SF Signal: May 2005 Archives

Monday May 30, 2005

A Feast For Crows is Done! Really this Time!

George R.R. Martin has completed the much-anticipated and oft-delayed next installment in his Song of Ice & Fire sequence, called A Feast for Crows. His website goes into the gory details of how the book has grown beyond original expectations.

In a nutshell, the the whole story originally intended for A Feast For Crows has been split into two parts. Rather than the normal booksplitting practice of breaking the story in the middle, Martin insisted that the the two parts each tell a complete, simultaneously-occurring tale. So the suddenly-complete book titled A Feast For Crows will focus on "Westeros, King's Landing, the riverlands, Dorne, and the Iron Islands." Meanwhile, the stuff ripped out of the original manuscript will now be part of the soon-to-be-finished A Dance With Dragons and will focus on "events in the east and north".

This most likeley means the the series may now stretch out to seven books instead of the intended six.

[Link via Locus Online]

Another Firefly Fan

Longtime SF Signal groupie James of Big Dumb Object has finally gotten around to watching Firefly. And he likes it! Even if it took him a seven-part review to realize it. Welcome aboard, James!

The Important Films

Matthew M. Foster, freelance film critic and film historian, offers up a list of The Important Films. Even better us sf fans, he gives a closer look at important science fiction films. One will note that Foster does not fear the inclusion of Star Wars on the list. That's good. Because we all know where fear leads...

A SF Fan and His Parents

Daniel M. Kimmel, a Boston-based film critic, has an article over at Emerald City about how he bacame a science fiction fan even without direct encouragement from his parents.

REVIEW: Counterfeit Kings by Adam Connell

REVIEW SUMMARY: Refreshingly gritty story in which I could not get fully immersed.

MY RATING:

BRIEF SYNOPSIS: After a failed assassination attempt, the King goes into hiding and is sought after by his ex-bodyguard and a host of bad guys.

MY REVIEW:
PROS: Wonderfully gritty feel; detailed and memorable characterizations.
CONS: Imbalanced pacing and writing style; suspension of disbelief wavered.
BOTTOM LINE: Meh. Hard to get immersed in the story.

I truly believe that you can't judge a book by its cover but that's not to say that a cover can't be eye-catching. The first thing that brought my attention to Adam Connell's Counterfeit Kings was indeed its striking cover, complete with its spooky-looking, medical portrait of a de-skinned human head. [Shiver] It's a great mood-setter for this story.

Horrocks, a salvager and the King's former bodyguard, is called upon by the Queen to find the missing King who's gone into hiding after a failed assassination attempt that took the life of one of his sons. With the King gone, the threat of civil war marches ever-closer. However, if Horrocks can find the King before the 20 day deadline, peace will once again be had.

But things aren't going to be easy for Horrocks. First, he must look after his pregnant wife who insists on coming along. He must also race against Guilfoyle, a dangerously imbalanced salvager who, under more normal circumstances, hijacks dead bodies and peddles them back to their families. Guilfoyle was hired by the Bastards, the King's illegitimate children who have banded together to claim legitimacy and, more importantly, inherit the kingdom once the deadline expires. Also on hand is Rouen, a roguish mine owner with a serious dental-pain fetish who, greedy son-of-a-gun that he is, just wants the kingdom for himself. And, lest we forget, there is some question as to the location of the Ringers, the so-called "counterfeit kings" who have been surgically altered to look like the King for purposes of his safety. They disappeared after the assassination attempt. Nice job, guys!

The world of Counterfeit Kings is a dark, dark place indeed. In fact, the most notable and appealing thing about the book was its wonderfully gritty feel - ships were run down, some had insect or water or heating problems... It's like the pristine space opera of yesteryear has been covered up in used, sludgy oil. The filth was, well, refreshing.

The characters have a lot of background information that also lends to the grittiness. The King's rise to power is based on his proprietary knowledge of how to produce energy caskets from the volcanic moon of Io. His lecherous ways have littered the system with illegitimate children who desperately seek validity (and a little something to ease the pain like, say, the throne!) That's hardly a regal résumé for a king!

Horrocks and his wife, Sari, were looking to get away from the dangers of being the King's bodyguard, so they bought an energy mine from him. Unfortunately the King's asking price was something very near an arm and a leg. Sari herself has a sordid background fraught with parental abuse and prostitution, a profession in which she gained much business thanks to the now-embarrassing, intricate tattoos that cover her body.

Guilfoyle is the epitome of desperation, a theme that is shared by just about all the characters in this book. Making ends meet by extorting money from grieving families, he jumps at the chance to make some "honest" cash by finding the King and selling his Ringers to the Bastards. His kid sister, Kitsis, is another loser, sponging off her brother and complaining the whole way, mostly about their ship's unsanitary conditions.

But wait! There's more! Queen Porphyria has a somewhat sordid past, mostly concerning her behavior with the Ringers and her doctor. The Ringers are experiencing serious identity issues in the wake of the assassination attempt. Rouen is just dastardly given half the chance, a pair of rusty pliers and a perfectly healthy set of teeth. [More shivers]

All of these characterizations are fleshed out in great detail and, like I said, lend much to the overall abrasive feel of the book. They aren't really likable characters but that's OK. The benefit here is in what they lend to the story's mood.

My feeling on the writing, with respect to style and pacing, though, was one of ambivalence. While the starkness of the verbiage lent to the grittiness of the story (good) it sometimes made for a slow read (not so good). And while the story moved along quickly (good), having Horrocks' ship hobbled via loss of its Spot Drive on page 8 made it seem like they were getting nowhere in their search for the King for the remaining 372 pages (not so good). It took about a third of the book before I really got into it by any appreciable amount.

When I did get into it, some things seriously tested my suspension of disbelief. For example, there were several scenes where Horrocks and others would cut through the hull of a ship with little or no repercussions. Spaceflight has a much stricter safety margin that that allows, especially in the world of rundown ships - see Allen Steele's Orbital Decay for a more believable approach to the precariousness of space travel. Also, it seemed that the services of Horrocks and Guilfoyle were mostly unnecessary since the people that hired them (the Queen and the Bastards, respectively) kept popping in to say hi every couple of chapters. If you're able to go where they do, why bother hiring them to do the job?

Another thing I noticed - the short, gratuitous and graphic sex scenes were a bit overdone. I'm not entirely sure what they added to the story at all. (Not that anyone really needs a reason to promote space porn. )

In the end, I couldn't get fully immersed in this story. Rather than putting myself in the action, wanting and waiting to see what came next, I was an outsider just watching the story move from point to point.

POLL RESULTS: 2005 Summer Movies

Here are the results of the latest SF Signal poll.

QUESTION
Which of the following upcoming summer movies are you most eagerly anticipating?

RESULTS

(39 total votes)

Friday May 27, 2005

The Unfortunate Fate of eBooks

Check out this PDF Zone article called Book Publishing Is Foundering for Good Reason which talks about the doom of eBooks. With 2 pros and 8 cons, the bottom line opinion is:

There's potential there, but it's waiting for the right combination of hardware, software and content to unlock it. Oh, yes, and human behavior and preferences need to change, too.

I've talked about eBooks before, first as an opponent then as a semi-convert. I've grown more used to reading on my PDA, but I still prefer a book. I rely on PDA reading only when it's convenient. I'll load up a couple of short stories (converted to MS Reader format courtesy of the handy MS Word add-in) so I have something to read when I find myself with some spare time while I'm away from my bookshelf.

More Info on Serenity Comic

Here's some behind-the-scenes info on tha making of the Serenity comic available in July. The link also has a sneak preview.

The Future of TV

Conan O'Brien has written a humorous preview into the future of television. An excerpt:

TiVo, the digital recorder with a brain, will continue to evolve with alarming speed. Super-TiVos will arrange marriages between like-minded viewers and will persuade mismatched couples to throw in the towel and start seeing other people. Tough-talking TiVos will even confront viewers, saying, "You've watched 40 straight hours of 'Sponge- Bob'-get off the weed!" One of TiVo's best loved features-its ability to provide viewers with commercial-free television-will inevitably force TV advertising to go extinct. As a result, celebrities will be forced to find new and creative ways to compromise their integrity. (At this moment, the writer pauses to slake his thirst with a delicious Diet Peach Snapple... now with less aspartame!) The sudden loss of ads on television will push many companies to stage their pitches live on Broadway, revitalizing the theater in America and garnering Patti LuPone a Tony award for her work with Geico.

Meanwhile, computers will continue to be used more and more to watch digital streaming video, eventually turning them into televisions. With no computers available to solve complex math problems, people will have no choice but to return to the abacus. Within a few months, this ancient device will be abandoned when it's realized that there is no good way to make "abacus porn."

Robert A. Heinlein Centennial

July 7, 2007 will be 100 years since the birth of Robert A. Heinlein. Let's Party!

Heinlein Continental, Inc., a non-profit organization, is organizing the Robert A. Heinlein Centennial. For more information, see there press release (PDF).

[Link via Truefen.net, which also list some more details from the site.]

Thursday May 26, 2005

Bit Torrent Users Beware

A Wired article details some legal action taken against Bit Torrent site administrators and users.

Acting on detailed information provided by the motion picture industry, federal agents descended on administrators and users of a popular pirate-friendly file-sharing site Wednesday in what the government is calling the first criminal law enforcement action against BitTorrent users.

The Laws of Science Fiction Writing

BoingBoing posted a link to stencils of famous science fiction authors. Ho-hum.

More interesting to me was the website's pointer to The Laws of Science Fiction Writing. To summarize:

No Nazis.

Aliens should be ALIEN.

Good Science Fiction is Good Science.

Given Something an Alien Name Doesn't Make it Alien.

Never kill off your main character.

It takes two to tangle.

A story should contain descriptions involving all 5 senses.

No Unicorns!

No Star Trek or Star Wars References

No Dreams

No Supermen

Rule #1 means no stories about time-travelling Nazi Zombies. Damn.

The Science Fiction Renaissance

A new FelixOnline article, The Science Fiction Renaissance, referring to the plethora of science fiction movies asks, "Why are we seeing this new wave of science fiction?"

Some excerpts:

Sci-fi movies are all about suspending the audience's disbelief. A science fiction film with obviously fake special effects quickly finds itself relegated to the 'B-movie' category. Recent advances in Computer Generated Imagery (CGI) have made it cheaper to make convincing alternate universes.

But a criticism that has often been levelled at science fiction is that usually the characters are very poorly developed and unrealistic. This may be true - from Blade Runner to Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith, dialogue and characterisation have always been weak points with sci-fi movies.

However, what science fiction lacks in characterisation, it makes up for in ideas. We live in a world when advances in technology are beginning to outpace our ability to keep up with them. We live in a technological culture.Although recent films such as I, Robot and Minority Report are entertaining, they also provide social commentary about the nature of our technological culture that other genres of film are unable to make. Another recent example is Gattaca, in which social issues about genetic engineering are addressed.

But some sci-fi purists remain sceptical: “Big budget ‘sci-fi’ films have always been popular and tend to come in waves,” says Michael Wright of Imperial’s Science Fiction society. “I’m not sure science fiction as a genre is getting more popular. Many of the people who will see Revenge of the Sith in the cinema wouldn’t touch a sci-fi book, and many of the best sci-fi TV series have been cancelled.”

One for Bruce Campbell Fans

As reported in the Houston Chronicle, Bruce Campbell is promoting a book, Make Love the Bruce Campbell Way. His promotional tour stops in Houston on July 6.

In addition to his first novel, Campbell will be promoting the first feature film he has directed, Man With the Screaming Brain. Part 1 of Dark Horse Comics' four-part comic book adaptation of the film went on sale earlier this month.

Tuesday May 24, 2005

On Reviewing Science Fiction

Since I've been reviewing books for some time, I think it's long overdue that I let people know (1) exactly what criteria are used to get a book's rating, and (2) what are my likes and dislikes that will affect my enjoyment of a book. I think something like that is necessary to put a reviewer's opinion in perspective for the reader. It helps them figure out how much weight they should attach to that reviewer based on their own likes and dislikes and it gives an explanation as to why a book might succeed or fail.

I could go on forever talking about reviewing so I thought that I'd try to reel myself in (and make this an easier read) if I used a FAQ-like format.

Who are you?
I'm just a science fiction fan who knows what he likes and is not afraid to say what he doesn't like. I don't sugar-coat reviews. What's the point? This is not a paying gig and I answer to no one. (The wife might disagree with that part, but there, I said it anyway. I should be safe, though. In an odd twist of opposites-attract, she doesn't read the blog.)

What qualifications do you have to review science fiction?
You mean besides being able to read and write? None, thank you. See above question.

Why do you review science fiction?
Mainly, it serves as a reminder of what I've read and my general impressions of the material. This comes in particularly handy with short stories where I am most likely to wonder what the premise of a short story was, or conversely, wonder "What short story has such-and-such a premise?" It also helps me remember what I did not like about a book.

Why bother posting your science fiction reviews? Why not keep them to yourself?
[This answer is blatantly stolen from Ariel at The Alien Online, whose introspections pushed me to get off my duff and do my own.] A review informs other readers with similar tastes about books they may or may not like. While this is seemingly altruistic, I would be lying to myself if I did not admit that there is some small chunk of vanity associated with "publishing" my very own words and having others read what I write. To quote Ariel: "...any reviewer who tells you different is trying to fool themselves."

Are there any other reasons you review science fiction?
Sure. There are unintentional side-effects of reviewing. A review of a book is a promotion of sorts; it gets the word out and makes science fiction more visible which I hope will drive up sales and keep writers in business. One might argue that a bad review will have the opposite effect. But I'd like to think that a bad review, especially one that doesn't ring true with other readers, will at least spur some conversation.

What kinds of reviews are there?
As I see it, there are two kinds of reviews.

The first kind of review is usually a deeply philosophical and intellectual pondering on the symbolism of this plot element or a literary examination of the merits of that character's motive, blah, blah, blah. Yeah, that's not what I do. I'm neither a literary scholar, nor a journalist, nor an aspiring writer, nor a paid reviewer. No such in-depth review would suit my reasons for reviewing in the first place.

The second kind of review is the often-formulaic format of synopsis/impression. This is what I do. I summarize the plot (jogs the old memory) and my impressions (more jogging!) and, hopefully convey to other readers a sense of whether they will like a book. (More on review format later.) That's not to say that no level of thought is exerted in writing a review. On the contrary, writing down my impression forces me to think about the specifics of a book's appeal or lack thereof.

What do your star-ratings mean?
     Couldn't be better! Worth reading again. Highly recommended
     Excellent book; some minor flaws/annoyances
     A Good book; an enjoyable way to pass the time.
     A mediocre book; not missing anything by passing it up.
     Horrible book; super-boring and/or made little sense.
     I could not finish this book.

Are these the only ratings you use?
No. Sometimes a book will feel like it falls in-between these absolutes, so I use half-star increments of the above for more granularity.

How can you give a book zero stars?
I use a zero-star rating to indicate books that I could not finish.

You actually review books you didn't finish?
Yep. There's a reason I didn't finish it and that's useful information.

What, exactly, are you reviewing?
In a nutshell, I am reviewing the reading experience. I am not reviewing the book, per se, for reasons I will make clear later. By reviewing the reading experience I am reviewing the book, my impression, the immersion factor, and most importantly, the overall entertainment value of the experience.

Why? Let me use some examples. Light, by M. John Harrison, is considered to be a literary masterpiece. Ok, I'll buy that. However, I read it through a series of forced late-night (later than normal) reading sessions where I had to Clockwork Orange my eyes open. If the material was good, it was lost on me. It is useful for me to note that rather than live with the lingering memory that it was just not a great reading experience. On the other hand, the Perry Rhodan series of books (or the Star Wars movies for that matter) are generally considered to be pulp trash. That may be true. But that does not make them any less fun to read (or watch). Should I slam the book because it is not a prime example of good writing? I say No! If it offers a good entertainment then it has served its purpose.

Wait a minute - are you saying that your book reviews don't actually judge the book on its own merits?
I'm saying that it's difficult, if not impossible, for someone to not be affected by external factors. I'll use another example to illustrate this. The first time I read H.G. Wells' The Time Machine (in my late 20's) I hated it. It just seemed boring to me at the time. Also, the Victorian writing put me off some. About two years later, after reading and liking some Sherlock Holmes stories, also Victorian, I decided to give The Time Machine another go. And I loved it! The story itself hadn't changed, I had. Or at least something unrelated to the book itself changed. If I would have reviewed it the first time, I might have given it 1 star. The later read was a much better reading experience and might have been rated 5 stars. Thus it becomes clear to me that the impression left by reading book is based on more than just the words themselves.

I don't agree with your review. Your review is wrong. What do you think about that, Mr. Smarty Pants?
Hooray for you! You have an opinion. So do I. That's what my review is - an encapsulation of my opinion about the book and the reading experience it provided. Since an opinion is never right or wrong, saying so is rubbish. It's OK to have a difference of opinion. Can't we all just get along?

What qualities of a book do you look at when forming your opinions?
In an opposite-of-a-nutshell, these are the things (reiterated from an earlier post) that I look for in my science fiction (listed in relative order of importance):

Entertainment Value - First and foremost, a fiction story is meant to entertain. Anything else it tries to do (teach, postulate, propagandize, inform, convince or meditate) is just gravy that hopefully adds to the enjoyment and value of the book, but is not essential to fiction. Good, and definitely great, fiction, science or otherwise, will make me not want to put the book down because I was entertained. I felt that with The Man Who Fell to Earth, The Reality Dysfunction, Mists of Avalon (chick fiction though it may be) and The Relic. All good/great reads, imho.

Sense of Wonder - Science fiction must evoke a sense of wonder. That's what draws me to the genre, not overly complex plotlines and fancy literary style. How cool would it be to travel in space? See other planets first hand? Communicate with aliens? Travel through time? All of these are fun to think about in an escapist sort of way. Good science fiction provides the forum in which I can do these things.

Good Writing - Writing is a skill that very few have absolute command over and writing style is somewhat a matter of taste. I found the writing in Kim Stanley Robinson's Red Mars to be very dry. This severely detracted from the enjoyment of the story; it became a chore. On the other hand, writers like Theodore Sturgeon and Rex Stout (the mystery writer behind the Nero Wolfe stories) are phenomenal. I've yet to read a bad word by either of them. Good writing will propel a story instead of hinder it. While Bradbury's Something Wicked This Way Comes is clearly lyrical in its prose, I found it to hamper my reading progress - a bigger annoyance than the lyricism made up for in enjoyment. Other characteristics of good writing include plot development, characterizations, style, pacing, continuity, well-written dialogue, originality, mood and emotion, sense of logic, coherency, predictability, and immersion quotient. And good writing applies to movies as well as books. Bad writing can kill a movie (Excalibur…not sci fi, but nevertheless, a good example). Incidentally, other authors/books I've enjoyed include Asimov (easy to read), Clarke & Baxter (thought provoking), David Gerrold & James P. Hogan (logical), Stephenson (style), Heinlein (sense of wonder), Peter F. Hamilton (plot), John Wyndham's Day of the Triffids and Brian Aldiss' Non-Stop (mood) and Ken Grimwood's Replay (plot and pacing)

Suspension Of Disbelief - The plot and events need to be believable. That's a tricky thing to adhere to with science fiction. For example, while FTL travel is not possible, it is conceivable. Ditto with time travel, wormholes, and other science fiction elements. Potential belief-killer: older science fiction shows its age when the "predicted" science is proven false. (Men on the moon? Technology based on transistor tubes? Ink pen-based computers? Bah!) That could be a belief killer for some. Personally, I always find it amusing to see what people 50 or 100 years ago thought life might like today.

Visual Effects - For movies, the visual effects play an important part on immersion. Make fun of Star Wars, but the visual effects were spectacular. For literature, an author should provide a healthy dose of futuristic objects and describe places so vividly that I can see it in front of me.

These traits are roughly listed in order of importance. So, I'm willing to call a poorly written book "good" if it's rip-roaring fun (The Perry Rhodan series comes to mind again, although the "bad writing" could just be the result of poor translation). Who cares if a story depicts men on the moon if it is hugely enjoyable anyway? So what if a story is poorly worded if it's though-provoking at the same time? What's the big deal if a sci fi movie provides cool explosion audio in the vacuum of space - it's fun! (Imagine how anti-climactic space battle scenes would be without the explosion sound effect. [Update: I take this back. Battlestar Galactica's space battle scenes are quite effective!])

Notice how entertainment is the primary requirement. I'm unlikely to cite something as an example of good science fiction if it evoked a sense of wonder, maintained suspension of disbelief but was just plain boring. I ultimately disliked the movie Blade Runner because it failed to entertain me, even though I very much liked the story and the visuals. Many people had a similar argument with the Star Wars prequels.

What formula do you use to review books?
There's no mathematical formula here, just a gut feel on how well I enjoyed the book, the sense of wonder evoked, etc. Generally speaking, the more of the above characteristics a science fiction story has, the more likely I am to consider it a great book.

What other factors go into your reviews?
Aside from the book itself, there are other, external factors that affect the reading experience. These are things over which the book itself has no control; things like the environment (noise, other distractions, poor lighting) and physical condition (whether or not I'm really tired when I read a book). External factors do contribute to the overall reading experience and I try to mention those factors when appropriate.

Do you write bad reviews?
Heck, yeah. A book review of a bad reading experience is just as useful as any other review. Hopefully I capture exactly what it was about the book that I did not enjoy. Sometimes (as mentioned above) a poor reading experience is not the fault of the book at all but some other external influence. If I clearly state that in the review, then a reader can take my comments with the corresponding grain or truckload of salt.

Do you give spoilers in your reviews?
As a rule, I don't give spoilers in a review. That would just deny you the pleasure or pain that I experienced when I read the book and I'm all about the pleasure and the pain. I should note that rules are meant to be broken and there was one review I did where I did give spoilers because a book was annoyingly mislabeled as science fiction. In that review I gave a clear and obvious warning to the upcoming spoilage.

When do you write your reviews?
I write my reviews immediately upon completion of the book while the story and feeling are fresh in my mind. This could take a while as I tend to reflect on the ideas presented and the execution by the author. Since I'm usually relegated to late-night readings, my reviews often tend to be written in the wee hours of the morning. [Insert late night rambling disclaimer here.]

Now With More Girl Genius

Fans of Phil abd Kaja Foglio (as seen in Dragon Magazine's What's New? comic) can now rejoice as their Girl Genius comic is now online. It looks like they are releasing pages from the existing books (3 currently), one a day on MWF. In addition, new material is also posted in the Advanced Class. Sweet.

I've always like the look and humor of the Foglio's work. This will have to become a 'must read'.

Book Publishing Stats

SF/BoingBoing author Cory Doctorow talks a bit about the state of the publishing industry based on same statistics from the Book Industry Study Group.

The number of books sold dropped by nearly 44 million from 2003 to 2004, even as the annual number of books published approaches 175,000.

''People are reading less, so what you're seeing is the same phenomenon that has hit magazines and newspapers, a massive shift toward home video, DVD, internet and cable,'' said Albert N. Greco, an industry consultant and a professor of business at the graduate school of Fordham University.

The Book Industry Study Group, a nonprofit research organization, reported estimated sales of 2.295 billion books in 2004, compared to an estimated 2.339 billion the previous year. Higher prices enabled net revenues to increase 2.8 percent, to $28.6 billion, but also drove many readers, especially students, to buy used books, Greco said.

Accelerando eBook

Over the past few years, Charles Stross has written a series of nine interconnected novellas that chronicle three generations of one family in a posthumanist future leading right up to the singularity. Each generation gets three stories. The stories ("Lobsters", "Troubadour", "Tourist", "Halo", "Router", "Nightfall", "Curator", "Elector" and "Survivor") have received multiple nominations and are being collected in a book called Accelerando to be released in July 2005.

Can't wait? According to accelerando.org, Accelerando will be available as an eBook under a Creative Commons license in June.

[Link via Locus Online]