SF/F Commentary

Haul of Books 2010: Stuff For Me v.15

/

A few more things have been trickling in over the last few weeks. This is an attempt on my part to play catchup. I think I’m going to spend the next week or so getting fully caught up on all the stuff that has arrived at my door. So, without further delay, here is the image for v.15 (after the fold, hopefully): And the descriptions (from left to right, top to bottom): 1. Interzone Magazine, Issue #228, May-June 2010 (subscribed) New science fiction and fantasy stories by Mario Milosevic, Jon Ingold, Melissa Yuan-Innes, Jason Sanford David D. Levine. Book reviews. Ansible Link by David Langford. Mutant Popcorn by Nick Lowe (film reviews). Laser Fodder by Tony Lee (DVD/Blu-ray reviews). Readers’ Poll results. Cover art is the third of six 2010 connected images by Warwick Fraser-Coombe. Illustrations by Dave Senecal, Jim Burns, Mark Pexton, Darren Winter, Richard Wagner. In colour! (A note from me: one of the things that I think has drastically improved this magazine, which I already love greatly, is the new interior design. It’s sleek, visually appealing, and uncluttered. If you don’t have a subscription, get one now!) 2. SFRA Review, Issue 292, Spring 2010 (subscribed) The issue contains calls for papers for journals and conferences, nonfiction reviews on a number of fascinating books (some on the Wizard of Oz world, Lovecraft, and H. G. Wells), fiction reviews (various authors, from Iain M. Banks to Ian McDonald), media reviews on Avatar, Pumzi, The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, and others, and an article on scholarly research and writing, which I actually found quite useful. I personally would like to see more articles in future issues. 3. Animythical Tales by Sarah Totton (won) In this elegant volume, award-winning author Sarah Totton takes her readers on speculative journeys of the heart and mind that will both challenge and engage you. Within these tales, readers will learn the meaning of darkness and pain and fear. Yet they will also learn about love and happiness and laughter. Sarah Totton explores the full kaleidoscope of the human heart and peels it back, one layer at a time. She offers her readers a full palette of emotions and stories to sift through, never settling, never holding back, and never flinching. Whether she is writing about the loss of innocence through dark revelations, the point to which a human mind can be stretched before succumbing to the magic of faerie, or something as preposterous as cloud-fishing in a world with pink yaks, the stories in Animythical Tales are always told with an eye toward revealing something important about the human condition. If you have ever yearned to fall into fabulous adventures in unforgettable worlds, Animythical Tales is the collection for you. 4. Elizabeth Street: A Novel Based on True Events by Laurie Fabiano (won) In Elizabeth Street, Laurie Fabiano tells a remarkable, and previously unheard, story of the Italian immigrant experience at the start of the twentieth century. Culled from her own family history, Fabiano paints an entrancing portrait of Giovanna Costa, who, reeling from personal tragedies, tries to make a new life in a new world. Shot through with the smells and sights of Scilla, Italy, and New York’s burgeoning Little Italy, this intoxicating story follows Giovanna as she finds companionship, celebrates the birth of a baby girl, takes pride in a growing business, and feels a sense of belonging on a family outing to Coney Island. However, these modest successes are rewarded with the attention of the notorious Black Hand, a gang of brutal extortionists led by Lupo the Wolf. As the stakes grow higher and higher, readers share with Giovanna her desperate struggle to remain outside the fray, and then to fight for—and finally to save—that which is important above all other: family. 5. Starcraft II: Heaven’s Devils by William C. Dietz (won) For the poor, hardworking citizens of the Confederacy’s fringe worlds, the Guild Wars have exacted a huge toll. Swayed by the promise of financial rewards, a new batch of recruits joins the fight alongside a slew of mysteriously docile criminals — and a few dubious military leaders. Eighteen-year-old Jim Raynor, full of testosterone and eager to make things right at home, ships off to boot camp and finds his footing on the battlefield, but he soon discovers that the official mission is not what he’s really fighting for. For the first time ever, StarCraft enthusiasts will learn the origins of the enduring friendship between the young upstart Jim Raynor and the streetwise soldier Tychus Findlay. Watch as they battle on the front lines of a fierce interplanetary war and bear witness to the Confederacy’s rank corruption — corruption so reprehensible that it rains immeasurable death and destruction upon the government’s own people. 6. Extrapolation, Spring 2010, Volume 51, No. 1 Volume 51 is pretty world SF and history heavy. There are articles on Brazilian and Bengali science fiction, one article on African American SF before black power SF, some really interesting looks at theories of history, genre, and video games (specifically EVE Online), and an article by Ken MacLeod on how science fiction does and does not contribute to the public understanding of science. All in all, a well-rounded issue! There you have it. So, what have you purchased or received recently?

SF/F Commentary

Race and Not Thinking About It: Why That’s B.S.

/

In this day and age, it seems like we (and by “we” I mean mostly white people) make a big deal about not thinking about race. Perhaps we do this out some sort of subconscious regret about the past (white guilt, if you will) or perhaps because we actually believe that we don’t think about race. The problem is that we (and here I mean all of us of all races) often do think about race, regardless of where we come from. We can pretend that racism is over, and some of us do a fine job of sticking our heads in the sand and trying to maintain the illusion of a world of Neapolitan ice cream, with all the colors hanging out together in the same place as if there never was a time when they were all in separate boxes. But the reality is that racism never ended and that we still live in a society that thinks in racial terms (for good and for bad) and still allows people to get away with actions that are, by all accounts, about as racist as you can get, at least for a short time. Why do I bring this up? I recently made the mistake of attempting to have a rational discussion with some politically motivated individuals on YouTube about the Shirley Sherrod fiasco (which is still going on). At one point I made the argument that I am making here (specifically that “everybody makes race a part of everything, even if they say they don’t”), which set a couple of people off, who quickly acted to deny that this actually applied to them. Notice that I didn’t say that race plays a part in how we act, just that we all make it a part of everything. Looking back, I probably would phrase it differently to say this: “we all think about race, even if we say we don’t.” But the interesting thing for me about this discussion was the way these folks reacted. They spend more time trying to deny that they actually thought in racial terms than they did trying to think about whether or not race actually factored into their thought processes, an action that would, most likely, prove my point far better than to have them stick their feet in their mouths. However, instead of simply saying they were wrong or hypocritical, I’d like to illustrate the point by example (specifically, two examples from two individuals). ReligionOfNice said: That’s the worst case of projection I’ve heard yet. So when I made friends with the black kid next door because we liked to do the same things that was because of race? I don’t think so. I didn’t make friends because he was black. I pick this example because there was an obvious racial angle to be played and yet race played zero part in the decision. He was my best friend because he was. And Txbertie said: Race is only “a part of everything” to people who make it so. I don’t. I try to be sensitive to feelings and wouldn’t say things I know might be misunderstood. I certainly wouldn’t refer to “them” or “their own kind.” There was a time in my life when I could have saved myself a great deal of trouble it I’d treated a black man like a “black man” instead of treating him like a man – but even looking back at that, I could never have done it. The racists could but I couldn’t and wouldn’t. There are some subtleties of language here that you’ll likely miss without having seen the YouTube video in question, but I won’t be talking about those points here, because they aren’t relevant to what I’m arguing. If you read the above comments, two things become perfectly clear: both individuals have come at this from an entirely defensive position and both have immediately reduced their conversion to the discourse of race. It’s ironic that both individuals claim that race is not something that they think about (or isn’t something that governs their actions), yet they also immediately refer to people by the color of their skin or provide examples in which race clearly plays a role in what they have done in the past. They each assume that I’m talking about action, rather than simply constituent elements, and their words basically make my point for me: if we don’t make race a part of everything, then why is it that the color of someone’s skin is something that needs to be mentioned in a conversation or plays a role in how we decide to act in our day to day lives? The other problem I see that they both seem to take what I said to mean that to think about race is somehow racist. But I’m not talking about an issue of subconscious racism. Noticing the color of someone’s skin isn’t necessarily a racist act (though it can be, depending on who you are and how you react). The reality is that we are all differently colored, ad when you are faced with something different, you’re going to notice, much the same way that you might notice a hair style or the color of someone’s eyes or the shape of a nose or what have you. We are always thinking in terms of that (i.e. difference). It’s inescapable. These two individuals are essentially putting their feet in their mouths by trying to pretend that somehow race never figured into their assessments of the people around them. The first has already reduced his or her friend to skin color and the latter essentially admits to making decisions based on race (a good decision, sure, but the decision was clearly about race). But the denial is still there. Race never figured into their existence, or so they say. The reality? It did, and intimately so. The same has happened for all of us. The fact of the matter is, we all

SF/F Commentary

The Skiffy and Fanty Show #10 is up!

/

We’re back with yet another episode! This week we talk about the new Avengers movie, what constitutes ethical selection practices for editors, and an exciting list of attributes that make us crazed bibliophiles. You can find the episode here (stream and mp3 download)

SF/F Commentary

Video Found: Priest (Trailer)

/

The trailer below is by far one of the coolest movie trailers I’ve seen this year. My only hope is that the movie lives up to the trailer, because I think it’s about time we got an awesome futuristic vampire film! What is Priest about? PRIEST, a post-apocalyptic sci-fi thriller, is set in an alternate world — one ravaged by centuries of war between man and vampires. The story revolves around a legendary Warrior Priest (Paul Bettany) from the last Vampire War who now lives in obscurity among the other downtrodden human inhabitants in walled-in dystopian cities ruled by the Church. When his niece (Lily Collins) is abducted by a murderous pack of vampires, Priest breaks his sacred vows to venture out on a quest to find her before they turn her into one of them. He is joined on his crusade by his niece’s boyfriend (Cam Gigandet), a trigger-fingered young wasteland sheriff, and a former Warrior Priestess (Maggie Q) who possesses otherworldly fighting skills. Here’s the trailer (after the fold): Priest trailerUploaded by blankytwo. – Check out other Film & TV videos.

SF/F Commentary

Comic Book/Graphic Novel Suggestions: What Are Your Favorites?

/

I’m notoriously picky when it comes to comics. When I was a kid, I was a huge Marvel junkie. I had all kinds of comic books, the collectible cards, action figures, and a very strict Saturday morning X-men cartoon viewing schedule (by that, I mean that if I missed an episode, someone would feel my wrath; unfortunately, that person usually was my mother). Then, when I hit my late teens, I got into Japanese manga (and am still very much into it, although in phases, rather than as a constant). But, despite all this, I feel very much disconnected from the comic/graphic novel community and I’d like to get into it again, partly for sheer enjoyment of the visual medium and partly because I am considering adding comics/graphic novels to my academic repertoire. So, here’s what I’m looking for (after the fold): Comic books or graphic novels from anywhere (online, print, Tibet, wherever) that have a high quality of artistic style, that are in some way fantastic in nature (science fiction, fantasy, weird, or slightly horror-oriented) and have complex, unique, or fascinating story lines. They do not have to be in color. I’m not particularly interested in standard American superhero comic style (i.e. X-men, Spiderman, and so on). That’s not because I don’t like X-men and so on, but I’m more interested in projects that pay as much attention to the visual medium as to the story line. I want my eyeballs to explode and my brain to melt…at the same time. So, what would you suggest I look into? What are your favorites?

SF/F Commentary

Science Fiction and the Sensawunda

/

The other day I wrote about what makes a good science fiction movie. In the comments, a number of people quoted the phrase “sense of wonder” (or “sensawunda,” as many fans like to abbreviate it). We’ve heard this phrase before. Some have argued that science fiction now lacks “sensawunda,” and others have argued that “sensawunda” is one of the defining characteristics of science fiction–specifically, good science fiction. But the thing that always surprises me about such discussions is that few people have actually provided an explanation for what “sensawunda” is, let alone how it operates within the movies and novels they so enjoy. And when someone points to an example, I’m even more surprised that the thing in question is hardly surprising at all. Maybe the “what is it” question is a good place to start to figure this out. While definitions vary from critic to critic, most agree that “sensawunda” is some sort of paradigm shift (a phrase from John Clute and Peter Nicholls, but not an original phrase) in much the same way as the phrase is used in science: a change of our basic assumptions about something (in this case, literature and reality). If that be the case, then “sensawunda” in science fiction relies entirely upon the genre’s speculative elements, since anything that does not shift us from the present in a fundamental way cannot produce the effect (at least for most). But now we run into a problem with the concept. Science fiction has largely become a self-referential genre. While the intention of authors is likely not to look to the past of the genre, that doesn’t change the fact that almost everything in contemporary science fiction has already been done before. Contemporary science fiction is, for better or worse, a genre that is always looking to its golden past, always conjuring images and ideas presented at a time when the genre inspired and shocked people based solely on its ability to present a vision of the future not found elsewhere (wondrous or terrifying futures, depending where you looked). And if science fiction is self-referential, replicating the same references without realizing it is doing so, then “sensawunda” no longer functions. It can’t–at least not for those who are well read in the genre. “Sensawunda” relies on some new thing (the novum) that draws us out of our comfort zone of reality and gives us a new reality, one tinged with the speculative details of a future that may or may not be (science fiction has never been a predictive genre). But this can’t happen multiple times for the same thing in different formats (i.e. different authors writing about the same concept). We’ve already seen it. The surprise comes, perhaps, from the movement of the plot, but that’s not something isolated to science fiction, let alone genre fiction. If all this is true, then that means “sensawunda” is dead for the old, and lively for the new in almost all cases. New readers certainly feel the moment we all secretly mourn, while old writers continue reading for…what? What is it about contemporary science fiction that keeps us reading, despite the near bi-monthly pronouncement of the genre’s death? Why do we still go to science fiction movies? Why do we want to see a possible future when we crack the first page of a new science fiction book? It’s not “sensawunda.” I suspect we’re all aware on some level that the “sensawunda” is gone–although, maybe it still exists in the movies simply because they visualize things we’ve only dreams about or read in books. I suppose the question I’m asking is whether we’re reading science fiction because of loyalty to the genre, a perspective we’ve adopted within ourselves that constantly looks forward (even to the bad), or simply an interest in the furniture of the genre (spaceships, aliens, future technology, and so on). I’m a pessimist, so I lean more towards the last of these by default. But I could be wrong. Maybe we are loyal to the genre and in possession of that future-oriented mentality. What do you think?

Scroll to Top