wisb-Guardian-Express

I usually don't remember my dreams.  But when I do, they are weird.  Take, for example, one of my more recent dreams:

For some strange reason, I and a bunch of friends -- whose faces I can't remember -- were transported by an unknown party to a semi-real replica of Earth somewhere in the vicinity of Cassiopeia.  I say semi-real replica because parts of the world that I was able to explore looked exactly like the hill my grandma lives on.  In any case, somehow we were sent to this planet, in which strange, tattooed humanoid people -- who refused to speak to humans -- drove around in camper trucks and Winnebagos.  And then there was the crazy lady in the tiny white Nissan truck.  I managed to flag her down and ask her for help and she explained to me that we should all watch out for the Green Nothings, the apparent villains of the dream.  And then she got on a motorcycle, drove off a cliff, and landed on top of a Winnebago half-submerged in the ocean, where a boat full of Pops and Fruitloops (among other brands of cereal) floated.

Is that not a weird dream?  I also dream about zombies.  Specifically, the zombie apocalypse, in which I, for some odd reason, become a bit of a hero due to my mad skills in zombie killing.

In any case, dreams are a wonderful way to come up with ideas for stories -- or at least to explore your subconscious brain, where crazy happens to live.  But the one thing I've always had trouble with is trying to understand why my dreams happen.  That is:  what sparks these little details?  Why did I dream about Green Nothings and biker chicks and Winnebagos?  I haven't thought about a Winnebago in years, as far as I can remember.  And I don't want one either.  And why Cassiopeia and a semi-real replica of Earth?  What crazy thing is behind all of this?

I don't know, and I'm sure you don't know either, but it makes one wonder...

So here's the deal:  I want to know what kind of crazy dreams you have had.  Leave a comment.  And if you know what my dream is about, leave a comment about that too!

cat -- Max sets off on a journey to meet a mysterious wizard and discover why he and his companions have been whisked away to such dangerous world.
Down the Mysterly River channels a number of interesting genres.  The most obvious is fantasy, which is an unavoidable fact both for the reader and for Max, who has to come to grips with the reality of the world around him.  The second is the young detective story, which Willingham brings out through Max via a methodical set of steps of detection.  These detective elements are interesting, though I have to admit that they sometimes felt forced.  That is until you get to the big reveal, which immediately draws into focus Max as a character and the old-time-children's-story feel he evokes.  The same thing can be said about the dialogue, which sometimes seemed too advanced or perfect for a character as young as Max; but once you realize what has been happening throughout the book, you start to understand why Willingham writes dialogue in the way that he does.  To be perfectly honesty, young folks are probably not going to notice these issues.  With or without the ending, however, the mixture of elements works, in part because it gives Max an enhanced sense of agency in a story that could reduce him to the victim trying to escape an evil that wants to kill him.  Having Max attempt to discover "why" things are happening, to put it another way, makes for a story that does more for its reader than provide an extended chase.

That said, Willingham's plot and pacing is expertly crafted.  The story moves at a good clip and the twists in the story are sure to amuse or shock readers (there are two major twists or revelations, plus a fair deal of minor ones; the ending, however, will blow your mind).  Willingham makes a good effort to introduce the genre mixture and Max's character traits without damaging the flow of the adventure story; in many respects, he succeeds.  One issue I had with the plot's construction, however, was Willingham's use of non-central POVs to show things the main characters couldn't see.  These are fairly minor, and are perhaps more common in literature for young readers than I am I aware, but they can pull you out of the suspense.  Regardless, the journey of the main characters is rarely disrupted, moving forward with an even dose of revelation and action.

Willingham also succeeds at constructing a cast of sympathetic (or terrifying) characters.  Max is a clever young boy who refuses to let the situation get the best of him, but also a boy who has a strong sense of morality -- he's easy to sympathize with as a result.  Banderbrock is a warrior with a soft heart who serves as a wonderful companion, and the interactions between the badger and McTavish -- which translate roughly to an animal kingdom version of "I'm tougher than you" -- are amusing.  Walden, who is the only actual member of law enforcement in the group (though a bad one), is also lovable as a character, which seems perfect for a bear. And the more you learn about him and watch him try to adopt Max's detection skills, the more you love him.  How can you fault a big, hug-able bear for being a less-than-stellar sheriff?  Even the Blue Cutters, who are the story's villains, are interesting characters -- and it's because of them that I want to see more stories set in this world.  They are pure villains, but there is a hint of complexity in Down the Mysterly River that I think Willingham needs to explore -- either through additional Max stories or via some other character.  There's a lot left to be told about this world.

Overall, Down the Mysterly River is a fantastic book.  The characters are amusing, the young detective storyline is compelling, and the fantastic elements are enjoyable and exciting.  I had trouble putting this book down, in part because I wanted to know why Max ended up in the world and in part because the mixture of genres and the characters seemed to beckon me through the cover.  Hopefully others will feel the same way.

If you want to know more about Down the Mysterly River, check out the publisher's website.  You can find the book just about anywhere books are sold (except, perhaps, the Moon).

I've decided to rename the Complaint Dept. feature to Discussion Dept.  Why?  Because half the time I'm not really complaining about anything, and it seems silly to label something so negatively when really all I'm trying to do is open a bunch of topics to discussion.  So, from now on, this feature will be knowing as Discussion Dept., to which I hope you all will contribute.

The two discussion points begin below:

Discussion #1 -- Political:  What does it mean?
Jason Sanford recently had a column posted at SF Signal about the political controversy associated with Military SF.  Some of what he talks about is old news, but if you're unfamiliar with Military SF and its history, the article is well worth reading.

What I'm curious about, however, is Aliette de Bodard's response to Sanford's use of the term "political":

I’ve seen it before, to refer to diverse other things, such as people’s positions on QUILTBAG relationships, abortion, women’s rights… The thing is, for me, those are not political problems. My position on war and abortion isn’t politics: it’s a matter of pure ethics, of how I put things in the context of my personal morals, rather than where my chosen political party stands on the issue (in fact, if anything, it would be a matter of where my religion stands on the issue).

I certainly see where Aliette is coming from, but I take issue with the separation of ethics from politics.  It seems to me -- and perhaps this comes from living in the U.S., which she sees as the central (or partial) problem for defining "politics" -- that you can't separate, in most cases, the political from the ethical.  At least, not in a democracy.  The government is constantly trying to solve or address ethical problems, which is precisely why we associate ethical problems with political motivations.  We can argue over whether it is unethical to turn ethical problems into political talking points (i.e., things people say to get elected), but that doesn't mean we can separate the two.  Things like healthcare, civil rights, and so on are ethical issues, but they are only dealt with on ethical grounds within the political sphere.  You do not have civil rights without government, for example; without the government creating, voting in, and enforcing laws, offering "civil rights" to the public is like offering little more than lip-service to the ethical quandary.

What do you think?


Discussion #2 -- The West Loves Itself (in Publishing)
This is less a complaint/rant than me saying "you need to read what Charles Tan has to say about how publishing and access to 'written' material is disproportionately geared towards Western audiences."  Tan has written about these topics before (read his blog), but his latest discussion has a great section on ebooks and why it is so difficult for people outside of the West (i.e., the Philippines, etc.) to participate in the literary community.  The kinds of things we get pissed off about in the West -- hidden costs, low wages, etc. -- are things Tan just has to deal with because that's the way things are.

A quote:

Even if the author and publisher wanted to sell me books, they can't, unless it's an App. Because Apple won't allow it. At least not without the workaround of obtaining a valid US billing address, credit card, and using prepaid iTunes cards to make purchases. 

But readers should rejoice right? I mean previously, only the US, UK, France, Germany, Australia, and Canada had access to Books. Last week, Apple opened it to 26 new countries in Europe. The world has an estimated 196 countries.  

Amazon has different kind of problems. As a consumer, I have to deal with the ambiguous $1.99 international Whispernet surcharge (you're still paying it if you download it from your computer). Granted, this doesn't apply to each and every country outside of the US (Australia isn't affected by this anymore for example), but it's there.

Go read the article here.

I know some of my readers are not from the U.S.  As such, I am curious about your ability to access print and electronic books.  Is it expensive for you?  Difficult?  Let me know in the comments.

You'll get a message from me soon!  Actually, since you don't have an email in your profile, I have no way to contact you.  So you've got 48 hours to send me an email to arconna[at]yahoo[dot]com with your address!

Thanks to all those who entered.  Better luck next time!

I think the description on The Skiffy and Fanty Show explains things better than I could reiterate here:

Jason Sanford, who may be the greatest man with a southern accent to grace the Internet, joins us for an extensive discussion about heroes. Why do we love them? How have they changed in our lifetimes? What is a heroic act? We answer those questions and more, touching on everything from District 9 to Milk. The big question for all of you: Why do you love heroes and what is a heroic act to you?

If that sounds like something up your alley, go over and download the episode.  Anywho!

I said at the beginning of this semester that I wasn't going to do any more academic conferences.  Part of that is because I don't want to spend any more money for travel expenses and the other part is because I want to start focusing on publications.

Well...so much for that idea.

In a few weeks, I will be presenting an essay on South African genre fiction at a local conference.  The essay focuses on contemporary SA SF, such as written work by Lauren Beukes and S. L. Grey and films like Neil Blomkamp's District 9.  Specifically, I am interested in the problem of interpretation.  One of the issues I see with how people read SA SF is that such readings are often overly simplistic.  It's too easy to read District 9 as a thinly-veiled allegory of Apartheid.  But doing so, in my mind, is reductive; it ignores the contemporary position of South Africa:  that is that SA is not an Apartheid State anymore; rather, it is a post-Apartheid State, and discussing contemporary literature should take that into account.  Every reference to racial tensions are, in my mind, more accurately applied to SA now than to SA as it was in a worse time.  That's not to say that talking about Apartheid is not relevant to interpretation or reading, just that reducing our reading experience to historical sensationalism presents problems for reception.

That's the first...

The second project I'm working on is not a sure thing -- yet.  A friend semi-invited me to contribute to a panel she is working on with another friend for the International Conference on the Fantastic in the Arts (ICFA) -- where China Mieville is Guest of Honor.  Their panel is focused on experiences of trauma and the "monster within," and I happen to have a paper that I've been meaning to rework that deals with those issues.  And the text in question?  Kage Baker's The House of the Stag.  In the original paper, I focused on the reconstruction of history and its impact on subjectivity in Baker's novel and Amitav Ghosh's In an Antique Land.  For this paper, I'm reconstructing the sections on Baker's novel in order to talk about how colonial trauma and exile lead to a different kind of internal acceptance -- if you've read the book, then you know that Gard adopts the narrative of the Dark Lord in order to find a "space" to exist within an extensive system of colonial exclusions.  Hopefully the paper will turn out well.  We'll see.

And there you go.  What are you working on (academic or otherwise)?

him on an interstellar journey, Jeff agrees, and the two of them set off on a grand adventure involving aliens, robots, evil galactic empires, and the fabled Universal Remote.
I had a blast listening to Kangazang!  While I knew from the start that my mind would make comparisons between Cooper's tale and Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, I intentionally set out to let myself have fun with it.  And I wasn't disappointed.  Cooper's humor is unmistakably British and, quite frankly, hilarious.  I found myself chuckling out loud a number of times, an act that does not come to me easily when I am alone.*  The situations and the jokes are sometimes too ridiculous to avoid laughing at.  What's not to love about the wimpy child of a deceased evil warlord being forced to take over and run a galactic empire, despite knowing nothing about running empires?  The fact that he turns out to be too good at it makes for an amusing story.

The characters, if the above is any indication, are perhaps the most fascinating aspect of the novel.  Each of them is distinct, not simply because they have a different voice, but more accurately because they have distinct personalities, quirks and all.  Jeff and Ray are as different from one another as any other two characters.  This makes for a cast of characters who are as compelling as they are amusing.  Even the villain of the story is given plenty of "air time," the result of which, as mentioned, is a hilarious play on evil galactic warlords and their less-than-evil kin (there are, of course, many villains, some of whom drag up Ray's less-than-reputable family history).  The mishmash of characters are really what makes Kangazang! work, because the situational comedy that arises from their interactions is precisely what makes this book so amusing.

If I have to criticize Kangazang! for anything, it is that certain parts of the novel are predictable or move too swiftly.  One of the romantic plotlines, for example, develops too fast, in part because Cooper has a character "grow" suddenly in order to facilitate the romance.  While that plotline turns out to be quite cute -- in a mushy way -- I do think more attention could have been paid to the development of the characters as they embarked on a romantic journey (or as they came close to embarking on that journey).  The same is true of other aspects of the story.  But it could be that Cooper has left a lot of things out in order to leave plenty to discover in future volumes.  If so, I will certainly follow along.

The last thing worth mentioning is Colin Baker and the production quality.  Cooper's tale is narrated using multiple voices, voice effects, sound effects, and more.  It's like listening to one of those old radio dramas with all the actors reading out their lines and banging things to make sounds.  And it really works.  The way Baker reads (the inflections, etc.) and the voices he creates improve the overall product ten fold.  I can't imagine reading Kangazang!  It seems right to have Baker read it for me.  It seems natural.  That's not to say that reading the book the old-fashioned way would make for a less enjoyable experience.  Rather, I think the fact that I was first exposed to the book as an audiobook of such quality gave me an experience that a traditional book cannot reproduce.

Despite the minor flaws, Kangazang! is a wonderful listening experience and well worth buying.  If you're a fan of British comedies -- Doctor Who, Red Dwarf, Spaced, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, etc. -- then this is a book for you.  Cooper has a knack for humor and I hope there will be more books in the future.

If you've never heard of Kangazang!, then you need to check out the website and get a copy right away.  For 7.99 (in British pounds), the audiobook is really a steal (or 5.99 for the paperback, which is also a steal).  You can't get them that cheap in the U.S. unless they're on sale or old!  All I'm hoping for right now is that Cooper and Baker team up again for some more scifi comedy gold.


*(Liar Liar holds the record for hardest lonely laugh for me)