Books Archive

1

Serialized Novels and eBooks: This Decade’s Power Couple?

By
Adam Shaftoe
– April 17, 2013Posted in: Books, The Daily Shaft

From my very limited perspective on the world of genre publishing there seem to be two schools of thought when it comes to eBooks. There are the publishers who recognize eBooks as an environmentally responsible alternative to print books. Those same publishers also seem to look at the one-time cost of specialized typesetting as being offset by the absence ongoing publication expenses. To that end, these publishers price their eBooks well below the cost of their paperbacks. I like these publishers.

Then there are the other publishers. These fine folk seem inclined to hold on to the ancien regime of publication. This in turn results in near parity in pricing between print and digital copies of books. Case in point: the kindle edition of The Running Man currently costs $10.40. The list price for a paperback of the same book $7.99.

I see pricing patterns from the other publishers as a tad unjust. I don’t like it when corporate entities attempt to deal with me in an unfair fashion. Such actions stir the part of me who wants to download the whole internet for free, and can get away with it too because he’s not morbidly stupid. But let’s not open that debate. Instead let’s entertain the idea that there might be a better way for the other publishers to have their cake and eat it too.

Enter: the serialized novel.

For the last thirteen weeks I had turned Tuesday night into The Human Division night. I would come home from teaching, watch some junk tv with my dinner, and then buy the latest installment of John Scalzi’s novel. With each passing week, Tor Books earned themselves another 99 of my cents. The Human Division is now my most expensive eBook. Under normal circumstances I generally won’t pay more than seven or eight dollars for an eBook. Since I’m not getting a physical product, and I’m reasonably certain the writers aren’t collecting any more royalties off eBook sales than they are print copies, I won’t usually go past what I see as a threshold of publishers laughing their way to the bank or using eBooks as a sponge to clean up messes in print publishing. Yet I will spend 99 cents on a short story, assuming of course that I like the author in question. And what is a serialized novel but a collection of really tightly linked short stories?

Independent authors flogging their wares on Amazon know that the name of the game is making a million sales of the 99 cent eBook. So why shouldn’t larger publishers try out the same model? Why be slavish to the format of the novel, which in and of itself is a product of the business of 20th century publishing, if slightly changing that formula, at what ultimately amounts to a null cost to the publisher, will bring in a market of eBook buyers who were previously turning up their nose at perceived injustices in pricing?

Say nothing for the fact that where conventional novels might get their blog tours and hullabaloo a month or two before launch, the serialized novel has multiple release dates. A smart PR person could craft a social media and marketing campaign that brings something slightly new to the table over the course of three or four months. Rather than flogging the same tag lines and promoting interviews which vary on similar themes, publishers can react to readers on a week to week basis. To me, this sounds like a recipe for greater advertising penetration and thus more sales.

I’m not suggesting this would work for all novels and all writers. Frankly, I wouldn’t buy into a serialized novel without pre-existing experience with an author. Also, serialization requires a writer who is equally adroit in both long and short form. If somebody like Marie Bilodeau were to announce she was doing a serialized novel set in her Destiny’s Blood universe, I would respond with my best Philip J. Fry, “Shut up and take my money” meme.

Then again, I might be more inclined to roll the dice on a new writer if I’m only staking 99 cents against their ability to entertain me for the span of forty pages. So maybe this could be something to consider for neophytes and masters alike.

At any rate, I hereby present serialization as my alternative solution for publishers who insist on keeping parity pricing between print and electronic books. Such a plan might require foresight and a bit of planning on the PR front, but it taps directly into the internet’s culture of instant gratification. So long as the would-be serial is worth the computer code that went into typesetting it, why not take a page out of the past to capitalize on digital publication.


Tags: , , ,
0

CBC’s 2013 Bookie Awards: What the Hell Happened?

By
Adam Shaftoe
– March 29, 2013Posted in: Books, The Daily Shaft

On Wednesday the CBC announced the short list for its third annual Bookie Awards. Upon review, it didn’t take long to notice the dramatic change in format between this year’s nominations and last year’s. It took even less time for me to feel somewhat disappointed by this reboot. And being that I’m the sort of guy who will likely never find himself in a place to be nominated for any sort of writing award, I don’t mind sharing my disaffection.

While I am sure all of the nominated books are quality works, worthy of attention and praise, it’s hard to look at the structure of the nominations themselves and not wonder if somebody at the CBC has lost sight of what these awards are meant to do, or at least what they managed to accomplish last year; therein the Bookies broadcast an impressive range of talent and type in Canadian writing.

Of the utmost importance to this website’s mandate is the removal of the sci-fi/fantasy/spec-fic category. Last I checked, Canada still has a vibrant and supremely intelligent community of genre writers. Why is this fact no longer worth celebrating in the eyes of the Bookie Awards? Surely if there is room on the ballot for categories like “The Brangelina Award for Most Attractive Book Cover,” “The Hot and Bothered Award for Steamiest Read,” and “The Up All Night Award for Most Spine-Tingling Canadian Book,” then we can find a place for “The Most Fantastic Vision of Another World in a Canadian Book.”

Another problematic change is the addition of “Canadian Author of the Year” and “International Author of the Year.” What’s the difference between “Canadian Author of the Year” and “Best Canadian Book?” Furthermore, should we not expect to see a bit of overlap between the two? How is Will Ferguson the only writer to be seen in both categories? In fact, Will Ferguson is the only Author of the Year nominee to have a book nominated within the Bookies. Forgive my ignorance, but what constitutes an Author of the Year in this scenario? I’m not suggesting these authors aren’t fantastic within their fields. Rather, I’m calling upon the Bookies to offer some sense of qualification for their nominations.

And I do hope my readers will indulge any perceived lack of class on my part for what follows, but in what world do we put E.L. James, and her ersatz eroticism, in the same category as Sir Salman Rushdie? I won’t pretend that I have picked up a Rushdie book post-university, but surely the man who wrote The Satanic Verses is hors concours against an author whose claim to fame is stirring a select audience’s loins while broadly pissing off the kink community.

Also absent this year’s ballot are categories for graphic novels, short story collections, young adult fiction, and poetry. Off the top of my head I can think of enough Canadian authors who published in those categories within the last orbit of the sun to merit some individual recognition.

Taking a broad approach to the awards, I’m not quite sure what the overall message is meant to be. Actually, that’s a lie. I fear I know exactly what the take away is, I just don’t like it. Last year the Bookies made an effort to sample from many walks of Canadian writing in forming their nominations. Every category may not have appealed to every person who visited CBC Books’ website, but there was almost certainly something for everyone. Since the award itself is one of bragging rights and exposure, this diverse scope was good and just.

This year’s taxonomy of awards suggests a celebration of books deemed interesting only by the conveners of the Bookies. Lost is the attempt to mobilize a base of readers with a variety of interests. In only their third year, the Bookies have shifted from aggregators of talent, inclusive of divergent genre and medium, to arbiters of taste. This is not only unfair but a misrepresentation of creative culture in Canada.


Tags: , , ,
0

The Indie Project Grab Bag

By
Adam Shaftoe
– March 20, 2013Posted in: Books, The Daily Shaft, Web Media

One of the benefits of writing this blog is the opportunity to engage with some profoundly talented people working in the creative arts. Over the last month three projects have landed on my radar, all coming from creators who I have previously reviewed. In support of their future endeavours, I decided to dedicate today’s post to promoting their upcoming works.

Up first is Strange Bedfellows. Strange Bedfellows is/will be an anthology of political science fiction, edited by Hayden Trenholm. Last year I had the pleasure of reviewing Mr. Trenholm’s environmentally themed anthology, Blood and Water. Powerful and evocative, the collection left with the same sense of looming dread that penetrated my soul upon finishing Cormac McCarthy’s The Road. Needless to say, I’m eager for any anthology which puts Mr. Trenholm in the editor’s chair.

Strange Bedfellows is also notable in that it successfully mobilized crowd sourcing as a means of augmenting the pay scale for its writers. This from Strange Bedfellows’ indiegogo campaign,

Our goal of $2800 will let us increase our rates from 1.5 cents a word to 5 cents a word.  Additional funds will be used first, to increase the length of the book to a maximum of 90,000 words, and, second, further increase the rate of pay to the writers.

As of this post, Strange Bedfellows had passed the $3000 mark in its fundraising with a little less than two days of fundraising to go.

Kudos to Mr. Trenholm and Bundoran Press for supporting writers and the Canadian science fiction community at large.

Next on the docket is Job Hunters, a web series which created its own sub-genre as a dystopian roommate comedy.

I honestly had no idea what to expect going into the first season of Job Hunters. Never did I suspect it would turn out to be a particularly clever commentary on unemployment and post-college disillusionment. This sharp writing combined with outstanding cinematography, skillful directing, and first rate post-production to deliver an experience that demonstrated the power of the web series as a medium.

Why support season two? Because the first season ended on a huge cliff-hanger and I need to know what happens next. There’s also the fact that the series mobilized some amazing talent who pulled something out of almost nothing in terms of production budget.

We created our first season with about $14,000 and a crew entirely made of volunteers. We want to bring a more rigorous schedule to Season Two and we need the funds to deliver you bigger, better stories from the characters you love.

As of this post Job Hunters’ second season is a little more than 20% funded. Head over to their season 2 kickstarter page to learn more.

Finally, I want to talk about a project that is a little outside my usual realm of critical discussion, and by a little I mean almost the exact opposite of my usual oeuvre. I’m talking about contemporary dance.

Dance by Day is a web series concept currently under development by Jonathan Robbins and Jason Leaver. Readers may know Robbins and Leaver as the creators of Clutch and Out With Dad, respectively. So why am I supporting a web series about a struggling dance troupe?

The easy answer is that Robbins and Leaver are tremendous as writers and directors. Clutch was recently nominated for a Streamy award in the “best action series” category and Out with Dad was nominated for “best original series for digital media”  at the Canadian Screen Awards. Collaboration between these two highly talented individuals is sure to result in web series gold (no pressure there, Jonathan and Jason).

More importantly, Dance by Day seems perfectly positioned to be a reflection on the perpetual downward march of government funding for the arts within the Canadian cultural landscape. Such discussions are all too often marginalized or flat out ignored in the face of realpolitick, especially amid a bad economy. Creating a web series on this topic could potentially mobilize a new base of support for the arts in a union of new media and old-guard capital-A “Art.”

Dance by Day is currently seeking funding from the Independent Production Fund. The best way to support its bid is to watch the proof of concept video, share it with others, and comment on youtube.

 

And there you have it. Three projects which I look forward to seeing in the near future. I think I may have to make something like this a bit more of a regular feature.


Tags: , , , , , , ,
0

The Atypicality of Battle Royale (the novel)

By
Adam Shaftoe
– January 11, 2013Posted in: Books, The Daily Shaft

I meant for today’s post to be a review of Post Mortem Press’ Fear the Abyss anthology. Unfortunately the review isn’t quite ready. However, I’m still in the mood to talk about books, so I thought I would put together some thoughts on Koushun Takami’s Battle Royale, a book which I impulse bought while the Page of Reviews was on hiatus.

As I’m fairly certain Battle Royale has been reviewed seven ways from Sunday, I’ll skip contributing to a discourse which likely already includes more than enough discussions of Orwell and Golding as seen through an Asian lens. Instead I want to explore a few narrative elements wherein Battle Royale is very atypical of my reading of Japanese popular culture as seen through anime and manga.

Granted there may be some level of comparing apples to oranges within my methodology, but as a person who can’t read Japanese I do the best I can with the materials at hand.

Also, spoiler alert.

Battle Royale is the first piece of Japanese fiction I’ve read/watched wherein the government is actively portrayed as an antagonist. Set in an alternate history version of the 1990s, Japan is part of a larger empire known as the Greater Republic of East Asia – an obvious reference to Japan’s WW2 creation of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. Through the eyes of a class of junior high school students, the GREA is seen as an oppressive and invasive fascist state ruled by a semi-divine “Great Dictator.” To speak out against the Dictator is to invite summary execution from the police.

While elements of government are often portrayed in anime/manga as overly hawkish or even downright American – I’m thinking General Colbert of Tekkaman Blade or Admiral Takashi Hayase of Macross – government, at least human government, is rarely evil in the banal sense of the word. Only through othering in the form of extraterrestrial governments/juntas do we see shades of fascism. Therein the mostly democratic governments of Earth are legitimized, even if they do tread a slightly authoritarian line.

Also unusual is Battle Royale’s construction of characters that exist without any sort of heroic justification. It’s all too common to see popular Japanese heroes as the reluctant warrior pressed into righteous combat by circumstances beyond their control. Hiraku Ichijo (Macross), Shinji Ikari (Evangelion), Susumu Kodai (Space Battleship Yamato), and Amuro Ray (Mobile Suit Gundam) all fit into the model of reticent hero. To some extent, Battle Royale’s Shuya Nanahara follows this formula. Before the battle begins, Shuya’s best friend is gunned down by their teacher. That same teacher also rapes the matron of the orphanage where Shuya grew up. But where there are characters like Shuya who fight for some worthy purpose (in theory) there is also someone like Kazuo Kiriyama, who decides to kill a group of his class mates on the flip of a coin. Far from an over the top depiction of evil, Kazuo is as cold and calculating as Patrick Bateman of Bret Easton Ellis’ American Psycho.

Consider as well Shogo Kawada, a senior student accidentally recruited into the Program for a second time. Even though Kawada might best be seen within a sensei-Chiron trope, he’s a proven killer who is content to reduce victory in the Program to winning a handful of matches in a grand tournament.

Another aspect of the novel which struck me as a thematic outlier is its early rejection of pacifism. A few hours into the first day of the Program, best friends Yumiko Kusaka and Yukiko Kitano stumble across a megaphone in the scenic lookout they are using as a hiding spot. Despite knowing that a number of their friends died in the first round of the Program, the two characters genuinely believe that none among their class really want to kill each other. Using the megaphone they invite their fellow students to use the lookout as a sanctuary. In doing so, the girls give away their positions and are quickly shot and killed. Thus are pacifism and idealism rejected when the threshold for survival demands human sacrifice.

The only thing that even approaches a refusal of the status quo within Battle Royale is suicide. For example, Sakura Ogawa is unwilling to see any of her classmates as enemies. Without even opening her back pack to see what weapon she was assigned, she throws herself off a cliff. This is not an act of cowardice after discovering herself armed with a fork where her friends have guns and crossbows; Sakura simply refuses to play the game. For all we know Sakura had a sub-machine gun in her pack. Sakura’s boyfriend, Kazuhiko Yamamoto, joins her in death, unwilling to kill so that he might live in a world absent Sakura. Though noble, these and other suicides within the novel are a complete divergence from the “let’s all hope to live in a world of peace” motif which is a mainstay of anime and manga. Moreover, they are meaningless deaths. It’s common enough to see self-sacrifice, Full Metal Alchemist and Ghost in the Shell SAC come to mind, but solemn non-ritual suicides are few and far between.

In 1997 Battle Royale was disqualified from Japan’s Grand Prix Horror Novel competition. I wonder, though, if its rejection was on account of the graphic violence, or its deviation from the norms of Japanese popular culture? Either way, as a reader with relatively little experience with proper modern Japanese literature, Battle Royale is a fascinating demarcation from the tropes and clichés ubiquitous to anime and manga.


Tags: , , , ,
0

Ender’s Emotional Game

By
Adam Shaftoe
– November 19, 2012Posted in: Books, Movies, The Daily Shaft

Were a person to ask one hundred science fiction writers and readers if they think Orson Scott Card’s Ender’s Game is an important novel, I imagine most would say yes. Ask that same group if they enjoy Ender’s Game more than its sequel, Speaker for the Dead, and I expect the room would polarize.

My last re-read of Card’s seminal treatise on child soldiers and interstellar war was in 2005. In ways that have nothing to do with space warfare, I found the novel surprisingly prescient. In 1985 Card successfully predicted the rise of independent publication through the internet as a means of effectively spreading a message; though reality offers few examples of blogs as successful and influential as Locke’s and Demosthenes’.

But if there’s a first principle from which my criticism of the novel emerges, it is Card’s creation of Ender as infallible – arguably this is what puts me in the Speaker for the Dead side of the Ender v. Speaker debate. Ender isn’t simply smarter than his colleagues, he’s also smarter than the readers. Indeed, he’s likely smarter than Orson Scott Card, himself. If this reality weren’t enough to alienate readers, Ender is also a fully mobilized child solider in a semi-fascist future. Thus Ender’s empathy and innocence become his go-to redemptive qualities. If nothing else, images of Ender crying in his bunk produced a reasonably palatable way for Card to hand wave his way around Ender’s various atrocities and war crimes. For everything else Card does in the novel, he is constantly imposing heavily on a reader’s sense of pathos.

This imposition is so overt that it even becomes a talking point within certain reviews of the book.

“Anyone who reads about Ender’s trials – even before he enters the Battle School – and doesn’t feel for him must have a heart of stone.” – Catherine Russell, Functional Nerds

“…it’s the character study of a young boy whose childhood is being denied him by those who are in fact putting on a show of catering to it.” – Thomas M. Wagner, SFReviews.net

“…Ender is brave, determined, but whether he is kind or mean changes as he progresses through Battle School.” – The Guardian

Regardless of if a reader enjoys the emotional milieu of Ender’s Game, the story falls apart without it. Bearing this point in mind, let’s turn to the newly released blub on the upcoming Ender’s Game movie.

“In the near future, a hostile alien race (called the Formics) have attacked Earth. If not for the legendary heroics of International Fleet Commander, Mazer Rackham (Ben Kingsley), all would have been lost. In preparation for the next attack, the highly esteemed Colonel Graff (Harrison Ford) and the International Military are training only the best young children to find the future Mazer. Ender Wiggin (Asa Butterfield), a shy, but strategically brilliant boy is pulled out of his school to join the elite.

Arriving at Battle School, Ender quickly and easily masters increasingly difficult war games, distinguishing himself and winning respect amongst his peers. Ender is soon ordained by Graff as the military’s next great hope, resulting in his promotion to Command School. Once there, he’s trained by Mazer Rackham, himself, to lead his fellow soldiers into an epic battle that will determine the future of Earth and save the human race.” – Via Collider

Granted it’s never wise to draw too extensively from two paragraphs of promotional text, but this doesn’t sound like a story which hinges upon the relative innocence of a child solider. In fact, it sounds more like an action movie intent on revisiting Starship Troopers but with a significantly diminished camp value.

Consider that in 1985, New York Times critic Gerald Jonas had this to say about Ender’s Game in his review of the book:

“I am aware that this sounds like the synopsis of a grade Z, made-for-television, science-fiction-rip-off movie. But Mr. Card has shaped this unpromising material into an affecting novel full of surprises that seem inevitable once they are explained. The key, of course, is Ender Wiggin himself…Alternately likable and insufferable, he is a convincing little Napoleon in short pants.” – New York Times

Cloying as it can be at times, Ender’s relationship with his sister, as well as his friends in the Battle School, is the glue that holds the narrative together. Granted, Jack’s and Valentine’s reflections on philosophy/bloggings provide an intellectual framework to justify the novel’s slant on human economies during war time. However, a skilled editorial surgeon could remove those sections of the novel without too much detriment to the overall story arc. But without Ender’s frequent introspection and at times maudlin self-reflection, he’s nothing more than an indoctrinated butcher.

Building this essential humanity into a film is going to be a tough sell. Ender’s deepest moments of reflection emerge out of solitude. Despite loading the cast with the likes of Harrison Ford and Sir Ben Kingsley, there’s no real way to lend their acting chops to Asa Butterfield without radically restructuring the narrative.

Returning again to the concept of first principles, there is a clear reason why a cinematic adaptation of Ender’s Game will have taken twenty-eight years, assuming it gets released on time: the novel is self-reflective, heavy on the exposition, and a delicate balance of pathos mixed with invasive politics of state designed child soldiers. Turning all of the above into a two hour movie is a colossal challenge. And if the advertising copy is to be believed, the film is already missing a significant element in the story’s chemical formula.


Tags: ,
1

World War Z Trailer and Breakdown

By
Adam Shaftoe
– November 12, 2012Posted in: Books, Movies, The Daily Shaft

I feel it necessary to say a thing or two prior to breaking down the World War Z trailer. First and foremost, I don’t think I am going to like this movie. Further, I don’t think anybody who appreciates the World War Z novel will be automatically inclined to enjoy this movie, which has long since languished in development hell. Were it called “Handsome A-Lister does a horror flick to finance his new summer home” I’d be content to take it for what it is and enjoy the slaughter. The World War Z name, and requisite literary expectations, produces some very unique challenges for cinematic adaptation.

There are perhaps two proven screen formats to make Max Brooks’ novel work on the big screen. The first method would be producing a faux Ken Burns style documentary. Alternatively, WWZ could work within a District 9 approach. Why these two styles? Because the full title of the novel is World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War. As such, the book is a collection of short stories told through a first person narrative. Typical Hollywood writing does not lend itself to such an approach. Moreover, Brooks’ book uses zombies as a means of exploring some very big and very uncomfortable ideas. Working with only the trailer as a point of reference, I don’t envision myself setting aside my devotion to the book where I can appreciating the film, such as it is.

Then again, my preconceptions have led me to feasting upon crow on a few occasions. On paper World War Z has some decent credentials. Marc Forster is certainly a capable director, despite Quantum of Solace. If twitter is to be trusted, people seem to like Damon Lindleof’s writing; though I don’t know I’ve quite forgiven Lindleof for Cowboys and Aliens.

Anyway, enough with the foreplay. Here’s the trailer.

 

We open on Brad Pitt and his family stuck in traffic. To pass time, the Ubermensch clan is engaged in some sort of guessing game. If at this point you’re hearing a shattering sound in the background, it’s just the trailer smashing my suspension of disbelief into elementary particles. Having once been stuck in Manhattan traffic with my family, I can safely say this scene is short at least nineteen colourful swears and a cacophony of honking horns. Also, I don’t know much about motorcycles, but it seems to me that the immutable laws of physics would come into play if a person so mounted smashed the window off a stationary car. I once clipped a car’s side mirror on my bicycle. The resulting impact caused me to turn the handlebars so much I ended up riding on the sidewalk.

It seems the only take away message for the trailer’s first forty-seven seconds is Brad Pitt as the white Cliff Huxtable. You may recognize this character from other movies such as 2012 and The Day After Tomorrow.

Forty-eight seconds into the trailer we bear unfortunate witness the next evolution of the Inception “Bwangh”. I thought the Prometheus scream was bad, but the WWZ buzz is even more obnoxious. Dear trailer makers of the world, please stop. I beg you.

Amid the low frequency whines, I was reminded of some very good writing advice I received from D.F. McCourt, the editor of AE – The Canadian Science Fiction Review. Therein he said an effective writer never puts emotion before action. Yet it takes this trailer a full minute and nineteen seconds before it even hints at the cause of society’s descent into madness, thus finally giving us some action. Prior to the shot of zombies storming over a bus like a wave breaking on rocks – though there’s nothing but foreknowledge of the franchise to confirm these are indeed zombies – everything in this trailer is emotion. But since all of those shots are derivative of big budget “end of the world” movies from the last ten years, the pathos is tedious, and Pitt’s character seems worn and trite.

Even as Brad Pitt and his family make a rooftop egress, there are no real visual cues screaming “Zombies!” I don’t have many kind words for the Resident Evil movies, but at least they know how to sell a zombie as a zombie. Instead this trailer just shows people running. Are North Americans really so fat as to justify running, the only thing these zombies do within the trailer, as a source of soul wrenching fear? If Paramount wants me to forget about the book and accept the movie as is, they should cut the trailer in a way which clearly demonstrates the zombie threat.

Post-rooftop evac, the trailer returns to pulling at heart strings. The dialogue hints at Brad Pitt’s special suitability to the “job” [of saving the world] all the while we see his inner turmoil as a man who puts family first. This exposition is interspersed with more running people, who we should assume to be zombies. In a shot reminiscent of the running of the bulls in Pamplona, a wall of humanity splashes around a corner in pursuit of the foreground. This follows footage of soldiers shooting indiscriminately into crowds. And finally the trailer offers a money shot of crudely rendered generic looking “zombies” climbing over top of each other to scale a wall. Hey where have I seen this before…

 

The guy who directed Monster’s Ball is cribbing from Paul Verhoeven’s Starship Troopers. What…the…hell? More to the point, why do the CG bugs from 1997 look more menacing than a CG zombie horde from 2012. Something is amiss here.

All I see within the trailer is a shallow and incongruous attempt to portray the book’s Battle of Yonkers and the zombie siege of Fortress Israel. I don’t want to get into a fight about fast versus slow zombies, but the slow zombies of the novel allowed for the Battle of Yonkers to become a criticism of modern military practices as well as a spec-fic study of American war fatigue in the aftermath of Afghanistan and Iraq. Similarly, the Fortress Israel story was a discussion of Middle-East tensions and a true “Othering” of Palestinians within an Israeli world view. Yes there were zombies and brain eating, but there were also questions of agency and a degree of geopolitical depth.

Nothing in the trailer gives me a reason to expect any level of meaningful social critique from within this movie. World War Z presents itself as an action movie cut from the same sub-par marble which formed the basis for a great many of the last decade’s disastrous disaster movies. Unless this trailer is a complete miscarriage of the movie’s actual story, I predict World War Z to be one of 2013’s biggest critical, possibly even commercial, flops.


Tags: , , , , , ,
0

Disney Buys Lucasfilm/Arts, Now Let’s All Calm Down

By
Adam Shaftoe
– November 2, 2012Posted in: Books, Movies, Television, The Daily Shaft, Video Games

On the off chance you’ve been living under a rock on some distant extra-solar planet without access to television or the internet, you may not have heard that Disney bought Lucasfilm. The house of mouse secured Lucas’ brainchild for 4.05 billion dollars. The price is quite a steal considering Disney paid 7.4 billion for Pixar and 4.2 billion for Marvel. Disney’s acquisition includes LucasArts, Industrial Light and Magic, and Lucas Sound, making  the deal seem all the more like a fire sale on George Lucas’ life. And as if all that wasn’t enough to get the internet buzzing, Disney paired announcing the sale with news of a new Star Wars film to release in 2015: Details remain unreleased.

Apropos of Obi-Wan, millions of voices cried out in terror…and nerd rage. Scenes with Jar-Jar as a speaking character and Leia reduced to “Disney princess” status raced through people’s minds as Randy Newman played some tedious up-tempo song in the background.

People pleaded with the internet gods, “Please, no more. Why can’t they leave it alone? Nothing good will come from this? They’re going to do more crap from the expanded universe.”

Life rarely mirrors rage comics, but this announcement ushered in one of those infrequent moments of similarity.

You seem upset...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now that the dust has settled, and fury morphed to quiet discontent I feel it is my duty to say the following. Good people of the internet, I feel your frustration but it’s time to calm the hell down.

Yes, not many among us liked the new trilogy. There was too much green screen, questionable writing, and no real depth to any of the characters. Would that George Lucas’ story telling abilities matched his technical acumen, I too would lament his departure from the Star Wars universe.

However let us explore the idea that some of the best Star Wars stuff has little to do with George Lucas, other than via his role as the progenitor of a mythic cycle, and scant direct tie-in to the canonical movies. In fact, I would go so far as to say that since Return of the Jedi the popularity of Star Wars, as a contemporary mythology, is so far removed from film that even if the next trilogy proves as bad as the last, it wouldn’t really hurt the brand or the reason it is so beloved by its fans.

To illustrate this point I offer five first rate aspects of the expanded universe which would not have been possible if Lucasfilm/LucasArts had left Star Wars alone.

The Heir to the Empire Trilogy

Timothy Zahn published the first of these post-Jedi continuity novels in 1991. In doing so he rekindled interest in Star Wars after many years of creative drought. The first book, Heir to the Empire landed on the New York Times best seller list. It would later go on to be adapted into a graphic novel by Dark Horse Comics. In addition to giving Coruscant its name, Zahn also gave Star Wars one of its most enigmatic villains in the form of Grand Admiral Thrawn. Though Zahn’s novels may show their age, they did bring a new generation of fans into the zealous fold when they hungered for more in the aftermath of Return of the Jedi.

Tie Fighter

Published by LucasArts but developed by the now defunct Totally Games, Tie Fighter is a name spoken with awed reverence among gamers. Though not the first game to put players in the cockpit of a star fighter, Tie Fighter set multiple benchmarks for space combat simulation. In terms of sound, graphics, and mission complexity, it was leaps and bounds beyond its predecessor X-Wing. TF also managed to change the news cycle of the Star Wars universe. For the first time the rebels were cast not as heroes but violent insurgents bent on disrupting the life of innocent imperial citizens. In shifting perspectives, players saw a more pragmatic and practical side to the empire and less of an evil oppressor.

 

Star Wars Jedi Knight: Dark Forces 2

The name might be a mouthful but Dark Forces 2 offered the first ever post-Jedi live action glimpse of life in the Star Wars universe. Like so many games of the late 90s, Dark Forces 2 bookended each level with a full motion video cut scene. As a precursor to Bioshock, a player’s decisions in-game dictated clear consequences for lead character Kyle Katarn, a former imperial officer turned smuggler turned Jedi. But more important than that, DF2 gave Star Wars fans what they really wanted: an opportunity to cut down storm troopers with a light saber in a first person shooter.

 

 

Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic

Because the only thing better than Dungeons and Dragons is a Star Wars RPG governed by D20 rules. KOTOR, and its sequel KOTOR 2, wound back the clock on the decadent, and possibly illiterate, civilization that is the Star Wars universe. Set thousands of years before the Battle of Yavin, KOTOR set the galaxy on fire with a war between the Republic and the Sith empire. As with any good RPG, decisions on the part of the player created multiple paths to stopping the Sith lord Darth Malak. Although far removed from the source material, KOTOR was widely praised by critics and earned multiple awards including the first ever BAFTA Games Award for best X-Box game of the year.

The Clone Wars

Perhaps the most controversial of the expanded universe settings, The Clone Wars follows the exploits of Anakin Skywalker and company during the “fade to black” conflict that occurs during Episode 2 and 3. While the story telling can fall flat with respect to certain characters whose fates are known, the series is at its best when chronicling the war stories of the clone troopers. Indeed, if this series proves anything, it’s that even the worst executed ideas (Star Wars Ep. 2) can lead to better things when fresh eyes get to work within a well established mythology.

So while Disney may own LucasArts/Films, it doesn’t necessarily follow that Star Wars is going to get neutered like so many scruffy looking Nerf Herders. Disney owns Marvel, yet Tony Stark is still an egomaniacal booze swilling playboy. The Hulk still has anger problems, even if they are a little inconsistent. Wall-E, for all its cutesy-poo robot stuff, was a story about unabashed capitalism gone wrong, wrapped in a criticism of the inherent sloth built into a western lifestyles, all told through the lens of ecological catastrophe.

Indeed, if the new trilogy, as well as these examples, prove anything, it’s that Star Wars can often be at its best when it is far removed from the man who created it.

So relax already. Everything is going to be fine.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
2

The Saturday Shaft: Random Thoughts

By
Adam Shaftoe
– August 4, 2012Posted in: Books, Criticism, Movies, The Daily Shaft

On Art,

Minecraft is a fantastic tool for having fun while creating digital art. But creating art with unlimited resources can diminish the experience. Minecraft builders, save for those undertaking “super” projects, would do well to play in survival mode from time to time. For one, there’s a unique satisfaction in creating a piece of digital art when you’ve had to scrounge for materials. For second, defending one’s project from creepers, zombies, and skeletons is much like defending one’s non-digital art. There are always going to be philistines who want to destroy, dismantle, or piss on the things that you care about. Accept that as a reality to be managed, rather than a thing to be avoided, and the experience will be that much more rewarding.

On Criticism,

Every writer a critic, and every critic a writer; that’s my solution to what Jacob Silverman calls an “an epidemic of niceness in online book culture”. Within the academic world, peer review is an essential part of the writing process. The creative sphere needs a little more of that. Granted getting published, save for writing a blog, self publication, or hooking up with a vanity press, is not easy. Once a writer has climbed that mountain the last thing they might want to hear from a colleague is that their work is wanting. But if we maintain that “critic” is the root of “critical thought” rather than simply “criticism”, we should welcome the feedback of our peers even if it’s not quite what we want to hear. In doing so, everybody grows as a creator and consumer.

Every writer a critic, and every critic a writer.

On Film,

The story of Pygmalion and Galatea is terrible; stop making movies that use it as the central conceit. I’ve met/talked to a lot of writers/artists over the last couple of years, and 96% of them are well adjusted and generally pleasant people. They can also be laser focused, incredibly determined, and passionate in ways that some folk might find surprising. This does not make them misanthropic narcissists who are incapable of holding down relationships with anybody who they have not created – I’m talking to you, Ruby Sparks and to a lesser extent Stranger than Fiction.

On America,

There are a lot of things that America does well. There is one thing America does very poorly: leaving issues of civil rights up to individual states and then a popular vote therein. Civil rights should never be a question of popular opinion, that’s why we call them rights. If they are not universal to all, then they are not worth the paper upon which they are printed. Who thinks that the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the US Constitution would have been better left to regional/state opinion? Such is the stupidity of putting marriage equity in a similar light.


Tags: , , , ,
5

The Thin Plaid Line of Negative Reviews

By
Adam Shaftoe
– July 25, 2012Posted in: Books, Criticism, Movies, Television, The Daily Shaft, Video Games, Web Media

In recent months, I’ve heard a great many thoughts on negative reviews. I’ll credit one of the best ideas to both Ryan Oakley, author Technicolour Ultra Mall, and Leah Petersen, author of Fighting Gravity. During a panel on criticism at Ad Astra 2012, a panel moderated by yours truly, both Oakley and Petersen suggested that leaving an inferior novel/film/game/whatever to languish in obscurity can sometimes be a better course of action than constructing a negative, albeit fair, review.

At that same convention I had a quick conversation with Sandra Kasturi, co-editor of ChiZine Publications, on the subject of criticism. Therein, she told me a critic should not be afraid to speak their mind as it is their job to assign value to a given work.

When I began writing reviews I found guidance in the writings of W.H. Auden, who framed criticism as something most useful when it calls attention to things worth attending to.

In an alternate timeline where I’m a “professional” critic, in the sense that I work for a publication and use words which elucidate critical thought for a living, I think it would be easy to craft the above mentioned philosophies into a set of grand critical principles. As an “amateur” critic, the issue is slightly more complicated.

Where “professional” critics are always going to receive gratis review materials, not to mention a fortified buffer zone from the subject under review via their publication, the amateur critic’s inclusion in the great game is dependent upon the good will of the publishers. Thus the “amateur” must broach the thin plaid line of negative reviews. In theory, a well crafted review, either positive or negative, speaks to the talent, experience, and ability of the critic in question. In reality, the publisher-critic relationship is about advertising, and no publisher is going to want to work with an “amateur” who makes one of their authors/game studios/clients look like a douche.

So that’s when you default to something that resembles the aforementioned Petersen-Oakley approach of occasionally leaving bad things to rot without comment, right?

Well, maybe. If a critic receives unsolicited review materials, they have every right to say thanks but no thanks. I did that once when a porn studio asked me to review one of their movies.

However, if said critic opts not to put pen to paper, then they probably aren’t going to see anything in the future from that publisher. To my previous example, nobody from the adult entertainment industry has solicited me since I said no to writing a detailed review of their Spartacus porno. (Come on, what would I say in a porn review? Offer commentary on the grunting and thrusting?)

If a critic asks a publisher for a review copy of a book/game/whatever, there’s an implicit, bordering on explicit, expectation that the work in question is going to get reviewed. A failure to complete the transaction on the part of the critic will likely yield the same result as producing a negative review: the end of the association between critic and publisher.

The equation is further complicated when self-published authors and independent productions enter the fray. Suppose a self-published author sends an “amateur” critic their debut novel. The critic then uses their review to demonstrate the inherent flaws of the text, warning potential readers away from investments in time and money. Under the Kasturi model, the critic has done their job. In theory, this is a good thing. In reality, a person who can write has held a person who can’t write to task for their inability to write. Some people (friends, family, fans of the author in question, and bored internet trolls) might be inclined to label that sort of treatment as a very public bullying.

Scenarios such as these contribute to what I see as a troublesome culture of positivity among the ranks of “amateur” critics. Beyond tiring both body and mind with a perpetual good will truffle-shuffle, this positive culture can cripple an “amateur” critic’s transition into the “professional” realm. Ask yourself this, how long would a New York Times book critic last if they loved everything? Would Ebert still be writing film reviews for the Chicago Sun Times if he praised every movie? Such a perpetually positive critic would quickly forfeit their perceived position as arbiter of taste, instead becoming something of a fanboy/girl, or worse, a paid stooge. Why would any editor want to hire such a writer? Furthermore, and even if people don’t want to admit it, readers love a scathing review.

A good negative review, that is to say one that knows how to challenge art without attacking the artist, is a spectacle in and of itself. It’s the reader-writer equivalent of a trip to the Coliseum. The negative review allows opportunities for revelling in collective contempt; those requiring evidence on that point should check the view count on Gilbert Gottfried’s reading from Fifty Shades of Grey. Similarly, the negative review can turn fans of the lampooned work into the most fervent advocates. At that point, a debate about the quality of the work often becomes a secondary concern. The focus shifts to proving the critic wrong and in the process mobilizing/recruiting others to that end. Go ahead and call out Stephenie Meyer and see just how quickly the Twihards assemble and more importantly proselytize. The same could be said for Community fans – myself among them. Say something bad about Dan Harmon within earshot of me and I’ll spend the next twenty minutes explaining why he is a visionary.

 

Thus we return to the Petersen-Oakley model where the bad review still promotes the work in question. Despite that reality, and the truism that any press is good press, there exists a limiting structure that shifts dominion over negative reviews to “professional” critics. The internet may have mobilized an army of well trained and highly skilled “amateurs”, but those critics risk biting the hand that feeds them should they dare to do their jobs and write like “professionals”.


Tags: , , ,
4

Teaching Moments with Chuck Palahniuk’s Fight Club

By
Adam Shaftoe
– June 29, 2012Posted in: Books, Lit Reviews, The Daily Shaft

NB: I’ve worked about 65 hours this week on only 20 hours of sleep. Much as I want to run the review that I have planned, I don’t trust my editing abilities in this state. Next week should be a return to normal Page of Reviews programming. For now, I offer a story about Scotch and Fight Club.

Date: Thursday June 28, 2012

Location: Oakwood Resort. Grand Bend, Ontario.

Time: 8:15am

After working a twelve hour night (can’t say that my summer job isn’t interesting that way) I needed a change of scenery. Armed with a breakfast Scotch and a copy of Fight Club on my Kindle, I sat down by the pool. My plan was to spend an hour reading before retreating to the vampire suitable darkness of my room.

Fifteen minutes passed before another resort guest, also armed with a breakfast cocktail, sat down in the pool chair two abreast of mine.

““Morning,” she said.

““Hello,” I answered.

I got to the end of the page before she asked, “What are you drinking?”

““Scotch.”

““Wow,” she said. “Having an early start to the day?”

I shifted my gaze to her glass as I raised an eyebrow.

““Yeah, me too,” she confessed.

I got through two more pages before she asked, “What are you reading?”

I am Adam’s inability to deal with people when he wants to be left alone.

““Fight Club.”

A moment or three past before she asked, “Wasn’t that a movie?”

I nodded.

““Isn’t it old?”

““About fifteen years old,” I answered, desperately wanting an end to conversation.

““So, why read an old book of an old movie?”

I won’t like, part of me wanted to commit a sin of utter rudeness and change seats. But some voice in my head suggested another plan.

““Did you see Fight Club?” I asked.

““When I was in high school,” she cautiously answered.

““Do you remember what it was about?”

““Terrorists and fighting and blowing up buildings.”

I nodded before asking, “What buildings were they blowing up?”

““Businesses, I think.”

““Tyler,” she raised an eyebrow as I said the character’s name. “Brad Pitt,” I corrected myself. “Wanted to blow up credit records so that everybody would have to start over on an even keel. He wanted to give people who work for a living a chance to be on par with the upper class.”

My companion seemed to think for a moment before tapping a finger on her chin.

““Sounds a lot like what the Occupy movement wants. That’s pretty amazing for fifteen years ago.”

And for the first time during the entire conversation, I offered her a genuine smile. “And that is why I’m reading the book,” I said.

““I think I want to read it now, too,” she said, raising her glass to mine.

It’s nice to know that when Chuck Palahniuk opens his royalty cheque next month, I’ll have made an indirect contribution.

Next week on the Page of Reviews: fantasy fights a war with science fiction, horror pulls a Kobayashi Maru, and I look at some web series that never were.


Tags: , , ,
Older Entries