Welcome to the Playpen, our space for ferrety banter and whimsical snippets of things that aren't quite long enough for articles (although they might be) but that caught your eye anyway.
Rereading it reminds me I meant to check out Long and Moore and haven't got round to it yet. Merritt's stuff is okay.
I also noticed how short the early sections are. Obviously Lovecraft is very verbose, but I wonder if it's more difficult doing the early sections where you're trying to brew up something without pinning it down too hard for the rest?
I kind of wonder what Moore thought of the way Challenge From Beyond turned out.
The easiest solution would be to just say "hey women can be space marines after all," but would it be better to make all the chapters co-ed, or make all-female chapters and thus preserve the whole "space nun" thing to go with the "space monk" thing? I mean you'd run into problems either way - if they integrate existing chapters, we'd most certainly end up with "Smurfette Syndrome", because all the Chapter Master positions are taken and all the Primarchs were dudes anyway, so there would be a couple of women like, holding bolters way off to the left somewhere in big battle scene art, and in a big army box you'd get a couple of female marines in your tactical squad or something. Who barely look any different because they're all wearing helmets anyway. Or, you go the sex-segregated route and say that the lost primarchs were women and give them all-women chapters, but there's so much lore behind the existing primarchs that any kind of new inclusion on that front is just going to seem shoehorned-in. What were these lost primarchs doing during the Horus Heresy? Just hanging out? That's no fun.
I mean probably the fairest possible thing would be to just retcon a ton of shit, gender-swap a bunch of the big primarchs, and integrate everything, but then you're left with a mountain of novels that aren't accurate anymore. Maybe there's another way I'm not seeing, but it's just such a boy's game for boys about men doing manly things with other men (NO GIRLS ALLOWED!!) from the ground up that as far as I can tell it's a "damned-if-they-do, damned-if-they-don't" kind of situation. Which is fitting for Warhams, I guess.
On the subject of that Supes vs. Bats article, I vote for the image, but the point of the article is very illuminating. It seems that Snyder is very investedin making sure that any other filmmaker should have any fun within the DC cinematic universe ever again. At the start of the next film, Booster Gold, Blue Beetle and men of Elongated, Plastic and Animal persuasion will be summarily executed by... something or other, but not by Darkseid or anything too cartoony. At the same time, Batgirl, Batwoman and Starfire will explode in an explosion in the background.
As Robinson pointed out my personal style, if I think I need to talk about spoiler-y stuff to make the point I want to make in an article, is to start the article by covering enough non-spoilery points to let the reader decide whether they want to stop now and go play/watch/listen to/experience the subject matter before getting to the spoilery bit, tacking on some spoiler space, and then discussing whatever it is I wanted to discuss.
In terms of reviews, we sometimes include spoiler sections for stuff we're recommending, and I'm sure I've read at least one article from the past year or two that was a paragraph or three of generalized praise and then the whole rest of the review was given over to the spoiler section, so it wouldn't be unheard of. My philosophy is to give fair warning, then say what you have to say and let folks work out for themselves whether to read the spoilers or not.
Prediction: next year the Rabids declare their slate early and sic their members on the Sad Puppy nomination process to ensure that all the Rabid nominations get on the Sad list.
Of course, if no one else here has, or they just can't get a good discussion going, you could always submit a review ...
@Adrienne: Okay, I was wondering about Ancillary Mercy ever since I first heard it was on the Sad Puppy suggestion slate, because, yeah, the series pretty much embodies everything which - to my understanding - the Puppies are in revolt against. If you're right, I suppose I should congratulate them for sticking to their promises, even if it means playing along with being trolled by "SJWs." It also makes my prediction for the eventual fate of the Dragon Awards seem even more likely.
Don’t know about any puppies but it’s BAD NEWS BEARS if you want to disrupt awards. That is a scoundrel tactic and probably part of Ted Cobbler’s devilman plan. Ted Cobbler is notorious devil and has been seen using dark magic to control puppies around the neighborhood. I do not support the devilman agenda but i think that Space Raptor Butt Invasion proves that LOVE IS REAL and no scoundrels can stop that. Especially not some dumb dogs.
So that's that then.
George R.R. Martin is calling for those whose entirely innocuous works were nominated by the Rabids (like Gaiman, Reynolds, etc.) not to withdraw them, on the basis that whilst that was an effective protest last time, it's become quite clear that Vox Day will declare victory regardless of the results, so people may as well shunt the toxic crap down under No Award but feel free to vote for works of actual merit anyway.
I particularly agree with her point that where Puppies have made it onto the ballot, it seems to have resulted in two different outcomes:
1: The category in question has become irredeemably shat up by Puppy candidates. This seems to have mainly happened to Short Stories and Related Works. We don't have the full breakdown of the voting numbers yet and I don't have a year-by-year chart of the votes in front of me, but part of me wonders whether this has happened mostly to categories which don't usually get many nomination votes in the first place, and consequently are much more vulnerable to Puppies.
2: The category in question is near-impossible to distinguish from the way it could have plausibly shaped up in a Puppy-free year. This isn't the same thing as the Puppies having no effect, just that, as Nussbaum puts it, they've "pushed middling but not-awful work onto the ballot over better, more deserving nominees", which as she points out happens all the time in the Hugos because that's how the vote tends to work. I note that the Sad Puppies went for Star Wars: the Force Awakens and Mad Max: Fury Road, and both they and their Rabid littermates went for The Martian; is anybody seriously going to tell me that those movies were not going to be on the ballot this year if the Puppies hadn't been a factor?
I mean, strewth, the Sad Puppies went for Ancillary Mercy and so far as I am aware it meets none of their ideological criteria and is there solely to troll people who wanted to vote for it but now feel conflicted because the Puppies licked it.
(The GOOD news is that their success is going to tip the scales even farther in favor of EPH passing, and that should at least blunt the edges of slates in future years.)