Orren Merton's Tumblr

Redshirts by John Scalzi

Redshirts by John Scalzi

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This novel is short, but packed with goodness. Scalzi takes the concept of “redshirts”—expendable characters in science fiction shows—and creates a funny, clever, and “meta” story. It never feels forced, and it’s one of the least “obvious” novels I’ve read; it twisted and turned in directions I never expected, not once but numerous times. The dialog is snappy, and it’s a fast read, both because it’s short and because it’s very difficult to put down. Indeed, even though you’d imagine a novel whose very title plays on character archetypes might rely heavily on tropes, I found the characters well drawn and I cared about them and their fates.

The tag line of the novel mentions the “three codas,” which are basically short stories adding details to the lives of three of the characters we meet late in the novel. I found the first one to be forgettable but I enjoyed the second and third. The codas are not necessary to understand the story, but if you enjoyed the world of Redshirts, you might enjoy them. And I did very much enjoy the world of Redshirts.

View all my reviews

Original Article

Clark and Diana

For anyone following comic news, you know that DC Comics has generated more than a little buzz by creating a romance between Superman and Wonder Woman. Some longtime fans of the Clark Kent/Lois Lane romance (which was nullified as part of the “New 52” reboot) are very upset. Others feel it’s cheesy, because it’s “too obvious” to have the world’s strongest man and strongest woman together. Many others take offense that this diminishes Wonder Woman—since Superman always gets top billing, this defines her as “Superman’s new girlfriend” and reduces her independence.

First of all, I think we should remember that over the decades, this isn’t a first. As the Comic Book Resources article The Many Kisses of Superman and Wonder Woman shows, the pair have been kissing since 1969. In other words, there have been stories about sexual tension/romantic curiosity between the pair since before I was born (and probably, you too). So this is definitely not out of the blue.

Also, at their heart, superhero sagas offer a healthy dose of relationship opera with their regular servings of adventure, fantasy, and action. These characters have been around a long time, which means that there’s a lot of stories to explore. Changing the status quote for these two heroes is a way to generate new stories. Greg Rucka, former Wonder Woman scribe and current author of novels like Alpha and graphic novels like Stumptown, blogged about this himself:

Speaking as a writer, they’ve not only opened a can of worms, but they’ve also opened a vast arena of new stories to tell. Some of those stories may well be worth telling. Some of those stories may well be worth repeating, and even cherishing. And, yes, some of those stories may end up best forgotten.

As a writer myself, I agree. Ultimately, it’s all about the story. If the story is good (as was the Superman/Wonder Woman relationship in Mark Waid’s Kingdom Come) then it was worth exploring. If not…not. So, having read Justice League 12 (to be podcast on Comics Corner…when our schedules allow!), that is the question: how is the story?

I hope this isn’t too spoilerific, but Superman and Wonder Woman basically find themselves a two “super people” not truly connected to the world around them, confronted with how lonely their lives are, which pushes them to try and find some solace with each other. This not the most complex reason for two people to start a relationship, but it’s not the shallowest, either. And not that you asked, but it seems as if their “first date” as shown on the page takes it relatively slow, despite some articles talking about them “getting it on” and the like. It’s a passionate kiss but that’s where we leave it.

Clearly, writer Geoff Johns is leaving a lot of room for this relationship to grow. And indeed, he co-wrote Justice League International Annual #1 and hints in that book that there is massive potential for cosmic disaster in their romance. So clearly, there is a story here that he wishes to tell, this isn’t simply “power couple” fan service for people who wanted to see Jim Lee draw the two heroes get busy with each other.

I buy into the idea that with the New 52, DC Comics wanted to try things that were, well, new. As such, this new twist opens up new story possibilities. I think the opening pages were good; not profoundly meaningful writing, but not awkward either. All the great Lois and Clark stories written in years past still exist. And after this relationship, there may be more great Lois and Clark stories. Will these stories be lurid, insipid, or diminish Wonder Woman? It’s certainly a danger. But for now, I’m going to give Geoff Johns the benefit of the doubt, and let him tell the story he wants to tell. I think it’s off to an interesting start, and I’m willing to go along for the ride before I place judgement.

Original Article

More Dark Knight anyone?

I love me some DCU Animated features, as everyone familiar with my ramblings knows. And their next one is an adaption of one of the most classic Batman stories of all, The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller. Part 1, to be released on September 25th (same day as a lot of other things, including The Avengers, interestingly). And it’s now available for pre-order. Needless to say, I’ve already preordered the blu-ray. Enjoy!

Original Article

Futures Past and Moon Men

I Tweeted and Facebooked as soon as I heard Neil Armstrong had passed away. I didn’t plan on much more blogging than that. Needless to say that having been born post-moon landing in the 70s, NASA were huge in our minds, space was the final frontier to which we were boldly going, and I’ve never known a world in which human beings hadn’t walked on the moon, thanks to him. I had other thoughts, about the world in which we live compared to the future that landing on the moon promised, but mostly I wanted to express how I was inspired in the way that I saw, and still see the world.

Well, writer John Scalzi, only modestly older than I am, articulates this and more in his blog Neil Armstrong and Futures Past. Count me on Team Scalzi on this one. I think he speaks for many of us in Generation X who took inspiration (and in some cases, our love of science and science fiction) from NASA and Neil. If you haven’t read it, please do. And as I said on Twitter and Facebook, Godspeed Neil, to your next adventure.

Original Article

Liberals: when is it okay to ignore rape?

My views on most social issues align with liberal viewpoints, but I’ve been finding the left-wing hypocrisy on this issue distressing. Yesterday (Sunday 8/19) two stories converged in the media that put it front and center in my social network feeds:

• Republican Congressman Todd Akin, who is running for Senate in Missouri, defended his insistence that there should never be any abortions even in the most extreme cases by insisting that women don’t get pregnant from cases of “legitimate” rape. As one would imagine, this swiftly invoked the wrath of thinking liberals everywhere. It is both scientifically wrong, and extremely callous and misogynistic. Even presidential hopeful Mitt Romney couldn’t distance himself from his fellow Republican nominee fast enough.

• Also yesterday, Julian Assange, the Wikileaks founder who has fled to the Ecuadoran embassy in London to take refuge from Swedish prosecutors gave a speech from a balcony.  Sweden has issued an arrest warrant for Assange as part of an investigation into rape charges. Assange insists that it’s politically motivated and the sex in both cases was consensual, so he refuses to face the arrest warrant or stand trial.

However, in Assange’s case, since he’s a left-wing hero, those same left-wingers on my social network feeds who were so indignant over Akin not taking the rights and feelings of women seriously are more than willing to give Assange a pass. They believe that he’s being unfairly targeted, that this is a witch-hunt, and all just a big lie designed bring him to the United States so he can be put to death.

Doesn’t the case deserve to be looked at on it’s own merits? And I don’t mean the actual rape case—that’s for a Swedish judge and jury to decide. I mean the case for extradition. Liberal English lawyer and blogger David Allen Green wrote a long article titled “Legal Myths About the Assange Extradition.” For people who think that this extradition is just about getting Assange to the United States to face death, there’s a lot of enlightening facts.

For example, would it be easier to get him from Sweden to the USA than from the UK to the USA? He explains:

Any extradition from Sweden to the United States would actually be more difficult. This is because it would require the consent of both Sweden and the United Kingdom…One can add that there is no evidence whatsoever that the United Kingdom would not swiftly comply with any extradition request from the United States; quite the reverse…In reality, the best opportunity for the United States to extradite Assange is whilst he is in the United Kingdom.

He also addresses the idea that the USA could extradite Assange in order to have him put to death:

Sweden (like the United Kingdom) is bound by EU and ECHR law not to extradite in circumstances where there is any risk of the death penalty or torture. There would be no extradition in the United States in such circumstances.

And Ecuador? If his entire fight isn’t for himself, but to protect freedom of information, he’s sure picked an odd ally. As Green notes:

Ecuador has a woeful record on freedom of the press. It is 104th in the index of world press freedom, and even the quickest glance at the examples of press abuse in Ecuador accumulated by Reporters Without Borders and Index on Censorship indicate a regime with a starkly dreadful and illiberal record on freedom of expression.

It has even recently been reported that a blogger called Alexander Barankov is to be extradited by Ecuador to Belarus, of all places, where he may face the death penalty.

Whatever the reason for Ecuador granting political asylum to Assange, there is no basis for seeing it as based on any sincere concern for media freedom either in Ecuador or elsewhere.

Really, read the whole article. It talks about the extradition case in both minutia and broad detail, and is quite revealing.

Assange is acting more like a desperate fugitive than a political martyr for the cause of freedom. Let’s assume that he’s right, that there is political motivation for all of his legal accusations. Isn’t the way to prove that he’s innocent to face the music in Sweden—especially since, as the law shows, it’s harder for him to be extradited if he does? If he turns himself in, and the Swedish authorities play their hand, then he could flee to Ecuador or whatever safe harbor he can find without the taint of alleged rape on him. I can tell you that if I personally was accused of multiple rapes, I’d drop everything I was doing to clear my name.

My point is not to suggest I think Assange is guilty of rape. But it is to point out that even if we applaud his creation of WikiLeaks and it’s goals, that his accusers deserve their right to face him in a court of law, just as any rape accusers do. We don’t let conservative public figures get away with saying “she asked for it”—which is exactly what Assange’s is saying (“the sex was consensual”). Maybe it was. But why doesn’t he have to say that in a Swedish courtroom under oath, when we’d insist that people who’s politics we don’t admire as much do?

Human beings are complex. People can do selfless deeds that benefit everyone and also selfish, painful, or cruel deeds. Assange could be both an underground warrior for whistle blowers everywhere and a boorish misogynist, or he could be wrongly accused. He could be solely a political victim, or he could be hiding behind his iconic status to try and deflect from having to pay for his crimes. I don’t know the answers, and I don’t claim to. But I completely reject the argument that he should not have to face his accusers because of his iconic status. Two Swedish women have accused him of horrible crimes, and he must answer those charges, as would any accused rapist—even if innocent.

Original Article

Ryan and Romney

Those who have pulled their eyes away from the Olympics or Mars Curiosity long enough to get some other news have noticed by now that Mitt Romney has picked Paul Ryan as his Vice Presidential candidate. I’ve not been nearly as political on my blog as I’ve been in the past, mostly because there’s so much sturm und drang about this election, I don’t want to add to it needlessly. But I figure that a vice presidential pick is a Big Deal™ so I should probably weigh in with at least a couple of thoughts.

• Not a lot of active Republican politicians are national figures, but Ryan is one of them. He’s not a household name, but among the sorts of people who follow politics, he’s famous for the “Ryan Budget.” The Ryan Budget, of course, which he named The Path To Prosperity, is noteworthy for repealing Health Care Reform, gutting Medicare, Social Security, and other social services in order to pay for maintaining tax breaks for the wealthiest 1% of Americans, which is the GOP litmus test these days, it seems.

• Ultimately, a Vice Presidential candidate needs to be ready to be President in a heartbeat. Is Ryan? He is certainly young, healthy, and intelligent. He has no foreign policy experience, never run in a Presidential campaign, and has an extremely thin resume. To some, this makes him a sort of “intellectual Sarah Palin,” a political pick without much depth. Supporters will point out that Obama’s resume wasn’t a whole lot thicker when he was elected President, and Ryan’s just joining the ticket as VP.

• Not too many people vote for a President based on his running mate—however, if someone hates a running mate, they might not vote for the ticket. Let’s face it—the Vice President only has as much power as the President gives them. People realize that if everything goes as planned, it’s an advisory and ceremonial role, and won’t choose a ticket based on it. However, it’s that if everything goes as planned part that gives some people pause. There are those who do imagine the VP taking over, and while they wouldn’t vote for the ticket based on the running mate, if they don’t like the VP, that gives them a reason to vote against it.

So what are my thoughts? Well, as someone who believes strongly in social services and education, I’ve disliked Ryan’s budget since I first heard of it. When it comes to domestic policy I couldn’t disagree with him more, and when it comes to foreign policy…well, he doesn’t have one, other than to nod politely and accept whatever the Republican orthodoxy is saying. So certainly picking Ryan does nothing to make Mitt Romney a more compelling candidate. But I don’t dislike Ryan as a human being, and I don’t think he’s a bad choice. It doesn’t appeal to me, but I was never the target for this move. Romney’s hope clearly is that this will help ignite his GOP base; the danger is that it will also ignite the Democratic base against him.

Me? My mind was made up during the GOP Presidential primaries, and this changes nothing.

Original Article

Leaving Megopolis

I think this is the third Kickstarter that we here at Comics Corner have backed. And like the others, this one is worth it. Leaving Megopolis is a creator owned, self-financed and self-published original graphic novel from the team of Gail Simone and Jim Calafiore, who previously collaborated on DC Comics’s Secret Six (which I just finished reading, BTW, and enjoyed immensely).

Gail Simone is one of my favorite creators, and the premise of Leaving Megopolis sounds interesting—what happens when the heroes all decide to turn? And Gail is at her best when writing the more weird and crazy stuff, so this sounds like it will give her ample opportunity.

Kickstarter is fantastic for comics, because it allows creators to raise the money to pay for the art, manufacture, and production of a comic when the money from a major company isn’t available. Those of us who want to see new and exciting comics be produced, supporting these Kickstarters is the way to do it. And an extremely reasonable $15 gets you the digital and print graphic novel, which is a bargain as far as I’m concerned.

They’re asking for $34,000 to produce and manufacture Leaving Megopolis. The Kickstarter has been posted for less than one day as of this writing, and they’re already more than one-third of the way there. Go Gail and Jim!

Original Article

…To explore strange new worlds…

While the achievements of our Olympics athletes have garnered most of the news, NASA just celebrated it’s own remarkable achievement. It successfully landed Mars Curiosity on Mars.

This is a truly amazing thing. We even captured a picture of it from our own orbiter:

To quote actor and science promoter Wil Wheaton (who narrated a NASA video on the Mars Rover, as did fellow Star Trek actor William Shatner) from his blog:

So let’s think about this for a moment, okay? Not only did these humans successfully land a Mini Cooper on Mars, they timed everything out so that a satellite they already put into orbit around Mars could take pictures of it.

People were lined up in Times Square, New York City, at 1am to watch this happen, live with less tape delay than NBC’s Olympic coverage. It brings people together, like the Olympics. It brings out the best in humanity, like the Olympics. And as expensive as it was ($2.5 billion), it costs less than a fraction of what we spend to send our troops into Afghanistan. If only, like the Olympics, we could realize how important exploring our universe is for the human spirit, and prioritize it higher than we do violence and war and creating divisions among ourselves.

Right now, we have two beautiful examples of what we are capable of when we come together. My wish is that we learn from it, that the Olympic spirit lasts longer than just the duration of the games, and we take Roddenbery’s challenge to “explore strange new worlds…to boldly go where no one has gone before.” For the price of a few less weeks of Afghan slaughter, think of how much we could explore…

Original Article

Geek culture is a non-exclusive club

I guess the beginning of my “geekdom” was around 1975-1976 or so when my dad sat me down in his cluttered office pointed me toward a tiny television set in the corner of the room, and “here, you’ll like this TV show.” It was Star Trek. I just a young child, but I was hooked for life. Comics, fantasy, video games, Dungeons and Dragons, and all that good stuff was to follow, but it all can be traced to my dad having a sense of what sort of flights of fancy appealed to his young son.

I never thought of any of these pursuits as “boy” pursuits or “girl” pursuits. To me, “boy” stuff was football, and girl stuff was dresses. To me, escapist, fantasy, geek and nerd stuff was somewhere in between. It wasn’t manly, but it wasn’t girlie either. And yet sadly, not only was geek culture excluded from the mainstream of culture, but girls tended to stay away.  Flash forward 20 years, and geek culture has been invited to the party. A wide variety of boys and girls find enjoyment and belonging in elements of geek culture, be it sci-fi, fantasy, anime, manga, comics, gaming, role-playing, cosplay, you name it. Its still only a small sub-strata of pop culture, but it’s no longer got the stigma it used to. Geek culture is big money, anyone has access to geekdom, and they’re welcome to it. The doors are open, and everyone is invited.

So it was with dismay I read the article “Booth babes need not apply” in the “Geek Out” blog on cnn.com. The author’s point is that pretty girls who go to Comic Con to cosplay (in other words, dress up like their favorite characters from film, books, TV, comics, etc) are not sincere, but are “faking” just to get attention.

I could fume about this article for pages and pages. First of all, who declared this guy spokesman for geek culture, and who is he to determine who is “pure” and who isn’t? And maybe he doesn’t know any attractive geeks, but I know a fair number of absolutely gorgeous geek ladies and handsome geek men. But rather than rant, let me direct you to the John Scalzi retort “Who Gets To Be A Geek? Anyone Who Wants To” which says everything I’d say, but better. Specifically, after rather amusingly (and pointedly) laying out his own geek credentials and taking the author to task, he writes:

Many people believe geekdom is defined by a love of a thing, but I think — and my experience of geekdom bears on this thinking — that the true sign of a geek is a delight in sharing a thing. It’s the major difference between a geek and a hipster, you know: When a hipster sees someone else grooving on the thing they love, their reaction is to say “Oh, crap, now the wrong people like the thing I love.” When a geek sees someone else grooving on the thing they love, their reaction is to say “ZOMG YOU LOVE WHAT I LOVE COME WITH ME AND LET US LOVE IT TOGETHER.”

Not only would I agree, but it explains why most geeks are so happy when movies like The Avengers or The Lord of the Rings are both awesome and successful. We want to share the love. We go to Comic Con to share our love. And we cheer on the cosplayers who share their love. Being judgmental about who “belongs” misses the whole point. This is not an exclusive club. We were the ones who were excluded, remember? Now it’s our turn to be the better men and women, boys and girls, and welcome everyone. Sure, our escapist pursuits are just fun and stories, we know that, but these stories and this community makes our world better. And we come together to share our better world with everyone who wants in. And to be obnoxiously judgmental and stupid about it is to fly in the face of everything that geek culture holds dear.

As a proud member of the geek community, I applaud anyone who is willing to fly their geek flag, no matter what segment or segments of geek culture they participate in, how long they’ve participated, or how they choose to participate. There’s no entry exam, no test, no judgement. Make yourself at home, stay as long as you want, and you’re always welcome back. The only requirement is that you share our joy. Nobody is excluded. And if anyone tries, they are the ones who aren’t doing it right—not you.

Original Article

Batman doesn’t use guns

Michelle and I are incredibly excited about seeing The Dark Knight Rises tonight, although like most everyone in the world, we were shocked and deeply saddened by the tragic shooting in Colorado. Much has already been said about this, but I wanted to say a few things.

I’m deeply saddened that this has turned into a political issue. How can it? A maniac, a man with a deep psychological break, the inability to control his worst impulses and rages, committed horrible violence on random people who had the misfortune of being in the theater he chose. But inevitably, it becomes a gun ownership issue.

The “pro gun” community insists that if everyone (or at least someone) in the theater was armed, the maniac could have been shot and killed before he could have murdered more people. Maybe so. But having a gun isn’t the same as being trained to use it, and having the steel nerves and training to return fire when a man in riot gear is shooting at random. And don’t forget about the riot gear—the maniac wouldn’t have been that easy to kill.

The “anti-gun” community points out that the ease with which guns can be purchased in the USA makes this kind of senseless tragedy far more likely. Indeed, you don’t hear of nearly as many shootings in nations in which guns are illegal. As movie critic and social commentator Roger Ebert opines in the New York Times, We’ve Seen This Movie Before. But regardless of the value of gun laws to society as a whole, it’s not clear if that would have stopped this murderer in particular. This perpetrator had gone to extreme lengths, with (what seems to be) extra-legal riot gear, booby traps on his apartment, and so on. Clearly, this was an educated sociopath with the means to get the equipment he needed, regardless of the law.

So can’t we just all unite in condemnation of this tragedy, and put politics-as-usual aside?

There is of course the expected criticism of violence in the media as being a cause. I too feel that there is often excessive gore in television and films which can have a desensitizing effect. But hundreds of millions of people every year see violent movies and watch violent television shows, and yet there aren’t hundreds of millions of random acts of violence due to them each year. In the minds of the viewer, the separation between fantasy and reality is clear. Upbringing, education, family/environment, all contribute to the viewer being able to understand and interpret the story (and in fact, as the panel above shows, Batman himself does not kill or use guns, so the moral lessons of the stories are clear). When an individual cannot tell the difference between fact and fantasy, when one has been raised that random murder is bad and decides to go ahead with it anyway, there is a deep pathological break that as far more to do with the failures of parenting/education/psychiatric treatment/environment than whatever art the murderer is exposed to. Even the total elimination of all action/violence in art wouldn’t stop psychotic people from doing psychotic things.

We’re still going to enjoy seeing The Dark Knight Rises tonight. And we hope you enjoy it too, if and when you see it. And we’re going to continue to work towards a caring, compassionate world which reduces the number of random acts of mass murder. It’s a lofty, maybe impossible goal. But it’s one worth fighting for.

That’s what Batman would do.

Original Article