Drum'n'bass (Jungle) music
on
King Rat
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I adore China Mieville's work. I had the pleasure of meeting him at a convention last year. He's a brilliant, interesting guy who writes brilliant, interesting novels.
I'm a bit disappointed that the reviewer downplayed the drum'n'bass aspects of King Rat. It's part of why I love the novel. It's rare that an author can so strongly render a subculture that revolves so much around music. The musical fusion that is drum'n'bass is fascinating, both from a dancing point-of-view and from a headphone music point-of-view. When I read King Rat, I found it exciting that the novel ended up hinging on the interplay between rhythm and melody, and that the importance of rhythm - so often under-appreciated in Western music - was essential to the plot.
I've read all three of Mieville's published novels. I prefer Bas-Lag (the world of Perdido Street Station and The Scar. I believe the forthcoming Iron Council also takes place in Bas-Lag) to the London of King Rat. But I enjoyed the time I spent there in reading the novel and would highly recommend it. And if people who read King Rat take the time to discover drum'n'bass, especially the best stuff from the 90s, then even better.
Does the casting for Ford Prefect seem odd to anyone else? At least when I read the books, I NEVER pictured Ford Prefect to look like this
As a black woman who spent a large part of her childhood in England, who once had a English accent, and who grew up with the HHG books, I feel the need to say, DON'T PANIC!;-)
There are plenty of black English people (we exist in more places than just North America and Africa), so even though Ford isn't necessarily English, either way, the casting's not odd at all. Ford could very much look like Mos Def.
I thought it was very well done - a nice tribute. I'll be making copies and forcing people to watch it. I'm hoping that the Wachowskis and co. see it and put in on the Revolutions DVD or something.
Also, it was good to see that they fixed the spelling of "Wachowski" on their disclaimer page. I figure they have a stronger case of "this is fannish fun; don't sue us" if they actually get the names correct. They were spelling it "Warschowski" before.
I'm hoping the Wachowskis and co. respect the obvious fandom and do something cool like put it on the Revolutions DVD or something. Stranger things have happened, and the Matrix folks seem to be pretty positive in terms of fannish activities.
Of course, the Fanimatrix folks might make a better case for themselves if they stopped misspelling "Wachowski" (they repeatedly spell it "Warschowki"). It's like, "We love your work, but we won't bother to spell your names correctly."
I thought the point of an essay was to grade the ideas and how well they're expressed. I didn't realize they were spelling/grammar tests.
The point is to grade the ideas, how well they're expressed, and how well they're presented. I teach Freshmen-level College English. Teaching (and grading) essays is how I make my living. A friend, also a writing instructor, puts it this way: grammar, spelling, mechanics, etc. in formal writing are like dress clothes for words. Yes, a person can write an essay that's misspelled and poorly worded but full of great ideas. But it's easier for a reader to access those ideas if the essay is presented well. An essay can have the most brilliant ideas in the world, but if it's written poorly and full of distracting errors, a lot of readers will give up before getting to the good stuff.
Presentation is only a part, but it's an important part.
Oh, wait, no, he was assassinated by the entirety of the Praetorian Guard when they revolted.
Not only that - they killed his wife and bashed his young daughter's head open.
People will only put up with fear and hatred for so long. Then they tend to get angry.
Perdido Street Station by China Mi�ville
on
A Good Summer Read?
·
· Score: 1
As soon as I saw the original post, I knew I was going to recommend Perdido Street Station.
PSS is the best novel I've read this year. It takes place on a world called Bas-Lag. It's never specified if this is another world, Earth at another time, a parallel universe, or what. It doesn't matter. It's a beautifully rendered, immersive world that's easy to believe whilst reading this novel.
The story is kind of science fantasy - it has fantastic elements with a scientific sensibility. It revolves around a scientist named Isaac Dan der Grimnebulin who is hired to do an unusual job. He's an outsider at the university where he works and is considered a bit of a maverick. As a result of this job, Isaac becomes entangled in a great deal of intrigue.
What's geek about this book? Well, first there's the world it takes place in. Every little detail contributes to the whole - and geeks tend to like well-rendered worlds. Then there's the steampunk aspect - many modern scientific ideas with Victorian technology. There are also some obsolete theories (phlogiston gets mentioned, for example) that are fun to read and look out for. And, without giving too much away, there's an unusual take on artificial intelligence.
The political issues in the novel are also interesting. Miéville has a doctorate from the London School of Economics, and it's obvious that politics and economic systems are something in which he takes a great interest.
I had the pleasure of meeting Miéville this past weekend. He's very smart, extremely interesting and nice to his fans - which is exactly what one might expect from reading his books. Others have mentioned his other two novels - The Scar, which also takes place on Bas-Lag, and King Rat, which takes place in contemporary London (and is not related to the Bas-Lag novels). Read those, too, but start with Perdido Street Station. It's worth every word.
I've read Pattern Recognition. I was lucky enough to get a review copy from a local independent bookstore. It is one of Gibson's best. The interesting thing about it is that it takes place in the present. My feeling while reading the book was that the reason it worked so well in the present is because so much of the present has become the future of Gibson's previous novels (Neuromancer was published in '84. Hard to believe, sometimes).
(a brief plot summary follows. It doesn't contain anything too spoilish, but if you don't like that kind of thing, skip it):
The protagonist's name is Cayce Pollard (her first name is pronounced "Case," which Gibson fans will recognize as a name he seems to like). As the novel opens, Cayce is on a job in London (she lives in New York). Cayce works in advertising, and has an ability to sense what will work on not work almost immediately in things like corporate logos. She's also a "cool hunter," not in the sense of middle-aged wannabe hipsters hanging out with teenagers to see what's "in," but in the sense that she can recognize what trends will be picked up by the general public and which ones won't. Her abilities are very valuable to ad agencies, and she makes a living hiring out her services. The down side to her ability is that she's very sensitive to the point of illness to the sight of some logos. She calls it an allergy. When she sees certain logos, she'll have a panic attack.
In her spare time, Cayce participates in an online discussion group revolving around clips of a film that have mysteriously and anonymously been turning up online. No one knows who made the film or in what order if any the the clips are supposed to be viewed, but underground interest in the clips has sprung up worldwide.
The plot revolves around Cayce's work in advertising and her footage interest coming together, which leads her around the world. There's also a subplot involving her father's disappearance (he was last seen taking a cab in the direction of the World Trade Center on the morning of Sept. 11th, 2001), as well as several other subplots that all come together very nicely.
(end of summary bit)
If you've liked Gibson's other work, I strongly recommend picking this one up. It's interesting to read Gibson's writing style in a book that doesn't take place in the future (or, in the case of the Difference Engine in the past). As usual, it's the details and ideas that really make the novel. The characters are fascinating, too, particularly Cayce.
I actually think that *The Dark Knight Returns* would be the better story line to do. I've always wanted to see that one done anime-style with a great voice cast. They need to have Clint Eastwood voice an older batman before he dies.
It's time that America produced an intelligent, engaging animated feature for adults, and *The Dark Knight Returns* is the perfect storyline with which to do it.
I'm glad they're getting an incredible director and an equally incredible writer to work on a comix film. While I'm kind of sick of previously published stories being turned into movies (Pi was so great, not only because it was a tight, well-done film, but also because it was an original story. WHen I took my Mom to see it, she asked what book it was based on, and I smiled when I told her it was an original screenplay), I think that Frank Miller's graphic novels, being so inherently visual (duh) and so good, would make a great film. Graphic novels are practically movie story boards, anyway.
I didn't like X-Men. I'd like to see a good comix film. Maybe this will be the one. Also, J Michael Straczynski's *Rising Stars* is supposed to be in the works as a film down the line. That would be good, too.
I truly enjoyed ATP. I work at a bookstore & was talking to several people about it, and we all agreed that while this trilogy isn't as intense as the Sprawl trilogy, it's still very much worthwhile.
I think Gibson is the most poetic of the Cyberpunks. He's the one who deals in imagery more than hard science. His novels are series of snapshots. He paints small moments in time that add up to huge events, and ATP truly illustrates this. As a writer, Gibson's the most lyrical of the bunch. I think he's more a poet than a prose writer. The Virtual Light, Idoru, All Tomorrow's Parties trilogy is more like an extended series of prose poems than three novels, and I think this may be what turns a lot of hard SF folks off to them. A poster above called this book a "put-downer," which illustrates this point. Instead of a "put-downer," I'd call these three "ones-to-slowly-savor." THe characters and the images unfold like a flower blooming, and it's gratifying to spend the time truly appreciating the process instead of zooming through them.
What I'd like to see is some of Gibson's poetry if he writes it. I'd also like to see a fourth novel in this series, and then see him move onto something else. It'll be something new & exciting as Gibson always is.
All in all, I'd say this has been a good Speculative fiction year. We got Crytonomicon, which was nothing short of amazing, and this week, Neil Gaiman released Sandman: Dream Hunters amongst other worthwhile offerings. There've been great stories published in the magazines & Fantasy & Science Fiction celebrated its 50th year. Looking back on the decade, we've gotten mind-blowing stuff from the likes of Rudy Rucker, Paul Di Fillipo, Connie Willis, Nancy Kress, Bruce Sterling, Nalo Hopkinson--the list can go on & on and on. My point? Basically, it's a good time to be alive & to be a fan of SF. Read ATP & enjoy the magic of the way words can be used.
Did anyone else notice that the movie Johnny Mnemonic incorporated a lot of the aspects of Gibson's other works? For example, the bridge the lo-techs lived on was soooo much the bridge we first saw in the short story "Skinner's Room," and which figured prominently in Virtual Light and All Tomorrow's Parties. There were a lot of other minor details, too, that were completely cribbed from other stuff. I can't remember too many specifics right now, because I've never been able to make it through the movie for a second time (it just hurts too badly, but the screenplay's good), but that's the major thing that stuck with me after having seen JM (that, and the fact that it was such a horrible movie). Gibson's books & stories are of great importance to me, so in a way, seeing so many bits and pieces from his works put into this movie made it even worse.
I think the short story "Johnny..." would make an excellent animated short. Maybe they should have done that instead of making the movie. And as much as I would love to see a Neuromancer movie, especially after The Matrix turned out so well, I think Idoru would make a truly interesting character driven movie.
Gaiman is freaking brilliant, so all of his stuff is worth picking up, but we've all got to start somewhere. I suggest starting with the Sandman series. They've been published in softcover collections that are properly numbered. There are ten of the books, and by the time you get to The Kindly Ones, the penultimate collection, your mind will be properly blown.
For some of his prose, I suggest Smoke & Mirrors. It's a short story collection that highlights the depth and variety of story of which Gaiman is capable.
Also, if you get a chance, go see him speak. It's very much worth your time, and not just 'cause he's cute & has a lovely accent. He does a wickedly funny Harlan Ellison impression, and he's a thoughtful, intelligent, funny speaker.
The only reason why I suggested donations is because regardless of one's financial staus, (unless one is in a significantly higher tax bracket) it can be incredibly difficult to start over after losing most if not all of your stuff. I do donate money to shelters, Habitat for Humanity, etc. I even worked at a shelter when I was in college. That's not the point. There's enough money to donate to both strangers and to friends. And though I don't know Hemos, the nice thing about communities like/., at least in theory, is that there can be friendships developed. If he didn't have insurance, he'd be screwed, and even with insurance, it'll take awhile for an assessor to come by & for the insurance company to issue a check. Alot of people who end up in homeless shelters do so because of things like having a house burn down & not having insurance. A lot of people don't get any help because people assume they don't need any, and that's not cool.
I do hope you have insurance. If not, do you need money to replace your things (basic stuff like clothes, etc.)? If so, post an address for donations. I'm sure most of us would send $5 to a help Hemos fund, and $5 per/.er would add up fast. It's really easy to have a loss like this. Just as I was typing this, I noticed a cigarette burn in my rug that could have easily been the start of a fire. There but by the grace of God, I guess. Take care.
I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who's actually tried this. When I decided to try Linux, I got a new computer (actually, a friend gave me her old one when she got a new one). As soon as I can afford a CD-Rom drive for that machine, I'll be installing Linux. I won't put it on my Windows machine because I don't have the time to have my software down while I'm messing with a new OS. I don't mind partitioning my hard drive and the like, but I needed Windows stuff for my last job, and if I get the job for which I just applied, I'll be needing some of the same stuff (unfortunately, Windows is fairly ubiquitous, as if we didn't know this already). I've had friends suggest various distros of Linux, none of which had Windows in the title, so chances are I'll pass on this one, but I am curious to see what others think about it beyond dissing newbies for wanting or needing it. Is it any good?
I don't understand why some people were so shocked after Deep Blue's victory over Kasparov. The real miracle is that men are still able to compete with computers today ! This is merely a matter of time before we can get machines powerful enough to calculate and try the entire tree of a game (or, for more complex games, significant parts of it) and be almost sure to win.
By design, machines are better than human at mathematical games. Chess are a mathematical game.
What about the Chinese and Japanese game of Go? So far, Go has been entirely too complex for a computer to be any good at beating anyone but a novice player. Hell, I'm still trying to figure out the most basic rules. There's still a level of complexity and intutition to this very mathematical game that computer progammers can't replicate or overcome. This suggests to me that there's more to programming a computer to be unbeatable at a game than just entering all possible variations. With Go, that number is humungous. There's a saying that Go is so complex, no two identical games have ever been played. You can't say that about Chess.
Instead of just computing likely outcomes, true AI is going to have to have emotional understanding and a real level of intuition. That's going to be the difficult part.
Even I would have to go along w/ Turing & say that if we can't actualy point out the difference, we're morally obligated to assume that computers *can* feel emotion, etc.
But what will we do if we come to the point where we have to make that assumption?
You know, the one thing that always bothers me when talking about Artificial Intelligence and where it could possibly go is that a ot of people don't think about the political implications of such an intelligence. Why are we working so hard to replicate human intelligence artifically without a set of ethical guidelines? If we actually succeed, we're gonna have a hell of an interesting set of problems about which to worry.
I've been involved in human rights activism for years. We in the human rights community usually have a set of standards which are the minimum standard by which we feel all people should be treated. This includes basic freedoms like the rights to free speech, freedom of religion, free assembly, the right to not be tortured, etc. If we ever succeed in creating a true artificial intelligence, are we (and this is a collective "we," not just one encompassing the human rights community) going to be willing to fight for the ai's rights? We can't even work out standards for ourselves.
What about self-determination? Are we going to try to create intelligences with Asimov's slave codes (the three laws), or will they "bop" like Rudy Rucker's robots?
What if an artificially intelligent computer chooses to follow a religion or make one up? Will its creators determine what beliefs the computer will be allowed to keep, or will the threat of reprogramming or deactivation be held over the intelligence?
About Brutus and his potential progeny: What if we do succeed in actually creating a computer that writes stories. I mean, good, originial stories. What if the programmers input the widest possible amount of genre specifications &, say, background information. What if (and this would depend on the computer actually being "i passed the Turing test" intelligent) the computer decided to write radically political allegorical stories that suggested that its creators were a bunch of wankers & should be shut down for crimes against humanity or something like that. What if the computer decided to write highly literate & sensitive erotica? Dirty limricks? Surrealistic fiction? Cheesy romance novels? Xena: Warrior Princess or Pokemon fan fiction? Would its creators (and we're talking about Brutus' descendents, here) shut it down for being a rebellious child?
I'm really tired , it's five o'clock in the morning, and I'm up with a splitting headache, so I'm kind of worried that I'm rambling. I suppose my point is that in a world of complication, where we uphold a variety of beliefs about the ways in which we should treat each other, should we really be working so hard to create artificially minds and all that suggests without a set of ethical guidelines? I hate the idea of creating a slave-class.
Don't forget the excellent short story, Spew, that Wired also published.
My favorite Stephenson Novel
on
The Diamond Age
·
· Score: 3
The Diamond Age remains my favorite Stephenson novel. I've read all of his novels that he's published under his own name (I've read that he has a psuedonym, too) except for The Big U which I haven't managed to find.
I find it interesting that the reviewer didn't like Miranda:
There is also a very annoying character named Miranda who seems superfluous to the story to me.
She's one of the reasons I liked this book so much. Stephenson's very good about speculating on what the future may hold (It's a good thing he's a speculative fiction writer, huh;) ). I don't want to give too much away, but I think it's really important that Stephenson added her character into the interaction of the primer. I don't think that the primer could have worked without her. It raised Nell. I don't care how intricate a computer intelligence is, there's a level of human interaction necessary for raising a healthy child. I think Miranda represents the human aspect of advancing technology, and as such, she is in no way superfluous.
On another note, I read The Diamond Age while studying for the GRE. I had to look up alot of words (i.e. "a Propaedeutic Enchridion" p. 184 paperback edition) that I'd never even remotely seen before. I ended up scoring really highly on the Verbal section, so perhaps I have Neal Stephenson to thank for that;)
I recommend all of Stephenson's novels. One criticism many people have about his novels are the detail he gives to secondary characters such as Miranda. I think this is one of the reasons why he's not only a good writer when it comes to scientific speculation, but why he's a great writer, period. He actually develops all of his characters to the point where he creates believable worlds and communities instead of empty plot outlines to show off his ideas like many SF writers unfortunately do. His books are literature. Read them.
I agree that there is a biological basis for a lot of mental illnesses. Depression, for example, runs in my family, & I thank God every day for anti-depressant medication that returns seratonin levels to normal. My point was that the reactions of people to these diseases is what's socially dictated. You're not considered an outcast if you catch a cold, but you are if you get diagnosed with ADHD or bipolar disorder. That's where the problem is.
I don't think it's total BS. I think there's probably something to it, but, as with any theory, it's just an idea with some evidence to back it up.
I'm a literature geek (I majored in English, not computer science), so I would suggest you guys read Madness & Civilization by Michel Foucault. It's a really interesting study of the defintions of madness throughout history and how they change. Why is this book relevant to this discussion? Well Foucault (who had to be one of the greatest geeks who ever lived...medical doctor, historian, scientist, literary critic--just thinking about his output makes me tired), believed that societal opinion is a lot of what defines mental illness. It's separating the "other." So one doctor labels a set of traits a "disorder." It doesn't mean that we geeks are all autistic. It does mean that perhaps there is a correlation between some stereotypical behavior and a medical syndrome.
Foucault's book discusses how public perception has historically defined mental illnesses. This not to say that there's no such thing as a mental illness (believe me, I know that there is). It is to say that the way in which people are treated as a consequence of that illness is as relevant as the illness itself.
Being a geek or a nerd (and I'm not going to get into the semantics of each word's meaning. I've been called both, as well as many more) is indicative of a society's dislike of anything or anyone different. For whatever reason, those of us called "geeks" are often considered strange. I know I got odd looks when I started jumping up and down with happiness because Neal Stephenson published a new book or when I became selectively mute when I got to meet Neil Gaiman. Whether we're geeks because of mild autism or because that's just who we are, this article is more about other people's reactions to us than our reactions to them.
I'm of the opinion that perhaps the reason why so many geeks have such low social graces is because of the way in which we are treated growing up. If you're an outcast for long enough, you may start believe that other people and their social graces aren't worth dealing with. I've been called a psycho because I really, really like and follow science fiction. I go to cons, I post on boards & I buy lots and lots of books. I don't believe this is a psychosis, but this other, so-called normal person thought so, the fact that I can dress nicely, get invited to parties, speak well, know which silverware to use in a formal place-setting & love to dance notwithstanding. I was different enough for her to have to separate herself from me with name calling.
If some people who are autistic get diagnosed as such as a result of this research, then wonderful. The same with dyslexia, depression & a variety of other treatable disorders for which treatment can make life just a little easier (again, I know). I believe that the vast majority of geeks do not have this disorder, but it's important that those who do have the opportunity to get treated if they want to. For those of us who're just geeks because that's just who we are, more power to us. And screw those who have a problem with it.
I would personally like to see a newer, more up and coming director take over the AI project. I can't really put my finger on why, but the idea of Spielberg, whom I feel is a wonderful director, directing this film is really disappointing.
In the week after Kubrick's death, the New Yorker published a piece by Ian Watson wherein Watson talked about how he and Kubrick were changing "Super Toys" for the film version. I believe it was this same New Yorker piece which said that the only reason Kubrick agreed to do Eyes Wide Shut was that Warner Bros. agreed to fund AI in return. I really wish they had agreed to fund AI, first, as the world suffers from a lack of truly challenging SF films (In this decade, I liked The Matrix, Ghost In the Shell, Pi, 12 Monkeys, Dark City and Cube. The decade's almost over. That's not even a film a year.).
The combination of such an intriguing story with such an intriguing director combined with recent special effects advances would have made for a hell of a film. I'm hoping that if Spielberg does get the film, he doesn't sentimentalize (is that even a word?) it. And for the sake of all that is holy, please, please, please do not let George Lucas or James Cameron anywhere near it. This should be a character-driven film, IMHO.
Chris Cunningham, the director attatched to another on-again, off-again, potentially brilliant film based on another decidedly brilliant piece of fiction, Neuromancer was said to have apprenticed under Kubrick. Why not let him have a go? I think this project needs a new director, & Cunningham's stuff has certainly been gritty and unsentimental thus far.
Did you know that GR intended to have gay characters in the next series of ST:TNG, just before he died.
Actually, I read an article a long time ago about a script for ST:TNG that involved two officers on the Enterprise who were a long-term gay couple (I'm sorry I don't remember exactly which article it was. I'd usually post where to find it instead of just saying "I read something somewhere"), but Roddenberry was adamantly against it. The writers really liked it, but Roddenberry killed it. He was not ready to deal with the controversy.
Trek has always been only slightly progressive. It's easier to deal with things in a glossed-over way (i.e. the two episodes referenced by a poster above), but the idea of really dealing with things like, say, a long-term gay relationship were just too scary for Roddenberry & co.
I had the pleasure of meeting Peter David at a con last year. People talked about the idea of starting a new series based upon his books (I haven't read them, but the responses to them were very positive). There are two reasons why a series or movie based on his novels will never happen.
At the con, Peter David talked about how much the people in charge of Trek hated anything outside of their little world when it came to making movies or episodes & the like. Majel Barrett-Roddenberry wanted to do an episode of ST:TNG based on David's wonderful novel Q-In-Law, but the folks in charge of Trek deep sixed it from the giddy-up. They won't do tie-in-related stuff. Also, even if they did, by some miracle, change their policy and do a series based on his novels, you wouldn't recognize the characters and situations you love when it hit the small screen. Read some of Harlan Ellison's stuff about writing for television. Also, read "The Goldfish Pool and Other Stories" by Neil Gaiman. It's published in his collection, Smoke and Mirrors, and it's a sadly funny story about how Hollywood screws with really good ideas (It's about other wonderful things, too, but the bit about Hollywood screwing with good ideas is what's relavant to this discussion). You ever wonder why movies based on your favorite books are rarely anything like the book, even if the author of the book is involved with the project? This story illlustrates why, and a TV series would be even worse.
This is my personal opinion, but I think most Trek fans are not able to deal with anything that's too far off of the original Trek idea. My favorite series has been DS9 for a long time. Yes, it had a lot of weak episodes, but when it was on, it was really on. I mean, it was a lot like the original trek in that they took risks like having Steve Barnes write an episode. It surpassed any of the other Treks by dealing with the problems of one area and not taking off for a new place every week. DS9 was definately the most challenging of the shows, but it was also consistantly lower-rated than ST:TNG, for example. People are too resistant to change to make a new series work.
It's funny how many lists to which I end up posting about this topic, because in the giant scheme of things, it's Soooooooo not important. But I grew up with Trek; it strangely feels like family. I think it's time to let it go, though. Don't keep making series just for the sake of making series. That's just sad.
Slashdot Mirror
I adore China Mieville's work. I had the pleasure of meeting him at a convention last year. He's a brilliant, interesting guy who writes brilliant, interesting novels.
I'm a bit disappointed that the reviewer downplayed the drum'n'bass aspects of King Rat. It's part of why I love the novel. It's rare that an author can so strongly render a subculture that revolves so much around music. The musical fusion that is drum'n'bass is fascinating, both from a dancing point-of-view and from a headphone music point-of-view. When I read King Rat, I found it exciting that the novel ended up hinging on the interplay between rhythm and melody, and that the importance of rhythm - so often under-appreciated in Western music - was essential to the plot.
I've read all three of Mieville's published novels. I prefer Bas-Lag (the world of Perdido Street Station and The Scar. I believe the forthcoming Iron Council also takes place in Bas-Lag) to the London of King Rat. But I enjoyed the time I spent there in reading the novel and would highly recommend it. And if people who read King Rat take the time to discover drum'n'bass, especially the best stuff from the 90s, then even better.
Does the casting for Ford Prefect seem odd to anyone else? At least when I read the books, I NEVER pictured Ford Prefect to look like this
;-)
As a black woman who spent a large part of her childhood in England, who once had a English accent, and who grew up with the HHG books, I feel the need to say, DON'T PANIC!
There are plenty of black English people (we exist in more places than just North America and Africa), so even though Ford isn't necessarily English, either way, the casting's not odd at all. Ford could very much look like Mos Def.
I thought it was very well done - a nice tribute. I'll be making copies and forcing people to watch it. I'm hoping that the Wachowskis and co. see it and put in on the Revolutions DVD or something.
Also, it was good to see that they fixed the spelling of "Wachowski" on their disclaimer page. I figure they have a stronger case of "this is fannish fun; don't sue us" if they actually get the names correct. They were spelling it "Warschowski" before.
I'm hoping the Wachowskis and co. respect the obvious fandom and do something cool like put it on the Revolutions DVD or something. Stranger things have happened, and the Matrix folks seem to be pretty positive in terms of fannish activities.
Of course, the Fanimatrix folks might make a better case for themselves if they stopped misspelling "Wachowski" (they repeatedly spell it "Warschowki"). It's like, "We love your work, but we won't bother to spell your names correctly."
I thought the point of an essay was to grade the ideas and how well they're expressed. I didn't realize they were spelling/grammar tests.
The point is to grade the ideas, how well they're expressed, and how well they're presented. I teach Freshmen-level College English. Teaching (and grading) essays is how I make my living. A friend, also a writing instructor, puts it this way: grammar, spelling, mechanics, etc. in formal writing are like dress clothes for words. Yes, a person can write an essay that's misspelled and poorly worded but full of great ideas. But it's easier for a reader to access those ideas if the essay is presented well. An essay can have the most brilliant ideas in the world, but if it's written poorly and full of distracting errors, a lot of readers will give up before getting to the good stuff.
Presentation is only a part, but it's an important part.
Oh, wait, no, he was assassinated by the entirety of the Praetorian Guard when they revolted.
Not only that - they killed his wife and bashed his young daughter's head open.
People will only put up with fear and hatred for so long. Then they tend to get angry.
PSS is the best novel I've read this year. It takes place on a world called Bas-Lag. It's never specified if this is another world, Earth at another time, a parallel universe, or what. It doesn't matter. It's a beautifully rendered, immersive world that's easy to believe whilst reading this novel.
The story is kind of science fantasy - it has fantastic elements with a scientific sensibility. It revolves around a scientist named Isaac Dan der Grimnebulin who is hired to do an unusual job. He's an outsider at the university where he works and is considered a bit of a maverick. As a result of this job, Isaac becomes entangled in a great deal of intrigue.
What's geek about this book? Well, first there's the world it takes place in. Every little detail contributes to the whole - and geeks tend to like well-rendered worlds. Then there's the steampunk aspect - many modern scientific ideas with Victorian technology. There are also some obsolete theories (phlogiston gets mentioned, for example) that are fun to read and look out for. And, without giving too much away, there's an unusual take on artificial intelligence.
The political issues in the novel are also interesting. Miéville has a doctorate from the London School of Economics, and it's obvious that politics and economic systems are something in which he takes a great interest.
I had the pleasure of meeting Miéville this past weekend. He's very smart, extremely interesting and nice to his fans - which is exactly what one might expect from reading his books. Others have mentioned his other two novels - The Scar, which also takes place on Bas-Lag, and King Rat, which takes place in contemporary London (and is not related to the Bas-Lag novels). Read those, too, but start with Perdido Street Station. It's worth every word.
I've read Pattern Recognition. I was lucky enough to get a review copy from a local independent bookstore. It is one of Gibson's best. The interesting thing about it is that it takes place in the present. My feeling while reading the book was that the reason it worked so well in the present is because so much of the present has become the future of Gibson's previous novels (Neuromancer was published in '84. Hard to believe, sometimes).
(a brief plot summary follows. It doesn't contain anything too spoilish, but if you don't like that kind of thing, skip it):
The protagonist's name is Cayce Pollard (her first name is pronounced "Case," which Gibson fans will recognize as a name he seems to like). As the novel opens, Cayce is on a job in London (she lives in New York). Cayce works in advertising, and has an ability to sense what will work on not work almost immediately in things like corporate logos. She's also a "cool hunter," not in the sense of middle-aged wannabe hipsters hanging out with teenagers to see what's "in," but in the sense that she can recognize what trends will be picked up by the general public and which ones won't. Her abilities are very valuable to ad agencies, and she makes a living hiring out her services. The down side to her ability is that she's very sensitive to the point of illness to the sight of some logos. She calls it an allergy. When she sees certain logos, she'll have a panic attack.
In her spare time, Cayce participates in an online discussion group revolving around clips of a film that have mysteriously and anonymously been turning up online. No one knows who made the film or in what order if any the the clips are supposed to be viewed, but underground interest in the clips has sprung up worldwide.
The plot revolves around Cayce's work in advertising and her footage interest coming together, which leads her around the world. There's also a subplot involving her father's disappearance (he was last seen taking a cab in the direction of the World Trade Center on the morning of Sept. 11th, 2001), as well as several other subplots that all come together very nicely.
(end of summary bit)
If you've liked Gibson's other work, I strongly recommend picking this one up. It's interesting to read Gibson's writing style in a book that doesn't take place in the future (or, in the case of the Difference Engine in the past). As usual, it's the details and ideas that really make the novel. The characters are fascinating, too, particularly Cayce.
I actually think that *The Dark Knight Returns* would be the better story line to do. I've always wanted to see that one done anime-style with a great voice cast. They need to have Clint Eastwood voice an older batman before he dies.
It's time that America produced an intelligent, engaging animated feature for adults, and *The Dark Knight Returns* is the perfect storyline with which to do it.
I'm glad they're getting an incredible director and an equally incredible writer to work on a comix film. While I'm kind of sick of previously published stories being turned into movies (Pi was so great, not only because it was a tight, well-done film, but also because it was an original story. WHen I took my Mom to see it, she asked what book it was based on, and I smiled when I told her it was an original screenplay), I think that Frank Miller's graphic novels, being so inherently visual (duh) and so good, would make a great film. Graphic novels are practically movie story boards, anyway.
I didn't like X-Men. I'd like to see a good comix film. Maybe this will be the one. Also, J Michael Straczynski's *Rising Stars* is supposed to be in the works as a film down the line. That would be good, too.
I think Gibson is the most poetic of the Cyberpunks. He's the one who deals in imagery more than hard science. His novels are series of snapshots. He paints small moments in time that add up to huge events, and ATP truly illustrates this. As a writer, Gibson's the most lyrical of the bunch. I think he's more a poet than a prose writer. The Virtual Light, Idoru, All Tomorrow's Parties trilogy is more like an extended series of prose poems than three novels, and I think this may be what turns a lot of hard SF folks off to them. A poster above called this book a "put-downer," which illustrates this point. Instead of a "put-downer," I'd call these three "ones-to-slowly-savor." THe characters and the images unfold like a flower blooming, and it's gratifying to spend the time truly appreciating the process instead of zooming through them.
What I'd like to see is some of Gibson's poetry if he writes it. I'd also like to see a fourth novel in this series, and then see him move onto something else. It'll be something new & exciting as Gibson always is.
All in all, I'd say this has been a good Speculative fiction year. We got Crytonomicon, which was nothing short of amazing, and this week, Neil Gaiman released Sandman: Dream Hunters amongst other worthwhile offerings. There've been great stories published in the magazines & Fantasy & Science Fiction celebrated its 50th year. Looking back on the decade, we've gotten mind-blowing stuff from the likes of Rudy Rucker, Paul Di Fillipo, Connie Willis, Nancy Kress, Bruce Sterling, Nalo Hopkinson--the list can go on & on and on. My point? Basically, it's a good time to be alive & to be a fan of SF. Read ATP & enjoy the magic of the way words can be used.
I think the short story "Johnny..." would make an excellent animated short. Maybe they should have done that instead of making the movie. And as much as I would love to see a Neuromancer movie, especially after The Matrix turned out so well, I think Idoru would make a truly interesting character driven movie.
For some of his prose, I suggest Smoke & Mirrors. It's a short story collection that highlights the depth and variety of story of which Gaiman is capable.
Also, if you get a chance, go see him speak. It's very much worth your time, and not just 'cause he's cute & has a lovely accent. He does a wickedly funny Harlan Ellison impression, and he's a thoughtful, intelligent, funny speaker.
I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who's actually tried this. When I decided to try Linux, I got a new computer (actually, a friend gave me her old one when she got a new one). As soon as I can afford a CD-Rom drive for that machine, I'll be installing Linux. I won't put it on my Windows machine because I don't have the time to have my software down while I'm messing with a new OS. I don't mind partitioning my hard drive and the like, but I needed Windows stuff for my last job, and if I get the job for which I just applied, I'll be needing some of the same stuff (unfortunately, Windows is fairly ubiquitous, as if we didn't know this already). I've had friends suggest various distros of Linux, none of which had Windows in the title, so chances are I'll pass on this one, but I am curious to see what others think about it beyond dissing newbies for wanting or needing it. Is it any good?
I don't understand why some people were so shocked after Deep Blue's victory over Kasparov. The real miracle is that men are still able to compete with computers today ! This is merely a matter of time before we can get machines powerful enough to calculate and try the entire tree of a game (or, for more complex games, significant parts of it) and be almost sure to win.
By design, machines are better than human at mathematical games. Chess are a mathematical game.
What about the Chinese and Japanese game of Go? So far, Go has been entirely too complex for a computer to be any good at beating anyone but a novice player. Hell, I'm still trying to figure out the most basic rules. There's still a level of complexity and intutition to this very mathematical game that computer progammers can't replicate or overcome. This suggests to me that there's more to programming a computer to be unbeatable at a game than just entering all possible variations. With Go, that number is humungous. There's a saying that Go is so complex, no two identical games have ever been played. You can't say that about Chess.
Instead of just computing likely outcomes, true AI is going to have to have emotional understanding and a real level of intuition. That's going to be the difficult part.
Even I would have to go along w/ Turing & say that if we can't actualy point out the difference, we're morally obligated to assume that computers *can* feel emotion, etc.
But what will we do if we come to the point where we have to make that assumption?
You know, the one thing that always bothers me when talking about Artificial Intelligence and where it could possibly go is that a ot of people don't think about the political implications of such an intelligence. Why are we working so hard to replicate human intelligence artifically without a set of ethical guidelines? If we actually succeed, we're gonna have a hell of an interesting set of problems about which to worry.
I'm really tired , it's five o'clock in the morning, and I'm up with a splitting headache, so I'm kind of worried that I'm rambling. I suppose my point is that in a world of complication, where we uphold a variety of beliefs about the ways in which we should treat each other, should we really be working so hard to create artificially minds and all that suggests without a set of ethical guidelines? I hate the idea of creating a slave-class.
The Diamond Age remains my favorite Stephenson novel. I've read all of his novels that he's published under his own name (I've read that he has a psuedonym, too) except for The Big U which I haven't managed to find.
I find it interesting that the reviewer didn't like Miranda:
There is also a very annoying character named Miranda who seems superfluous to the story to me.
She's one of the reasons I liked this book so much. Stephenson's very good about speculating on what the future may hold (It's a good thing he's a speculative fiction writer, huh ;) ). I don't want to give too much away, but I think it's really important that Stephenson added her character into the interaction of the primer. I don't think that the primer could have worked without her. It raised Nell. I don't care how intricate a computer intelligence is, there's a level of human interaction necessary for raising a healthy child. I think Miranda represents the human aspect of advancing technology, and as such, she is in no way superfluous.
On another note, I read The Diamond Age while studying for the GRE. I had to look up alot of words (i.e. "a Propaedeutic Enchridion" p. 184 paperback edition) that I'd never even remotely seen before. I ended up scoring really highly on the Verbal section, so perhaps I have Neal Stephenson to thank for that ;)
I recommend all of Stephenson's novels. One criticism many people have about his novels are the detail he gives to secondary characters such as Miranda. I think this is one of the reasons why he's not only a good writer when it comes to scientific speculation, but why he's a great writer, period. He actually develops all of his characters to the point where he creates believable worlds and communities instead of empty plot outlines to show off his ideas like many SF writers unfortunately do. His books are literature. Read them.
I agree that there is a biological basis for a lot of mental illnesses. Depression, for example, runs in my family, & I thank God every day for anti-depressant medication that returns seratonin levels to normal. My point was that the reactions of people to these diseases is what's socially dictated. You're not considered an outcast if you catch a cold, but you are if you get diagnosed with ADHD or bipolar disorder. That's where the problem is.
I don't think it's total BS. I think there's probably something to it, but, as with any theory, it's just an idea with some evidence to back it up.
I'm a literature geek (I majored in English, not computer science), so I would suggest you guys read Madness & Civilization by Michel Foucault. It's a really interesting study of the defintions of madness throughout history and how they change. Why is this book relevant to this discussion? Well Foucault (who had to be one of the greatest geeks who ever lived...medical doctor, historian, scientist, literary critic--just thinking about his output makes me tired), believed that societal opinion is a lot of what defines mental illness. It's separating the "other." So one doctor labels a set of traits a "disorder." It doesn't mean that we geeks are all autistic. It does mean that perhaps there is a correlation between some stereotypical behavior and a medical syndrome.
Foucault's book discusses how public perception has historically defined mental illnesses. This not to say that there's no such thing as a mental illness (believe me, I know that there is). It is to say that the way in which people are treated as a consequence of that illness is as relevant as the illness itself.
Being a geek or a nerd (and I'm not going to get into the semantics of each word's meaning. I've been called both, as well as many more) is indicative of a society's dislike of anything or anyone different. For whatever reason, those of us called "geeks" are often considered strange. I know I got odd looks when I started jumping up and down with happiness because Neal Stephenson published a new book or when I became selectively mute when I got to meet Neil Gaiman. Whether we're geeks because of mild autism or because that's just who we are, this article is more about other people's reactions to us than our reactions to them.
I'm of the opinion that perhaps the reason why so many geeks have such low social graces is because of the way in which we are treated growing up. If you're an outcast for long enough, you may start believe that other people and their social graces aren't worth dealing with. I've been called a psycho because I really, really like and follow science fiction. I go to cons, I post on boards & I buy lots and lots of books. I don't believe this is a psychosis, but this other, so-called normal person thought so, the fact that I can dress nicely, get invited to parties, speak well, know which silverware to use in a formal place-setting & love to dance notwithstanding. I was different enough for her to have to separate herself from me with name calling.
If some people who are autistic get diagnosed as such as a result of this research, then wonderful. The same with dyslexia, depression & a variety of other treatable disorders for which treatment can make life just a little easier (again, I know). I believe that the vast majority of geeks do not have this disorder, but it's important that those who do have the opportunity to get treated if they want to. For those of us who're just geeks because that's just who we are, more power to us. And screw those who have a problem with it.
Actually, it was, "you can type this shit, but you can't say it."
Oh, the nit-picking that can happen when you get a bunch of pedants together ;)
I would personally like to see a newer, more up and coming director take over the AI project. I can't really put my finger on why, but the idea of Spielberg, whom I feel is a wonderful director, directing this film is really disappointing.
In the week after Kubrick's death, the New Yorker published a piece by Ian Watson wherein Watson talked about how he and Kubrick were changing "Super Toys" for the film version. I believe it was this same New Yorker piece which said that the only reason Kubrick agreed to do Eyes Wide Shut was that Warner Bros. agreed to fund AI in return. I really wish they had agreed to fund AI, first, as the world suffers from a lack of truly challenging SF films (In this decade, I liked The Matrix, Ghost In the Shell, Pi, 12 Monkeys, Dark City and Cube. The decade's almost over. That's not even a film a year.).
Back when Wired was good, they published "Super Toys Last All Summer Long" in the issue dedicated to HAL's birth. They also published "The Intelligence Behind AI," which is a piece on Kubrick & the AI project.
The combination of such an intriguing story with such an intriguing director combined with recent special effects advances would have made for a hell of a film. I'm hoping that if Spielberg does get the film, he doesn't sentimentalize (is that even a word?) it. And for the sake of all that is holy, please, please, please do not let George Lucas or James Cameron anywhere near it. This should be a character-driven film, IMHO.
Chris Cunningham, the director attatched to another on-again, off-again, potentially brilliant film based on another decidedly brilliant piece of fiction, Neuromancer was said to have apprenticed under Kubrick. Why not let him have a go? I think this project needs a new director, & Cunningham's stuff has certainly been gritty and unsentimental thus far.
Did you know that GR intended to have gay characters in the next series of ST:TNG, just before he died.
Actually, I read an article a long time ago about a script for ST:TNG that involved two officers on the Enterprise who were a long-term gay couple (I'm sorry I don't remember exactly which article it was. I'd usually post where to find it instead of just saying "I read something somewhere"), but Roddenberry was adamantly against it. The writers really liked it, but Roddenberry killed it. He was not ready to deal with the controversy.
Trek has always been only slightly progressive. It's easier to deal with things in a glossed-over way (i.e. the two episodes referenced by a poster above), but the idea of really dealing with things like, say, a long-term gay relationship were just too scary for Roddenberry & co.
It's funny how many lists to which I end up posting about this topic, because in the giant scheme of things, it's Soooooooo not important. But I grew up with Trek; it strangely feels like family. I think it's time to let it go, though. Don't keep making series just for the sake of making series. That's just sad.