wisb-Guardian-Express

To all the people out there telling me how I should publish my first book: please take your advice and shove it. You have no frakking clue what you're talking about. Anyone who says "there is only one way to do it" should be discounted as idiots. 

J.K. Rowling got rich publishing the old fashioned way. Amanda Hocking got rich self-publishing (and now she's got the old fashioned thing going). Lots of people have got rich doing it either way. Anyone who says "but my way is the only way" is full of shit. WTF do you know? Sometimes there is no right way. You just do what feels right to you and hope for the best.  Publishing is a crapshoot. Some of us make it. Most of us don't.

The only sure advice anyone can give is this: if you really want to make it, don't give up. Keep improving your writing and write better stories.

Meh.

That more or less sums up how I feel about it all now.  My thoughts have changed a lot in the last few years.  Such is life...

(Originally posted on Google+)

There have been a lot of lists recently of SF/F books everyone should read from *insert older decade here.*  While I enjoy these lists -- occasionally you discover something new or unusual -- I'm always driven to annoyance by the endless nostalgia for the "good ole days."  Don't get me wrong here.  I don't hate the classics.  Some of the best works of SF/F come from before my time.  But I think we need to have more discussions about the works being produced now.  Maybe that's because I like to pretend that I'll have a bead on what will be remembered 50 years from now.  Or maybe I like seeing what people feel are great works of SF/F from the 2000s (ish) so I can rub my chin and ponder.  It doesn't really matter.

Today's post is about this very question:

What do you think are the great works of science fiction and fantasy from the post-millenium period (the 2000s to the present)?  Why?

Some rules:

1. They obviously have to have been originally released at some point between 2000 and the present.  Re-releases or re-writes or pickups of self-published books published prior to that do not count.
2. "Great" should be taken to mean "a book that contributes to the genre in some significant way."  Interpret that how you will.  Entertainment value, however, is not enough on its own.
3. The books must be science fiction or fantasy.  I will not define what these mean; we can hash out suspect entries in the comments if people feel the need to do so.
4. The publisher or marketing strategy for the book is not strictly relevant.  If a great SF novel was published as a literary work in the general fiction section, then so be it.

The comments are yours.  Suggest away.

For those that don't know (which might be almost all of you), I have jokingly said that I am working on a 25-novel (1,000-page per book) epic fantasy series. In truth, said series will likely be 4 or 5 books, but that depends on how many subplots I decide to include.

Lately, I've been trying to build up the world, particularly the genealogical history of some of the main characters (it's relevant, since one of the POVs is The Bespectacled King, whose family have only recently risen back to the King's seat with said bespectacled person). This has no been easy, as there aren't many software programs that I've found that make it easy to create a chart following the familial line visually first (Freemind sort of works, but it's not designed to easily follow the lines of sons and marriages, and so on).

And, of course, I've bitten off more than I can chew. Of the four most powerful families in one of the kingdoms of my fantasy world, the first generation of children consists of 20 true blood sons (haven't started on the bastards yet...). No way to keep this all clear without better software (suggestions anyone?).

What about all of you? What adventures are you having exploring other people's worlds, or building your own?

I realize that a lot of people have already talked about Joss Whedon's portrayal of Black Widow in the smash hit The Avengers (and that I'm coming to this quite late).  Jim Hines has an interesting response here that is worth reading.  Much of the discussion has dealt with Loki's insult ("mewling quim," which more or less translates to "whining c-word") and the fact that much of Black Widow's screen time involves being subject to the authority of men.  Most don't seem to have a problem with the fact that Black Widow is under the jurisdiction of Nick Fury (a man); neither do I.  They do have a problem with the way in which power is distributed when Black Widow is on screen, and
particularly when she's doing her "spy" thing:  namely, that it appears as if men mostly have power in all situations, leaving Black Widow to navigate the patriarchal power dynamic that structures her society (and, in other words, ours).

On the one hand, I do not have a problem with this portrayal.  For me, The Avengers takes place in an alternate reality whose only difference from our own is that super powers and aliens exist and directly impact the lives of average people.  Comics always reflect our present in some way, whether through allegory/metaphor (think the parallel between anti-mutant movements and anti-black movements) or literal representation (the recent announcement that Canadian superhero Northstar will have a gay wedding is a good example).

In that sense, I think we need to take a quick look around us, particularly in the United States, where pretty much all Marvel comics are written and where the focus is almost always put (even when the characters are not Americans).  If we look at Black Widow, we realize that what we're seeing is a reflection of the reality we've presented women, whether we like it or not (this from the perspective of the film and not the comics).  She does not exist in an equal world anymore than she is part of a military or similar organization which reflects equality in its members.  In other words:  Black Widow's actions, unfortunately, must work within this system.  That means using what others perceive as her weaknesses to achieve her goals (even if those goals are S.H.I.E.L.D.'s and not her own).  It also means being subject to the patronizing gaze of her "male superiors" (in scare quotes for a good reason).

On the other hand, arguments for a more subversive feminist movement in The Avengers are ones for which I have sympathy.  On some level, Black Widow really should be treated more equally by her fellow "heroes," regardless of gender.  She is an accomplished spy, strong (emotionally, intellectually, and physically), and obviously completely capable of matching up with men, except where super powers give them the edge (let's be fair:  she's not going to overpower Captain America, the Hulk, Thor, or Iron Man, but only, I suspect, because they have things she does not -- powers or wicked technology).  With all that in mind, why would Whedon choose to portray her as less-than-equal?  Is it because men still have not moved well enough ahead, even in the fairly "progressive" realm of Hollywood, to see women as figures who subvert patriarchy?

To be honest, I do not have an answer for this question.  Personally, I do not have a problem with her portrayal, at least insofar as I can reflect upon my own reality.  My hope is that perhaps discussions like these will make us think about how our society is structured, because to change representations, we have to change the the society it reflects.

Anyone have thoughts on all this?  The comments are yours.


P.S.:  On some level, we should also acknowledge that some of the superheroes and leaders who are men in this movie also come from an older era.  In particular, Captain America spent the generations after WW2 as a Capsicle, which means he did not have the benefit of time to change with, well, time.  I don't know how much we can attribute this to the sexism of the film, but it's something to consider.

(Originally on Google+; cross-posting to amuse myself.)

Excuse me while I call this the dumbest thing to hit Geek culture all year that happens to not be some racist or sexist rant of doom. Seriously? Your idea of how the Hulk would speak is to give him remarkably sophisticated diction...but in ALL CAPS? Because ALL CAPS = The Hulk, right? Because The Hulk is a privileged white male teenager having a temper tantrum, but who is remarkably aware of himself as a literary cliche?

Here's how the Hulk would assess Mark Ruffalo's performance in truth: Funny jokes. Smash good.

That's about it. He's a man/creature of few words for a reason. That's why he says all but one (maybe more if you count grunts and roars as words) line in the entire Avengers movie.

Pah! This is why Film Crit Hulk works on Twitter, but not on a blog. On Twitter, he seems like he's actually in Hulk character (or she, if the person behind the persona happens to be a woman). On the blog? Not so much. He's using "Hulk" as a justification for putting things in all caps (i.e., to be annoying as hell).

Meh.

If you didn't know, I've been hard at work putting together my committee and reading list for my PhD exams, which I intend to take in March or April of next year.  The list will likely change in the next few weeks, given feedback from my director, but I thought you'd all like to see what I'm up to academically.

In celebration of Mother's Day, I offer to you all my favorite science fiction mothers. There are a few lists of mothers in science fiction, but this will be one of the only lists that narrows things down specifically to heroines who are also mothers (of which there are very few) and who can be found in fim.

I gave myself a few rules for the selection process:

1. Heroine will be defined as a woman who achieves (or attempts to achieve) physical or intellectual goals either as an equal member in a group, a leader, or on her own.
2. A mother will be defined as a woman who either gives birth to and participates in the raising of children OR a woman who adopts (de facto or literally) a child and participates in their raising.
3. They must actually be heroines while being mothers.  It doesn't count if she was a heroine in her younger days, and then stopped being one when she got pregnant and had kids.  It also doesn't count if she wallows in despair because she lost manly man, gives birth, and then decides to die (I'm looking at you, Padme Amidala).

Here's my list:


One of my favorite Sarah Jane moments:  reminding Davros in "Journey's End" with little more than the tone of her voice that she was there in the beginning, on Skaro -- sort of like rubbing salt in an open wound.  There's a reason Sarah Jane Smith remains a favorite among Whovians.  It's because she's awesome.

#4 -- Dr. Beverly Crusher (Star Trek:  The Next Generation)
An accomplished doctor on a powerful exploration ship full of menfolk with enormous egos?  Yup.  But she holds her own, telling her Captain what's what from time to time and resolving all manner of medical anomalies brought aboard by her intrepid crew.  And she has to handle all of that while being the mother of a genius son, Wesley.  Imagine trying to do best by your son while in an official "military" post.  Now imagine trying to handle being separated from your son in an increasingly hostile galaxy.  Yet Crusher handles all of that with extraordinary strength.

Not many mothers have to survive the disgusting levels of violence thrown at Sharon Agathon.  Being a cylon, she's hated by what's left of the human race, because her people nearly wiped humanity out.  She's hated so much that she's kept in a prison for most of her life -- where she is beaten and almost raped -- and has her half-human/half-cylon baby stolen away from her (supposedly "dead") by people who think Hera (the baby) will destroy the ragtag fleet of leftover human ships.  But she perseveres, fighting with all her might to save her daughter and her family.  She's a lot like...

What list of SF moms would leave out Sarah Connor?  With two enormous weights on her shoulders -- the looming threat of the sentient robot apocalypse and the responsibility of raising the savior of mankind -- she's  the kind of mother we all can respect.  Sure, she's not perfect -- after all, she's sort of mental and homicidal -- but so is everyone else.  Without her strength and determination, John Connor wouldn't exist and humanity would be screwed.



I rest my case.