You can see the most recently posted comments here, 24 at a time; or, if you prefer, we've got a news feed...
-
Daniel F on The Reading Canary: Fighting Fantasy (Part 5)
at 02:26 on 25-01-2015 - link
This doesn't necessarily answer the parallel evolution vs. planned back story question, but the "rising to greatness due to the hero getting a dwarfish weapon" thing pings to me as coming from (variations on) the Sigurd/Siegfried mythos, though in that case it's a sword rather than a hammer.
If you're going to go that route, surely you'd also mention Thor? He strikes me as one of the earliest examples of a mythic hero who receives a magic hammer from dwarfs and uses it to make his fortune.
The 'Temple of Terror' example strikes me as a bit too generic to posit a clear link to Sigmar and Warhammer Fantasy. As you say, it's not a unique motif at all. Legendary heroes have magical weapons; dwarf/ves are known to produce magical weapons; and dwarfs have been strongly associated with hammers and axes, presumably because hammers are reminiscent of the forge and because Gimli had an axe.
I'm not sure how much Sigurd I'd say there is in Sigmar. The names are similar, but Sigurd is archetypally a lone warrior, a dragonslayer, and ultimately a doomed lover. None of that applies to Sigmar, who seems cast in a different mould: general, emperor, law-maker, and so on. I always wondered if there was a bit of Arminius in him, actually.
Anyway, good to see the Fighting Fantasy reviews resume, Arthur! I enjoyed the previous ones quite a bit too; their pulp feel has become rather charming. -
Sonia Mitchell on Catharsis by Rabbit
at 15:07 on 24-01-2015 - link
Child's Play are great publishers. I like that they're not afraid to publish charmingly odd work that's at a simple reading level but challenging in interpretation.
This page from Star Gazers, Skyscrapers and Extraordinary Sausages is just fabulous. -
Alice on Catharsis by Rabbit
at 22:57 on 23-01-2015 - link
Oh goodness, this book sounds wonderful, I shall have to keep an eye out for it.
(I have to say, I had a moment of "oh, well, of course it's a lovely book, it's published by Child's Play!" when I saw the logo on the cover image in this review.
As they say on their website, CP publish books "that fully reflect our diverse society in terms or [sic] heritage, disability, gender and family" -- I remember being really pleased when I first saw the couple of CP books my toddler niecephews have, because the books not only show babies of different skin colours/ethnic backgrounds, but also babies with glasses, hearing aids, and seizure helmets/protective headgear. Which makes this bleeding heart liberal softie very happy. *g*) -
Alice on The Reading Canary: Fighting Fantasy (Part 5)
at 22:30 on 23-01-2015 - link
Then I have to smash the dragon statues with the legendary warhammer of Stonebridge, provided by dwarves. (Super geeky fact: Sigmar, the first Emperor in the Warhammer Fantasy world, rose to greatness in part because of a warhammer lent to him by dwarves. The first edition of Warhammer Fantasy Battles came out two years before this gamebook, so this will have emerged at a time when a lot of the Warhammer Fantasy setting details were being thrashed out. Parallel evolution, or remnant of some plan to have Fighting Fantasy be the backstory to the Warhammer Fantasy world? No idea, but it's an interesting question.)
This doesn't necessarily answer the parallel evolution vs. planned back story question, but the "rising to greatness due to the hero getting a dwarfish weapon" thing pings to me as coming from (variations on) the Sigurd/Siegfried mythos, though in that case it's a sword rather than a hammer.
I imagine that's not a unique motif in modern(ish) fantasy fiction, though -- for instance, in the Narnia books, Prince Caspian is given a dwarf-forged sword to replace his own sword, which in comparison looks "as feeble as a toy and as clumsy as a stick". (It also seems likely that C.S. Lewis -- consciously or not -- drew on Nordic/Germanic myths while writing Narnia, too.) -
Michal on The Man Whose Dicks Weren't All Exactly Alike
at 04:43 on 23-01-2015 - link
I would prefer if I never again see anything remotely resembling Iron Sky, even in the context of a film-within-a-film.
I saw the pilot. Haven't read the novel, mind (and I really should), but it had some nice moments. Main problem is, as in the Verge's review, it didn't seem willing to go far enough in painting the world as anything other than a late-1940s America with a few flags and SS officers scattered around.
I'd be interested in seeing the full series if it goes ahead. - Arthur B on The Man Whose Dicks Weren't All Exactly Alike at 17:22 on 21-01-2015 - link Eh, never mind, The Verge's review confirms my worst fears: the pilot chickens out of showing America defeated (because RAH RAH AMERICA SPECIAL) and the newsreel is just footage from our universe (the most boring possibility of all). Meh.
-
Arthur B on The Man Whose Dicks Weren't All Exactly Alike
at 17:18 on 21-01-2015 - link
I haven't watched the pilot because I don't want to get invested in it if it doesn't become a series, but I have heard some stuff about it. Apparently The Grasshopper Lies Heavy is a film reel (the contents of which are currently mysterious) rather than a novel, which I guess is a reasonable format-shift given the different medium but I do wonder whether it'll ultimately disappoint.
I mean, if it's an actual film from a parallel universe where Hitler lost the war, then that's way more objective proof than anyone in the novel had of the alternate timelines and would, I suspect, herald them taking a clunky and unsubtle direction with the parallel universe stuff (and the series as a whole).
On the other hand, it'd be kind of awesome if it's a low-budget '50s-style sci-fi movie about an alternate timeline where Hitler lost the war - like Iron Sky (or the counter-Hitler alternative) as written and directed by Ed Wood. - Ibmiller on The Man Whose Dicks Weren't All Exactly Alike at 16:21 on 20-01-2015 - link Has anyone checked out the Amazon "Man in the High Castle" pilot? I haven't gotten to the novel yet, but I did watch the episode last night, and thought there were some very Dick-ian themes (primarily "IS THIS REAL??????"), but it was so achingly pedestrian in terms of dialogue and structure I wasn't very pulled in.
-
Shimmin on Wings of Love(craft)
at 23:07 on 14-01-2015 - link
Sorryish about the names... with a monograph I’d obviously do that, and if I’d been looking at each story in turn I’m sure I would as well. With the thematic arrangement it didn’t really occur to me, as most weren’t getting much attention, although thinking about it, the ones I disparaged were probably owed that much at least!
I was interested (slash disappointed) to note that of the authors I’d actually heard of – Pugmire, Stableford and Cambell – nothing really struck a chord with me. It may be worth bearing in mind, though, that critical darlings and me tend to go together like fish and paragliding...
I can sort of see what Cisco is going for, but I’m afraid I thought the execution wasn’t that good. Perhaps he was aiming for a portentous, ominous sort of atmosphere full of interpersonal tension, but it came across to me as needlessly cryptic; it’s hard to feel the tension of a story if you’re just sort of perplexed about what’s going on. I may be unfair, but the impression I got was that the opacity concealed Cisco not having any real idea what the cultists were all about. If you’re trying to write a story from a cultist POV, that’s a problem.
In contrast, The Truth about Pickman was pretty open, and I was convinced by the world it presented. The antagonist felt well-realised and, while I can’t now recall if everything was explained, there was a sense of solidness; Stableford seemed to have a firm grasp of the situation he was writing about. My regret there was that it didn’t feel weird enough – as a story it’s pretty good, but as a follow-on to Pickman’s Model it had something quite specific to live up to. In this case, I was awaiting a little more weirdness punch at the end, which never came.
To put a few more cards on the table, I’ve never really considered Lovecraft as horror. It’s very much weird fiction as far as I’m concerned. In fairness, everything here is basically weird fiction (except, of course, Rotterdam).
Incidentally, as well as the folks I specifically recommended, I will be checking out Stableford and Campbell’s other writing. These particular stories didn’t do quite what I was looking for, but I didn’t come away with the impression that the authors were Not For Me. Maybe also Niswander. -
James D on Wings of Love(craft)
at 21:16 on 14-01-2015 - link
I too appreciate the addition of author's names - I found it especially interesting that you especially didn't like Michael Cisco's story, given that he's something of a critical darling.
Somewhat related, just from my interactions with other fans, it seems like horror is more "to each his own" than most other genres - I wonder if it's because horror's main goal is to engender a specific set of feelings in the reader - horror, fear, terror, disgust, etc., and a reader's personal phobias and predilections can dictate that more than usual. If so, in theory it seems like romance would be the same way, though I don't know anything about that genre. -
Michal on How Gary Jennings ruined my adolescence
at 03:36 on 12-01-2015 - link
Aztec has its saving graces. It's certainly what Jennings was most famous for, famous enough that I've seen posthumous continuations of the Aztec at the used bookstore (there are no less than 5, I believe) and even books bearing the heading Gary Jennings's Apocalypse 2012 in the "well the Mayas had stepped pyramids too" vein of beating a dead horse Brian Herbert-style. I'm not sure what the benefit of slapping his name on those books even is, he's not exactly remembered as a giant among historical novelists.
I would still like to know why he hated Armenians so much. -
Ashimbabbar on How Gary Jennings ruined my adolescence
at 14:27 on 11-01-2015 - link
re AZtec: as to Jennings' first evil bisexual female, the "authetic" elements i.e. taken from a known Aztec tale, are that she, the daughter of the tlatoani of Texcoco, had numerous male lovers, had them executed and statues made of them. Her husband wondered a little at the number of statues, but failed to catch on until he found her in flagrante with three high-born men and had the mery foursome executed on the spot. The bi/gay dveeloments are courtesy of Jennings'
re Marco Polo: what disgusted me most in this ( whereas I had rfound Aztec rather likable in a over-the-top way ) is the sick racism especially toward Tibetans and Indians combined with an abandonment fo the slightest pretence at historical truth.
-
https://me.yahoo.com/a/pwQl65QjyO_qKzMVXCk4NkWmA93bTB40uqFXg0tjtoso59j2K3E-#74262 on Wings of Love(craft)
at 22:47 on 10-01-2015 - link
I brought up the issue of the author's names for two reasons:
1. It helps me evaluate whether or not I'd be interested in reading something if I know who wrote it. Of the listed authors, I'm a fan of Spencer's Lovecraftian work, and I'll check out anything Stableford writes. Most of the others I don't know.
2. I'm a published writer, although what I write is very, very distant from Lovecraftian short stories. I like to see writers get credit for their work. -
Shimmin on Wings of Love(craft)
at 21:45 on 10-01-2015 - link
Including the names of the authors of the stories would help here.
Never occurred to me, sorry. I'm curious: is there a particular way I didn't think of in which it'd help, or does it just seem generally useful?
Because of the way I've discussed the stories in themed groups, I couldn't really see an elegant way to add the authors' names in without making the text itself seem clunky and hard to read. Instead I've just stuck a list in at the top. Hope that's okay? I also fixed a typo. - Arthur B on Wings of Love(craft) at 19:02 on 10-01-2015 - link I'll leave it to Shimmin whether he wants to edit in the authors' names, but there's a list here.
- https://me.yahoo.com/a/pwQl65QjyO_qKzMVXCk4NkWmA93bTB40uqFXg0tjtoso59j2K3E-#74262 on Wings of Love(craft) at 13:40 on 10-01-2015 - link Including the names of the authors of the stories would help here.
-
Michal on The Inner Sadness of a Nazi Murder Machine
at 22:45 on 01-01-2015 - link
They weren't making Shoah or Come and See.
I can imagine it now: "Mash X to claw your way out of the barn window before that scene happens." -
Melanie on "See Me!"
at 05:30 on 01-01-2015 - link
Ah, Suzie's just a regular doll. The only significance she has is that poor bloody May puts on her.
Oh, I gathered. But in a different movie... well.
I guess all I'm really saying is that it has all the hallmarks of having something horrible and supernatural going on with it, even if there isn't really. -
Alasdair Czyrnyj on "See Me!"
at 23:55 on 31-12-2014 - link
Well, this was a hell of a merry Christmas!
Loving parents don't give their kids haunted/cursed shit for their birthdays.
Ah, Suzie's just a regular doll. The only significance she has is that poor bloody May puts on her.
Come to think of it, regarding both May's mother and May herself, I think an old quote by C. S. Lewis explains their mindset ably; "In heaven, there is a state of being called love; in hell, we would recognize it as hunger." - Ashimbabbar on Fresher Than You Think at 20:39 on 31-12-2014 - link Now that you've pointed this out, I wonder whether Williamson didn't make conscious use here of the boogeyman of racist thinking - the male of the 'inferior race' ( jew, black… ) stereotypically described with a strong sex drive and a will to miscegenate…
-
Arthur B on Fresher Than You Think
at 15:18 on 30-12-2014 - link
That's a good point, though it's interesting how Williamson also subverts Nazi racial theory by pointing out that if the "superior" traits originated that far back in human evolution, then you'd expect them to be distributed through a wide swathe of populations - and indeed the telepathic master-race has representatives from more or less every racial and ethnic division out there.
I suspect Williamson would bristle at this being referred to as a "serious novel", if only because he was quite unashamed of being an adventure story hack and was suspicious of attempts to create "literary" SF. Which is ironic because he's quite good at not overtly trying to be fancy-pants or highbrow whilst at the same time presenting something that is a little more clever than it looks at first glance. -
Ashimbabbar on Fresher Than You Think
at 00:16 on 30-12-2014 - link
Also, I think there is an interesting sub-text in this novel.
The novel basically subscribes to the Out Of Asia theory of the origin of humanity - which had been quite popular in the end of the 19th century and until about 1930.
The nazis had been very much into it, Hitler sending an expedition to Tibet to look for the cradle of the 'aryan race'…
So. We have a would-be master race originating in TIbet. Also, its powers are animalistic and Hitler's aim was to turn the next German generations into "magnificent beasts of prey" unencumbered with sentimentality or conscience…
Anybody sees a pattern here ?
In that light, the promised Rule of Darkness takes a new meaning ( and so does the conspiracy which includes wealthy and eminent members of society… )
Also, it must be the only serious novel where the protagonist transforms into a pterodactyl.
- Michal on "See Me!" at 21:54 on 26-12-2014 - link @Melanie: I dunno, these necropants my parents gave me yesterday are pretty comfortable.
-
Melanie on "See Me!"
at 18:14 on 26-12-2014 - link
The second episode comes during her sixth (?) birthday, when she receives Suzie, a doll her mother made as a child. However, Suzie lives in a glass case, and according to Mama (Merle Kennedy), must never come out.
...Loving parents don't give their kids haunted/cursed shit for their birthdays.
