Slashdot Mirror
Blind Lake
Blind Lake takes place in a close future and deals with alien contact and the difficulty of interpreting alien behavior. If you don't want to read further (but I will not include real spoilers, only the setting of the book), I can already summarize as follows: if you liked The Chronoliths or Darwinia, then you will like Blind Lake.
In the book, Blind Lake is one of two locations with an ultra-advanced telescope. This device doesn't work optically, and in fact nobody really understands exactly how it works (there is some amusing technobabble in the book about infinite complexity, adaptive self-programming and the like -- you know the drill), since it was invented accidentally. Anyway the result is that with this telescope, scientists can examine the surface of very far planets in great detail, they can even track an intelligent alien being through its daily life. The book follows Marguerite, a team leader at Blind Lake, her ex-husband, her young daughter (who suffers from a mild personality disorder), and a team of journalists. Marguerite leads a team of "interpreters," which leads to plenty of interesting discussions on how difficult this work is -- it is almost impossible to write the life story of the alien, since we tend to map what we observe to our own habits. Is the alien admiring the view or is he enjoying the air pressure? Etc, etc. Already from the very start of the story, Wilson injects a thriller element: Blind Lake goes into quarantine, with robot drones guarding the perimeter. Nobody knows why. Did something happen with the other telescope? Why are all data streams blocked?
Blind Lake is written with the same attention to detail as The Chronoliths, and the characters are equally well developed. There isn't much adventurous action in the book; it is built rather like a mystery novel with thriller elements, interjected with several interesting ideas. The pacing is similar to that of The Chronoliths. Wilson takes time to flesh out his characters and various background details. I like this thoughtful approach. Towards the end, various new ideas are introduced which are bigger in scope than the original storyline.
While I liked the almost metaphysical (even somewhat new age) concepts introduced in the later chapters, I actually preferred the original storyline (I had the same feeling with Darwinia, which evolves from an alternative history novel into a totally different story). Still, this is only a minor issue and most SF readers will experience a great deal of satisfaction with this book.
I would score Blind Lake 8/10. As a comparison with other Wilson books: I think it's as good as The Chronoliths, while I would rate Darwinia as a 7/10.
Interesting links
- Author's homepage
- Interesting reviews of Wilson's books
- The Blind Lake page at Barnes&Noble has interesting other comments (maybe even already a bit too much info if you haven't read the book yet).
You can purchase Blind Lake from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
I just heard some sad news on talk radio - Horror/Sci Fi writer Stephen King was found dead in his Maine home this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't enjoy his work, there's no denying his contributions to popular culture. They say celebrity deaths come in threes, guess it is true. Truly an American icon.
first
YOU WERE THE BADDEST OF THE BAD
Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account. Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal. Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account. Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal. Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account. Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal.
To observe this Sept. 11, 2001, anniversary, I urge critics of Attorney General John Ashcroft - especially the Democratic presidential candidates - to read the article "The Falling Man" in the current Esquire.
A photo on page 176 shows the article's subject plunging headfirst from the North Tower of the World Trade Center. Taken by celebrated Associated Press photographer Richard Drew, the picture was printed once in various newspapers - then banned by the U.S. media as too awful for public consumption.
The riveting article, by Tom Junod, chronicles the search to identify the "falling man," but the larger point for today, two years later, is that hundreds of people were driven by heat and smoke to leap to their deaths before the towers collapsed. The article is must-reading because - since the horror of the jumpers has been hushed up - it's a new wake-up call about the menace of terrorism.
Al Qaeda is still out there. Cells may be operating right here in the United States. Osama bin Laden still wants to wreak terror on America. Radical Islamicists have declared that using weapons of mass destruction to kill women and children is part of the holy duty of jihad.
As Bob Woodward reports in his book "Bush At War," President Bush's first order to Ashcroft after 9/11 was that his job no longer was to prosecute terrorists as criminals, but to prevent them from attacking America again. And that's what Ashcroft has tried to do - so far, successfully.
Yet, to listen to Ashcroft's critics, one would think he was a greater threat to American well-being than bin Laden or the terrorist leader's top planner, Ayman Al-Zawahiri.
The loudest of the critics is the Democrats' frontrunning candidate, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, who has outrageously said that Ashcroft is the worst attorney general in American history, worse than Richard Nixon's AG, John Mitchell. "And he was a criminal," Dean noted.
Dean also declared that "John Ashcroft is not a patriot. John Ashcroft is a descendant of Joe McCarthy."
In the so-called Democratic presidential debates, does anyone besides Sen. Joe Lieberman (Conn.) ever call Dean on the things he says? After all, Mitchell organized a burglary at Democratic National Committee headquarters and helped cover it up. McCarthy used anti-Communism to ruin lives and terrorize the entire U.S. political system.
Ashcroft doesn't begin to compare with either scoundrel. And, whatever limited infringements on civil liberties he has presided over, they don't begin to compare with those America has experienced in prior wars - Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus or Franklin Roosevelt's internment of 120,000 Japanese-Americans for four years.
Instead of rebutting Dean's overstatements, his rivals are competing with him to ride a wave of Ashcroft-phobia raging semi-hysterically on the American left - and also, to some extent, on the right.
At the Congressional Black Caucus debate Tuesday night in Baltimore, Ashcroft's next-most vociferous critic, Sen. John Edwards (N.C.), said that "the last thing we need to do is turn our rights, our freedom and our liberties over to John Ashcroft."
Edwards also repeated the canard, spread by the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Library Association, that Ashcroft has FBI agents "going to our libraries and keeping records of the books we're checking out."
Under the U.S.A. Patriot Act, which Edwards voted for along with 97 other Senators, the government is entitled to search business records - and, yes, library records - in pursuit of potential terrorists. It takes a court order to do so, however, as it does in regular criminal cases. It's a fact that the 9/11 terrorists used computers at public libraries to communicate with one another. Does Edwards seriously think that the FBI is snooping into the check-out records of average citizens, when it fears an al Qaeda attack?
Dean and Edwards are in the lead, but all the Democratic candidates take routine swipes at Ashcr
MF*!!
UR GONNA BE F*KED SOON U LUNATIC PUSSY A$$.
I ROCK. I WON. I AM GAY.
please rape my ass...\
PLEASE DONT USE SO MANY CAPS!!! ok, then...
asdjfasjkl asdlvbj as alksjd aslvj asldfjjasljdfblasdhjfb lsdjafbhasdfbhsadhbf asdjfasdf a s df asdf a sd f as df d fas df asd fs a fa sdfasdfasd f a sd f asfas dfas df a sdf asd fa f a sd fas dfsadf ds f as f asdf asd asd sd
end of filler
Why does the side bar overlap the comments with Mozilla Firebird?
It works perfectly fine with IE.
Is it that slashdot is a shitty webpage, or the Firebird is a shitty browser?
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Hey... wait a sec... That's not sad news. That's not sad news AT ALL!!!
In the great tradition of farce, Three's Company is the comedy that pushed the envelope by matching two attractive young women and one handsome, but clumsy, willing and able young male chef living under one roof. Jack, Janet, Chrissy, Cindy, and Terri all resided in apartment 201. And their presence made American audiences gladly want to knock on their door each week. Copyright 2000 ABC,Inc. The laughs began when American producer Donald L. Taffner saw the success in adapting and "Americanizing " British television comedies for the U.S. Acquiring the Changed Format Rights for the Thames Television hit Britcom, Man About The House, Taffner partnered with former TV DuMont television executive Ted Bergmann and they flew to Los Angeles to pitch the networks CBS, NBC, and ABC with the idea. In the fall of 1975, all three networks balked at the risque premise of two single women living with one single man. Three's Company was a novel and shocking first-timer for an American sitcom. Copyright 2000 ABC,Inc. While each of the big three networks originally passed on the idea, newly appointed ABC Programming Chief Fred Silverman (a fan of the concept from his days at CBS) surprised everyone and contacted Taffner and Bergmann. Dennis Doty, Bridget Potter, and Tom Werner had been developing the program at ABC when Silverman gave them the green light to produce a pilot. Larry Gelbart, who penned the first four years of MASH and his stepson, Gary Markowitz, who coined the show's title, "Three's Company", were the first writers hired. At this point, no one involved knew that it would take three pilots and one year until the show would go to air. At the time, John Ritter was best known for his role as Rev. Matthew Fordwick on The Waltons. Although his role on the popular drama The Waltons was a completely different character type, Fred Silverman saw something in Ritter and convinced the actor to audition for the role of David Bell (the name was later changed to Jack Tripper) in January 1976. Everyone including Larry Gelbart knew he was right for the part. One down, two more to go. More than 250 female actresses auditioned for the roles of the roommates. Valerie Curtin won the role of Jenny (the name was later changed to Janet) and Suzanne Zenor was cast as Samantha (which later became the role of Chrissy). Michael Eisner, then an ABC Programming Executive, inspired the casting of Norman Fell and Audra Lindley as the nosy landlords, Mr. and Mrs. Roper. The casting was complete, but unfortunately, ABC executives didn't feel this first pilot was strong enough to air. Back to the drawing board ... ABC enlisted the help of the Emmy-winning writers and producers of All in the Family and The Jeffersons, Don Nicholl, Michael Ross, and Bernie West.
Michael Eisner stepped in again and suggested that two new actresses be found to play the female roommates. Nicholl, Ross and West knew Joyce DeWitt was perfect for the smart, wise-cracking roommate known as Janet, but they were still short a blonde. Susan Lanier, who was then famous for her role as Bambi on Welcome Back Kotter, was given a shot.
The second pilot was taped, yet producers still felt something was missing. They needed to find another Chrissy. Fred Silverman remembered Suzanne Somers from her guest appearances on The Tonight Show and knew she was just what they wanted. The clock was ticking and a third pilot had to be created that would convince the network the show was good enough to air. Somers read for the part early January 1977 and the producers made their decision -- Somers was the Chrissy they had been looking for. The third and final pilot was filmed Friday, January 28, 1977 and soon after the first five episodes followed.
Three's Company first appeared on television Tuesday, March 15th at 9:30 p.m. and was ranked 28th in the Nielsen ratings on its premiere night. The remaining five episodes of the first season aired Thursday nights at 9:30 p.m.-never falling out of the Nielsen's Top Ten. The show was a hit with audiences though the critics were
On reflection, I've spent most of the summer reading nonfiction for a change...
Jarhead by Anthony Swofford
Swofford was a Marine sniper during Gulf War I, and this book talks about that experience and his experience in the Corps. It's an extremely good read, and unlike most "military" theme books it is neither "pro" nor "anti" war, but instead lays the whole deal on the table with a tremendous amount of honesty and self-awareness from one grunt's somewhat nihilistic point of view.
Seabiscuit by Laura Hillenbrand
I know what you're thinking: I only read the book when the movie came out. You're right. That doesn't change the fact that this is an extremely interesting read, which is especially impressive given the lack of embellishment and the attention to historical detail. If you just saw the movie, you're missing out -- some of the most interesting parts of the book come as Hillenbrand sets up the reader's understanding of 1920-30's horseracing and introduces the people around Seabiscuit.
Holy War: The Crusades and their Impact on Today's World by Karen Armstrong
This is a bit more challenging than my previous two selections, but is more than worth the effort. Just after the second anniversary of 9-11, the vast majority of Americans still have no understanding of the history of east/west emnity (which probably explains how Bush Jr. can paint the whole complex affair in simplistic terms of good and evil without getting laughed at). This book covers the root causes of the Crusades and follows the results all the way to modern day. Written in 1988, this book seems almost eerie today in predicting the renewal of this ancient conflict. Armstrong takes hard history and makes it approachable without talking down to the reader -- she's one of those rare authors who can really get your brain in gear with an understanding of complex events rather than just awareness of them. As I mentioned, this book is somewhat of a challenge to read, but the understanding it will impart will leave you much more capable of understanding our modern world.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.