I Like That Old Time Rock ‘n Roll

As the decade has begun to close with the end of the year, there have been a number of ‘Best of the Decade’ lists in the music blog world, and a number of them have gotten me thinking about music over the past ten years. Since the start of the decade, I would consider these past years as some of the most formative in my own tastes in music, especially during my years in college. During that time, the entire music industry has been changed, for better or for worse, and with these changes has come new opportunities, sounds and experiences for musicians and fans alike.

My own taste in music has varied over the past ten years, from radio top 40 hits to Indie-Rap and I’m very eager to see what comes next. Looking back, I found that it would be almost impossible to put together any sort of comprehensive list for the last ten years, simply because there is too much music, it is too varied, and there is far, far too much that I haven’t listened to. While computers have become paramount in the way that music is transmitted, shared and listened to, I can’t help but wonder if it’s harmful to the overall music scene.

Looking back over music of the 1960s and 1970s, the music is easily recognizable, memorable and classic. Looking back over the decade, I’m not sure that I can find a comparable number of bands that match not only the quality of the hits of prior years, but ones that have the same presence. With other years populated by bands such as the Beatles, Rolling Stones, Jimi Hendrix, Elvis, Eric Clapton and more, revolutionaries all in their own way, the past couple of decades have much bigger shoes to fill.

The formative years of Rock and Roll have been filled with epic tales of musicians gone crazy: smashing up hotel rooms and instruments on stage, getting arrested on stage, all the while pushing the limits of free speech and taboo topics to entertain the masses, who ate it up with relish. And, the music was good too – music labels, I think , didn’t quite know how to deal with all of the new sounds and styles that were coming out from aspiring musicians: all they could do was control the direction, like pointing a fire hose, hoping that the water inside was just right.

Since that time, music has become more refined. We’ve settled down, figured out what works and what sounds just right. Advances in technology, from the introduction of computers and editing programs allow musicians to put together a fantastic sounding album, cheaper, quicker and to an incredibly wide audience than ever before. Young people, ever the bright start of the music industry, have been freed, recording demos with cheap recording equipment and access to MySpace, and have the chance of finding an audience amongst the numerous people out seeking for new sounds, and even more obscure bands and singer/songwriters.

My music interests have ebbed and waned over the past ten years, starting with listening to 107.1, WORK FM (Now FrankFM, a Classic Rock Station) a Top 40 station, which effectively brought my music tastes to ’90s alternative/grunge. I didn’t get that much into listening to anything outside of that before a couple years into college. A friend of mine at the time, later girlfriend, now ex, introduced me to indie-rock, styles along what was heard in Garden State, which further influenced what I listened to. Artists such as Alexi Murdoch, The Decemberists, Spoon, Nick Drake and others entered my playlists. From that point, I began to listen to more – not only to new artists that were coming out, but also to bands that I’d grown up listening to: the Beatles, Gordon Lightfoot, Fleetwood Mac.

In listening to the old and new, there’s an incredible amount of influence that is held by artists from long ago, especially by newer artists. Folk-rock has undergone a huge resurgence among the hip, from artists such as Alexi Murdoch, Iron & Wine and Bon Iver growing in popularity over the past couple of years – in no small part, no doubt, to commercial placement of their songs in television shows and commercials.

While the music is fantastic – I count all of the above to be some of the best artists of the decade, but at the same time, I’ve become very weary and wary of the independent market for music, because of the sheer drive to feed the hipster masses by going completely out on a limb and doing something patently outrageous, but in a calm, civil sort of way. In a way, the kids who go out and record come up with some interesting stuff, but they don’t toe the line like musicians of old. The music that we have today, independent and commercial (although that distinction is flat out ridiculous in and of itself – all music is commercial) is sanitized, watered down and just too appropriate. Maybe I’m just listening to the wrong types of music, but a lot of bands just don’t have that raw energy and bite that the ’70s brought us.

We don’t have our Hendrix, our Lennon or our Jagger – instead, a lot of our front men are put together by their publicists, who put them up on a pedestal for their outbursts, poor judgment or incredibly noble deeds (I’m looking at you, Amy Winehouse, Britteny Spears and Bono). But in a way, they become products in and of themselves, sold to the public through the spin on their actions, rather than the popular judgment of their actions unguided by the invisible hand of a major marketing company. In a world where news is paramount, and any news is good news, it seems that the rash actions of the people we admire are more constructed, rather than heat of the moment rashness. I have a feeling that those individuals, who’ve built up their personas in the time before facebook and MySpace, will be longer lasting. Even the persona of avoiding a personality, or just trying to be different by wearing mismatched clothing, acting the awkward soul in a way to appeal to more fans who make it out to see them.

Don’t get me wrong, there’s a huge difference between the personality of a band and the music that they play, but over time, how much of a band’s persona becomes intermixed with their music as a whole? In an age where the choices of music and bands is akin to water from a fire hose, the strive to be completely unique by adopting a certain persona for a band just seems shallow, fake. There are very few bands out there right now that I would label as being truly unique, focused on their music and presenting a fairly honest image all at the same time. At the end of the day, while there is plenty of selection – good selection – I can’t help but wonder if these musicians will really stand the test of time, or if they will just be lost in the multitude of other hipster artists who get their brief break of fame before realizing that they have to continue the act. At the same time, I wonder how many bands that have been sold to us will last in the long run.

Looking back over the music that I’ve accumulated over the past couple of years – and I’ve accumulated a lot – there are certainly bands that I go back to time and time again, while there are even more that I’ve listened to, and really enjoyed, but who soon become unmemorable. It’ll be fun to go back and seek them out in another ten years to see if anybody knows their name and see if their record deal through the strength of their MySpace page and website is really enduring. In some cases? I would bet so. In far more instances, I would bet that a lot of these bands will fail the test of time, only to be resurrected by lone fans with overburdened hard drives. In the meantime, I’ll take that old time rock and roll.

What’s the Point of a Genre?

Working at the bookstore, I come across a constant annoyance: trying to put a book into its proper place, using BITS, the internal store inventory system. The program is antiquated, clunky and a pain to use, and whomever is hired to enter the information into the system in the first place should be duct-taped off the ground and had rotten fruit thrown at them. It would be a good incentive to get the information entered in correctly and consistantly. Still, while annoyed about this the other night at the store, a thought came to me that’s been further pushed along by a post from John Scalzi on his blog, Whatever.

This recent post highlights something that I’ve noticed within the SF genre, and fandom: a general cry to be recognized by the literary establishment as a whole. Science Fiction, in general, has been trivialized by a number of establishments and authors of other genres – Margaret Atwood’s comments come to mind at just how against being labeled in the genre some peopel can be: “Science fiction has monsters and spaceships; speculative fiction could really happen”, and “Oryx and Crake is a speculative fiction, not a science fiction proper. It contains no intergalactic space travel, no teleportation, no Martians.” (From the Guardian and Book of the Month Club).

To some extent, there’s good reason for this – early science fiction, while fun, is loaded with rubbish, pulp and childish stories that were primarily geared towards selling as many copies as possible to the lowest common denominator demographic. Atwood’s characterization of the genre is highly flawed – science fiction is far more than intergalactic travel and aliens, and while that’s a common element, I see little difference between the superficial elements such as those, and the elements that contain a so-called speculative fiction. In the end, it’s the story that really matters, and provided that an author can put together a compelling plot and array of characters, I’ve often found that those more unbelievable elements, such as ‘monsters’ and intergalactic travel works out just fine.

Scalzi’s argument brings up a further version of this point – if the surrounding plot elements don’t matter all that much – and I’ve noticed an increasing number of books with horror, science fiction, paranormal, fantasy, urban fantasy and other themes – where does the overall label matter when it comes to books? Indeed, with the aforementioned types, they’re all lumped into the same small section in the larger bookstores, usually towards the back so the bookstore owners can hide the nerds and geeks from the rest of the cliental. (You know, kind of how the pretty people in gyms are always working out next to the windows?) I personally love the science fiction genre for its ability to tell stories, in addition to the settings and out there concepts that generally crop up. However, my enjoyment of one particular genre doesn’t necessarily cloud my feelings towards books of another, nor does the label on the back of the book affect how I feel about another genre.

To some extent, I think that the argument is largely fueled by egos and excess time of overeducated people, and out of marketing necessity. Since much of bookselling comes out of browsing, it makes sense to group books accordingly, by genre, which is in turn placed on a pedestal, as something that is so profound, it can’t possibly be associated with other books that have the reputation as science fiction / fantasy has.

This is where I have problems with the people who insist that any one particular genre is worthy of attention more so than the others. The same issue appears in Military History – I had a reading about this very same issue, as Military History is percieved by the larger academic community as an unimportant, somewhat annoying little cousin that wants to join in on the fun. Unfortunately, with the more established genres pushing out the newer ones, they miss out on a number of really good stories and insights into their fields. Cormac McCarthy’s book The Road is arguably one of the better books of the past decade, and it won the Pulitzer Prize, despite the post-apocolptic storyline that appeals to the many followers of the ‘geek’ genre. Still, it wasn’t marketed as such.

Marketing aside, I think the best alternative to all of this would be to get rid of the genre labels, sort out everything between fiction and non-fiction sections and shelve everything by the author’s last name. Non-fiction can be sorted by subject, while people can just figure out what they like ahead of time and just go by author. Scalzi’s hit on a huge point – this is an intellectual argument that really doesn’t matter in the long run. Honestly, if Science Fiction starts scoring more people, longtime fans will just find something else to complain about – the new fans who don’t have quite the same appreciation for the genre as they do.

Today, We Watched the Sky Fall

There is something that’s been bothering me on this day, and it’s something that I’ve noticed happening for a couple years now:

“Remember 9-11!”

This year, I’ve been seeing more and more of this, people pouring out a simple one or two sentences, sometimes all in caps, reminding me that I need to remember the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the thwarted attack on United 93. As if I could forget. The events of September 11 will likely remain with me for the rest of my life – I can remember that day as clearly as I remember last week, and in the ensuing eight years, it has changed our world far more than any event that I can remember.

These simple status messages just don’t cut it for me. I’m sorry, but from where I’m sitting, status messages are more about the person than anything else, and I’ve always seen these sort of messages as a simple reaffirmation that whichever person posts something like this, they want everyone else to see that they remember the day, that I’m honoring their memory in the maximum 140 characters and that with that out of the way, I can resume the next 364 days without issue.

What a fucking shallow thing to do.

September 11th was an incredibly complicated and vile act. Just under 3,000 people have died as a result of the attacks, either as passengers on the airplanes, bystanders or rescue personnel. The attacks were planned well in advance by Al Queda, and those plans were spurred on by larger actions on the part of many individuals and nations. In turn, it has unleashed some of the absolute best and some of the absolute worst this nation has to offer upon the world.

I am saddened by what happened. I remember the absolute horror that registered while I watched online as the news poured in. I remember the confusion and the terror of the unknown, wondering if another airplane would come down somewhere else. I can remember the smoke rising and the countless pictures that poured in. It’s something that I don’t think that I could forget if I wanted to. In the meantime, we have launched two major conflicts around the world, changed legislation, opened prisons and distrust anyone with a water bottle on an airplane. Every single one is a pointed reminder of what happened eight years ago. I can’t forget, and I refuse to simply honor those who died on one single day. They deserve better, especially in this nation with such a short attention span.

We are reminded every day that something terrible happened, and I am so tired of being told to support the soldiers overseas, otherwise I’m unpatriotic, I’m tired of the idea that any opinion that differs from the larger public consciousness is nothing short of treason in some people’s eyes, I’m tired of the polarization that has infected this country and I’m tired of 9-11 and the memory of those innocent people being used, manipulated into serving an administration’s agenda. I’m tired that despite all of the remembering that is going on, we’ve largely forgotten why we’re in the situations that we’re in today.

Today, we watched the skies fall and change the world. I’ll never forget that.

A Library Without Books

The other day, I came across an article that really shocked me. The Cushing Academy in Ashburnham, MA has decided to eliminate their twenty-thousand book library in favor of a digital one. According to the article, they have spent $500,000 to transform the library into a ‘learning center’ which will be outfitted with several widescreen televisions to display data from the internet and can interface with student laptops, while they have purchased 18 e-book readers (Most likely the Kindle and Sony Reader) which will have access to a large digital library. To cap it off, a coffee shop is being built in place of the circulation desk, including a $12,000 cappuccino machine.

While this really annoys me, I can see why the change is being made. The internet is becoming far more prevalent in our lives, and e-books are going to be on the rise with the successes of Amazon.com’s Kindle device and other similar brands. The school is certainly making a logical, and enormously expensive effort to modernize their library to tap into these new changes in how education might go. With this upgrade, students will have access to quite a lot of material.

There are a large number of flaws with this idea, however. The first thing that came to mind for me was what happens during a prolonged power outage? My iPhone, with an e-book reader will barely last a day as I use it, and in a situation such as that, it’s going to be going off until I can plug it in. While I can understand the desire to switch to a completely digital library, I can’t understand why this would include eliminating the traditional stacks and contents of the library.

This doesn’t necessarily stem from a desire to keep books because of the tactile feel and ease of reading – that is certainly a consideration, but that is not the sole virtue of keeping books on the shelves. The biggest concern that the teachers should feel here is the missed opportunities for students to utilize a working library in all aspects – being able to accurately locate a volume on the shelves, how to conduct searches, and simply browsing the shelves for related content. These are skills, especially in the humanities and social studies fields that will be vital for students to learn, for one simple reason: there are many archives and libraries with content that is not digitalized, and nor will it ever be, because of the sheer volume. Computers have successfully been integrated into libraries for years now – they are an invaluable resource for tracking books and their locations throughout a library. I myself have my own tracking software on my computer at home, called BookDB.

The introduction of online shopping and browsing, such as like on Amazon.com or BN.com, is something that has never really felt comparable to actually going into a bookstore and browsing the shelves. I’ve come across numerous books, some of which I never would have come across on my own by just browsing the web pages for books. With every advance, you lose something in the process. Nostalgia aside, presence on a shelf can also make or break an author.

What bothers me more is the attitude that books are unimportant. Books are easily one of the most accessible methods in which to introduce a person to reading, as opposed to an e-reader, which is not only expensive, but is a largely inaccessible technology for most out there – you need an internet connection, computer, amazon.com account, and so forth. While the successes of the Kindle are well known, proving that there is a market for it, there is a portion of the population that may not have ready access to something like this. People who aren’t inclined to read aren’t going to go out and go through all the steps, as opposed to a bookstore, where they might browse the shelves and pick up a cheap paperback book.

Another problem with internet only and digital databases is the tendency to rely far too heavily on information gleaned from the websites. Coming from background with a Master’s Degree from an online university and working for the same school, I’ve seen a number of examples of students utilizing Wikipedia as a credible source, as well as other online websites, without carefully scrutinizing or questioning them. Websites such as Wikipedia certainly has their places in the world – it’s a fantastic resource for any number of facts, but due to the nature of its existence, it is hard to trust much of it beyond a glance. Online databases are much more reliable, such as JSTOR, but they can be difficult to access and aren’t universal to much of the general public, unlike libraries or public archives.

My own experience with online and digital learning was a positive one, but the experience was not completely digitally based. Norwich University’s School of Graduate Studies MMH program switched from digital readings to printed coursepacks to alleviate the burden on students printing out everything, and continued throughout to issue books each course. I personally found being able to sit down with a hard copy reading was much easier on my eyes, allowed me to take copious notes in the margins, and were something I could turn to without having to restart my computer after I went to bed.

I personally wouldn’t trade books for anything digital. The lesson here that needs to be remembered is that hardcopy books and digital readings are both delivery methods that bring information to a reader, who then does with it what they will. Physical books have the inherent advantage, in my opinion because they are cheaper for the consumer, easier to handle and don’t require additional hardware to access. E-books are a fantastic idea to supplement a student body, either through digital textbooks that could be easily updated and distributed, but not as a replacement to a library system in place. Libraries are far more than just for pleasure reading – they serve a scholarly interest, and their use is something that needs to be taught. Plus, walking around stacks of books is just an outstanding way to get carried away.

iPhone

The future is here, I’m sure of it. For the past couple of years, I’ve owned a variety of Apple iPods to keep up with my growing interest in music. Looking back at my record with the devices, I’m a little surprised that I actually stuck with the product – since my first one, I’ve gone through five. Two 3rd generation Classics, 2 2nd generation Nanos and a 2nd generation iPod Touch, which has since been swapped out for an iPhone. Fortunately, I’ve only paid for a couple of these, because of Apple’s fantastic warranty, which covered the first couple devices when their hard drives broke.

I resisted the idea of buying an iPhone for a while, which was one reason why I bought the Touch from a fellow 501st member earlier this year. That was where I realized that there was quite a lot to these devices, and partially the reason why I went out and got a phone. The sheer functionality of the two devices have been a very interesting one, and I believe that it’s something right out of science fiction.

I’m finding that the iPhone is an invaluable tool – just carrying it around with me allows me ready access to my calendar, a camera, my e-mail, a calculator, notebook, dictionary, thesaurus, first aid guide, an e-book reader, maps, a compass, the weather, and the internet, among other things, as well as being my phone and music player. I’m slowly getting into the habit of tracking my bills, 501st and work events, concerts and a bunch of other things by using it as a planner, while noting down my food shopping list, interesting books as I browse and looking up the occasional word when I come across something I can’t readily remember.

Essentially, what I can hold in my hand is an entirely new method of communicating with the world. I know I’m preaching to the choir here on the Internet. But I’m absolutely astounded that I can check my e-mail, various discussion forums, the news, weather and so much more, practically everywhere I go. (Given AT&T’s crappy coverage of Vermont, my options are pretty limited in places). Thinking back to my family’s first mobile phone, a clunky, bulky thing that could hardly be put into a pocket, and could only do one thing: call another phone. Here, calling another phone is almost an afterthought.

Star Trek is largely credited with the idea of a hand-held communicator, and the idea has been used throughout the SF genre for years. Taken back to the 1960s, an iPhone, even without having any form of cellular network to operate on, would still be a pretty handy device – it already would be more powerful than the Apollo spacecraft, and considering that the computers of the time were the size of a room. No wonder that the idea of a handheld, wireless communications device would have been a radical idea at the time, and even throughout the next couple of decades, this sort of thing can be used as a prop in the genre.

What interests me more is that for such a rapid development in our society, the influence of something such as a smart phone doesn’t seem to make its appearance in Science Fiction as prominently as it might have been. During the Golden Age of Science Fiction, the knowledge that someday, people could walk around, constantly in contact with one another via an impossible technology would have made prime story material for some of the authors. Indeed, some of the effects of these devices would probably fulfill some science fiction authors worst nightmares about a healthy society. The declines in reading, the mutilation of reading and writing abilities, the shorter attention spans and other, similar troublesome trends that we are seeing now help provide the need for such devices.

I for one, have noticed the changes in my own behavior with my phone. Before, I existed without internet at my apartment, although I could check my e-mail on my prior phone. I didn’t have television and most of my news updates came from my commute to and from work. Now, I find myself checking my messages every hour or so, while being able to access an incredible amount of information whenever I think of it. Should I want to learn anything about the Faroe Islands (an island group in Northern Europe between Norway and Iceland), or if I need to look up the meaning for the word ’causerie’ (light informal conversation for social occasions) or tomorrow’s weather, (Mostly sunny, highs in the mid 70s, Light and variable winds…), I have it at my fingertips. I’ve made a conscious effort to fill my phone with things that are useful, and as such, I’ve found that in this regard, the phone is a very powerful tool, akin to the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, or the Encyclopedia Galactica. But at other times, I just want to put it away, and just read a book.

Unfortunately, the phone has that covered. I downloaded the iPhone’s version of Amazon.com’s Kindle technology, which further adds to its already impressive array of uses by turning it into an ebook reader. I’ve downloaded a handful of the free offerings from the website. I’m currently reading Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein, Naomi Novik’s His Majesty’s Dragon, Kim Stanley Robinson’s Red Mars and China Mieville’s Perdido Street Station, which is sure to keep me occupied at the next time that I am stuck in a line or away from my books. I can’t say that I’m sold on the idea of an ebook reader, but with the option, and the occasions when I’ve found myself away from whatever I’m reading, I find it to be incredibly useful.

A couple years ago, this sounded like something out of a science fiction novel or film – the advances in technology and miniaturization over the past couple of years has the potential to change how we learn, access information and communicate with one another, but it doesn’t change the way in which we interpret that information – it just gives us more and more as people’s appetite for information over knowledge increases, which I find more worrying. I like to think that I have customized the programs in my phone be of use, for communications and information access, as well as for entertainment, and as a result, it’s by my side constantly. It’s handy, but I’m happy that there is one feature on it that has been a staple of all computers since their creation: an off switch.

Summer Weddings & Growing Up

This year has been particularly weird for me, when I was asked to be the best man for my two best friends, Sam and Eric, for their respective weddings, this summer. It’s not weird that they’re getting married – I wholeheartedly approve of their wifes, Miranda and Marla, respectively, but I’m a little more weirded out at how this helps to point out that we’re all growing up. Maybe growing up isn’t necessarily the right word – we’re all adults now, thrust into postitions within the working world, and we’ve since scattered to the wind after high school and college to our careers, lives and hobbies in our own corners of the planet.

While at Eric’s wedding, I talked with a couple of friends from high school for the first time in years. I’ve only really kept in touch with two friends from Harwood, a larger number from college, but there is very little looking back, or effort beyond things such as Facebook, to keep in touch with people. I see what a lot of my former classmates are up to, but I rarely engage with them in any meaningful sort of conversation. I think that’s good and bad, honestly. There’s very few people who I want to keep in touch with from high school, and as the years go on, (Six already!) we’ve all changed a lot. Some people, from what I’ve heard, have essentially moved from student to parent, something that continually baffles me. Others have gone on to travel to other countries and do some pretty cool things.

It’s a very strange feeling, looking back at my education and realizing that I’m largely out of that stage of my life, and realizing just how little high school prepared me for this sort of thing. All of my social interactions have changed with my personality and mannerisms as I’ve grown older, largely formed while in college, but there was just so much crap that I didn’t need or have any use for, and from everything that I read and hear about, it’s largely the same everywhere else. There’s been very little that’s prepared me for ‘real life’, it would seem.

I’m very happy for my friends, I think that they’re embarking on some very good places in life, but jesus. We’re grown up! When did that happen, because nobody told me.

Rant: Montpelier Drivers

I love driving. I love it a lot, despite the slightly more frequent fuel ups – it’s about $30 to fill up my car – and the annoying price of insurance in Vermont with my type of car. However, there are elements to driving that I’m not thrilled with, namely, other drivers from Montpelier, VT.

As a population, they need a re-education when it comes to driving their eco-boxes (As Jeremy Clarkson from Top Gear and the UK Times calls the Prius and other hybrids). The amount of problems that I’ve come across lately is just annoying, and while I don’t know if it’s just Montpelier drivers, I do know that it’s incredibly annoying.

• While entering traffic, please look both ways before just driving into a lane. While there might be a small gap, you’re most likely crap at figuring out the timing that’s required to enter that gap. Most likely, it’s not big enough.
• Turn Signals are used to indicate when you’re changing direction, entering a new lane or a new street. Slowing down to five miles per hour a hundred feet from where you’re going to turn just pisses off the driver behind you.
• There is a posted speed limit in Montpelier. Within the town, it’s 25 MPH. Stick to that, because the people behind you have places to be.
• Plan ahead and know where you’re going. Don’t slow down and turn on your turn signal every intersection because your girlfriend thinks this street might be the right one. Don’t even think about waving your hand around in a WTF gesture when I honk at you.
• When at a stop light, please keep an eye on the signal to see when it turns green. When it turns green, go, especially when there is a line behind you.
• If said signal is a red, you’re intending on turning right and there is no cars coming at all, please take a right on red. It’ll keep traffic moving.

I much prefer driving on B roads than I do in the city, although larger cities are fun to drive in. While in a city, what I’ve found is that there’s a couple of priorities that drivers should take – safety of their own person and vehicle, safety of the others around them, and to ensure that traffic flows smoothly as a unit. You’re not the only person on the road, you’re surrounded by other people, and any actions that you take will inevitably cause reactions down the road, such as stopping suddenly, not starting off, or being efficient with your driving habits.

Astronauts > Ninjas

From here on out, I’m decreeing that Zombies, Ninjas and Pirates are no longer cool, and that Astronauts, Mongolians, Vikings and Robots are taking their place as the ‘cool’ things to geek out about.

Let me explain.

Over the past couple of years, these three character types have become more popular than usual. Pirates, Zombies and Ninjas have long been popular with the geek crowd. Recent films and games have only thrown the fuel on the fire. At camp, there were endless debates as to whether Pirates or Ninjas were better, or who would win in a fight, and I remember at least a couple of camp-wide games that revolved around these types of characters.

A couple weeks ago, I watched one of Yatzhee’s Zero Punctuation reviews for a game called Left 4 Dead, which is essentially a point and shoot at the undead, and where he says the following: “It’s my observation that Zombies are second only to Pirates, Ninjas and Monkeys in the list of things nerds like and need to shut the fuck up about.” After listening to that, it got me thinking – He’s certainly right, but but necessarily for the reasons that he presents in the game (basically, he rants about how Zombies have been overused for just about everything.)

I’ve never really gotten the whole pirates vs. ninjas vs. zombies thing. Sure, they make some interesting stories, but not to the level at which they’re really adored at. I think that it’s easy to atribute much of the hype to films because geeks and nerds like the various films that they’ve been portrayed in, and like to talk about it. The endless discussions are informed by the imaginations of screenwriters, and not necessarily fact, and as a result, 90% of the discussions are pure crap in the first place, a sort of rosy-nostalgic look at what we think these things should be.

The root complaint that I have at this point is that for such an inventive, interesting and imaginative genre, there’s very little actual innovation and imagination going on amongst the fan community. We obsess over pirates, ninjas and zombies because we’ve seen them before in films, and know all there is to know about them, reading over books like the Zombie survival handbook and Under the Black Flag if you’re really into the subject.

I’ve seen the fan community in action – we’re an incredbily handy bunch, and especially when it comes to things like costuming, there’s very little that people can’t do, and do it well. But, I try and think back to the various conventions that I’ve gone to, and wonder, when was the last time that I’ve seen something truely original. I’ve seen amazing costumes, especially from the 501st Legion that I’m a part of – and I’m not trying to disparage their work in the slightest – but everything revolves around existing media – Star Wars, Star Trek, Indiana Jones, Batman, Spiderman, you name it, you go to a big convention, you’ll likely see them. Even for halloween, unless you’re five, you’re unlikely to see any originality when it comes to costumes.

Forrest Ackerman, who recently passed away in December of 2008, was the first Science Fiction fan, appearing at the 1st World Con science fiction convention in a costume that he made himself, a sort of astronaut, essentially starting the trend of fan costuming. While I’m sure that there have been more cases of originality, I really haven’t seen anything like it. I’ve thought to myself that it would be really fun to try and construct something new and original for a con, before I remember that I’m really not that into costuming or conventions, but should I ever have the time and inclination, it’ll be something to attempt, for sure.

But this is something that falls beyond costuming – it’s largely affecting the entire genre. There are two specific examples that I can think of where this is happening – Pride and Prejudice and Zombies: The Classic Regency Romance – Now with Ultraviolent Zombie Mayhem! and the downsizing of the science fiction sections in Borders Books.

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies is a book that’s unoriginal to its core – it takes most of the text of Jane Austin’s Pride and Prejudice and inserts Zombies into it. I’m not necessarily against this by any stretch of the imagination, but I’m more worried about what it stands for in the greater sceme of things – a general trend of unoriginal thinking when it comes to the genre, especially in popular circles. The big comic book giants in particular are guitly of this sort of thing, running their characters for years on end, without rest or retirement, without replenishing the ranks with new characters that might be more interesting or more relevant. This sort of thinking penetrates all levels of fandom, from the top down. Fans don’t necessarily demand anything particularly original, and the production end of things doesn’t seem to mind turning over the same franchises to them. And I don’t blame them – much of this is a business, and this sells – keep it up, because there are good stories there. But the fan community should demand better.

Borders, last year announced that they were reducing the numbers of SF/F books that they’d have in their stores, a move that would likely hurt smaller and up and coming authors, as it put them in a catch 22 type postition – they weren’t selling enough books to warrent shelf-space, but at the same time, they’re not selling well because they don’t have the shelfspace, at least in theory. The trent here seems to favor more of the media-tie ins that sell far better. While that works for authors who are writing media-tieins, what about the authors who want to tell their own stories?

I don’t think that it’s any coincidence that books that are part of a larger franchise, such as Star Wars or Star Trek do excepetionally well, and they should – there are some excellent reads out there, and I know a bunch of authors who view their works as far more than a simple paycheck (Karen Traviss, Michael A Stackpole, to name two), and it shows. (Granted, there are a number of other hacks out there who really seem to churn out rubbish on a regular basis to get paid – Keith RA Dicandido comes to mind, as well as Max Allen Collins and a bunch of others). But, they sell, because they contain familiar concepts, characters and ongoing storylines.

I have no issues with tie-in media, so long as it’s well written. But for me, tie-in media is a form of advertising. That’s fine, especially because it’s generally entertaining, and features stories that are fun, but I’ll always value a story that’s original (and there will be those that will argue about just what originality is – in this instance, not tied in with someone else’s works) over everything else, just because it’s something new, a different way at looking at a story or story type. And there are good arguments here – because technically, there are only a handful of different story types – I mean, how many stories about space ships can you really expect? In a recent article that I wrote for io9, I was almost shocked to find that the main villian in most of the military science fiction stories were insectoids – Starship Troopers, Armor, Ender’s Game and Alien – all used similar elements to tell their stories. But, their stories are all very different, and I always find that I get more out of them, and most other standalone SF/F novels than I do for 90% of the tie-in books that I read. You just can’t compare Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell to Spider-Man: Down These Mean Streets, no matter the protestations of tie-in authors, you just can’t.

Sadly, this originality is something that seems to be lacking within the geek community, and we’ve become fans of the pre-existing. My complaint here is that Science Fiction and Fantasy has been an incredibly innovative and creative genre , and those qualities have become very far and few between when it comes to a good book or film. The imagination is still there, but the originality is not, and this is why we have the endless Zombies vs. Pirates vs. Ninja debates, I think – we just can’t seem to think of anything else to geek out over. And while it’s not completely original, how about Astronauts, Robots, Mongolians and Vikings? They’re totally better than Zombie Ninja Pirates any day of the week.

Rant: Joe the Plumber

I have just one question: Why on earth are people still paying attention to this guy? Samuel Wurzelbacher, who gained some fame during the election during the latter weeks of the campaigning, has been made a ‘War Correspondent’ for the conservative site Pajamas Media. Fine, okay, he’s going to try and do something. But when he starts spouting off crap like this, I have to really wonder about what’s really newsworthy, and the intelligence of some of my fellow countrymen.

From one article:

“To be honest with you, I don’t think journalists should be anywhere allowed war [sic]. . . . I liked back in World War I and World War II, when you’d go to the theater and you’d see your troops on the screen and everyone would be real excited and happy for them,” he said in an interview with the Associated Press.
“Now everyone’s got an opinion and wants to down soldiers—our American soldiers, our Israeli soldiers. I think media should be abolished from reporting,” he said.

What complete and utter bullshit. Not only is it incredibly shortsighted, it just practically just shouts obedience and follow orders quietly.
War reporting is an incredibly important thing to have happen in a war zone during hostilities. Without reporting, we wouldn’t have known anything about what was going on, especially when a number of problems came up. Without reporting, atrocities would have never been reported and would have likely continued.

I can appreciate the notion of wanting to support the soldiers that we’ve deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. But to be completely honest, the reporting for soldiers has been largely positive, with much of the criticism going against the administration and people who have mismanaged the war. Soldiers have come under fire from the press when they’ve done something that is really wrong, such as torturing prisoners or other unconscionable actions. People who do that not only bring down the honor of our soldiers, but of our entire nation. If they commit a crime, they shouldn’t be supported or allowed to continue.

Looking at some of the other things that he’s said, he’s alluded to World War II. There were atrocities there too. Our soldiers have been known to execute POWs, and there has been allegations and reports of rape and torture while the allied forces moved inwards. This wasn’t reported, or it was suppressed, but it certainly has given a number of people the very wrong impression of warfare – It’s never clean, it’s almost never right and it brings out the absolute worst from everyone involved. World War II unjustly has a reputation for the Just War, or the Good War. It wasn’t. It was just a necessary war that was still just a war.

Another small point: Israel’s soldiers aren’t our soldiers. They’re not American citizens, not on our payroll, etc. A vast majority of the people that I’ve come across don’t want to down soldiers – they have the upmost respect for them and what they do, but they want to make sure that we can be proud of our soldiers. The media is the only thing that really is a good safeguard to making sure that war is fought by the few, necessary rules that we’ve set up. But on the whole, I’m more astonished by the attitude here, that people should essentially put the war into the hands of someone else. To some extent, that’s true, because I’m no more qualified to run a war than this guy is. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t question why we’re doing this, because warfare and the political policies that go into it are things that need to be questioned, constantly.

Rant: Fanboy Expectations

There’s a couple of things that I’ve never really gotten about science fiction fans when it comes to the genre, particularly when it comes to remakes or sequels. I come across these arguments almost everywhere, and it’s just plain irritating.

“This has forever ruined the series for me”

Okay, this comes up a lot with Star Wars and whenever the prequel trilogy / TV series has been mentioned or when you talk about the Special Editions. Granted, The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith are nowhere near as good as the original movies, nor is the Clone Wars series. But when you look at the films, there are a lot of differences when it comes to the intended audiences. Episodes One, Two and Three really weren’t aimed at the fans of the original series – they were to be included, but honestly? The entire prequel trilogy series was a good way for LFL to reboot the entire Star Wars franchise.

When it comes down to it, Star Wars has always been a huge franchise, not a work of art. While there is certainly a lot to be said for how it has changed cinema, I find a lot of the arguments about the destruction of the property because of some of the recent changes to be extremely superficial, misguided and completely irrelevant. There’s some good evidence that this had potential to be a good money-maker. The novelization for the book was published several months earlier, and a number of toys were created right off the bat, which have remained popular to this day. There are a lot of properties out there, franchises, that have become incredibly popular, culturally relevant and just as shallow when it comes to marketing and money. Most children’s television shows and cartoons have had a very high value tacked to them when it comes to licensing the property because it sells incredibly well. Transformers, G.I. Joe, Voltron and He-Man all come to mind.

Franchises are an incredibly good idea if you have a marketable idea. Spreading a film’s image over books, comic books, action figures, playsets, video games, and spinoff features brings in a lot of money, because fans, especially geeks/fanboys, are able and willing to spend a lot of money. Even better, when a film, such as Star Wars, Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, gains a cult/icon status in culture, when it has the potential to continue to sell to multiple generations. Star Wars succeeds at this because it appeals to a very broad range of people, and it is not necessarily tied to the generations growing up around the 1970s. It contains ideas and situations that apply and still instill a sense of wonder in people today.

Given the cult status of many of these icons, it becomes incredibly difficult to confront, meet and exceed the expectations, especially with people who have grown up with the series. In my mind, it’s a nearly impossible task, one that is archived very, very rarely. Off the top of my head, I can only really think of a handful of films, such as The Dark Knight, that has really blown expectations away from an already lauded film. The real task for the crew there will be to find a way to overcome the high points of that film with a sequel. Terminator 2 and Spiderman 2 also come to mind. I’m sure that there are some others, but I just can’t think of any others at the moment. No, wait, Lord of the Rings was one of those series that continually build upon the successes of the prior films. But for those couple, there are numerous other sequels that just didn’t work. The Chronicles of Riddick, following Pitch Black, was an admirable attempt, but it didn’t quite make the grade in a lot of eyes. Spiderman 3 certainly failed storywise, as did Terminator 3. There’s a couple batman sequels that are truly abysmal, because they attempted to really please the demand after the first films, but failed. In addition to this, there are a number of remakes and up-and-coming projects in the near future that will have a lot of off the cuff fanboy complaints before the films hit screens. Forbidden Planet, The Day the Earth Stood Still come to mind, while War of the Worlds, Solaris and a couple others have already been made, to varying results.

It comes as no surprise, to me at least, that turning a series of films into a franchise has become a very popular thing now-a-days. There’s the new Star Wars, Stargate and Galactica TV series, Star Trek, Indiana Jones, Batman, Terminator, James Bond, and the Hobbit films, as well as a couple others – all with massive fanbases across a number of different formats. No matter what the critical reception is, they stand to make billions of dollars in profits from these fans, and will likely introduce a whole new generation and group of fans into their ranks.

Coming back to my original complaint about these fanbases and how these films have a far more difficult time meeting expectations. It’s an incredibly frustrating thing to see at times, but from everything that I can see, fans are a greedy bunch of people – they want their originals back in prime, untouched condition because they thing that the film is something that’s unique, special and inflexible. That, however, completely clashes with the fact that we’re considering an industry that exists as a business – to make money. For some stories, it doesn’t make sense NOT to make a franchise out of it because of how popular they’ve gotten. Honestly, I’m surprised that we haven’t seen concrete plans for a Cloverfield 2 yet.

I’ve been seeing this argument a lot with the upcoming Watchman film, and with the news earlier today that another 15 or so minutes are being cut from the film, we can expect to see another rash of complaints at how the film will be completely ruined. Honestly, I’ve never understood how watching a new version of something can completely ruin the experiences that you would have gotten from the first. Time still goes in a straight line, right?