What's So Special About Conan?

In today's USA Today, Mike Snider writes about Conan's reemergence as a relevant subject in popular culture (hat tip to SF Signal for the story). There are those of us who comment about poplar culture who think that Conan has never been an irrelevant figure in society. How can a character who codified an entire literary genre become truly irrelevant? Every story about a sword wielding barbarian, no matter how trite or bad, is at some level inspired by Robert E. Howard's creation. But it can't be denied that there is exciting news for Conan fans. Snider points to five recent developments that signal Conan's relevance:

1. The New PS3/XBOX 360 Video Game coming out next week
2. The new "Conan The Phenomenon" hardcover by Paul Sammon
3. The Savage Sword of Conan Trade Paperback Collection by Dark Horse
and
4. An upcoming movie by Millennium Films.

Those these are important, and wonderful, developments for the Conan fan, they are not new. One should not think that there has been some kind of sudden explosion in 2007 of Conan material.

Snider neglected to mention:

1. Conan: The Ultimate Guide by Roy Thomas which released in September 2006
2. The new Conan comic book series (first released in 2004) written by Kurt Busiek and illustrated by Cary Nord by Dark Horse
3. The Mongoose Publishing Conan Roleplaying Game
not to mention
4. The Age of Conan series of media tie-in novels published in 2005 and 2006
or
5. Del Rey's publishing of Howard's Original Conan Stories released in 2003

The Conan explosion isn't a new thing either, I could have pulled numerous examples from the 90s or the 80s of Conan releases. Conan is always lurking in the pop culture subconscious and I think that we do a disservice to Conan fans, both existent and emerging when we use Arnold Schwarzenegger as the archetypal Conan representation, as Snider appears to do in the article. Some like Arnold as archetype, but I find Conan to be one of the most underestimated characters in American literature (with Natty Bumpo being a close second) and the Governator's portrayal -- while fun -- lacks the depth the character actually has as a literary figure.

When it comes to depictions of unreflective low art, one need look no further than the commonly perceived opinions of Robert Howard's Conan stories. If you ask the average man on the street to describe a Conan narrative, you will likely be given a tale of lust and violence. In the tale Conan will rescue some half-naked maiden from some rampaging beast and the story will end with the woman becoming all naked as she swoons at the hero's feet. In fact, a great deal of Conan pastiche has been based on this very simple formula. The largest problem with such a vision is that it is not all that accurate. Are there tales of this sort in the Conan oeuvre?
Sure, but there are also tales of visionary wonder.



Like most authors, whether they write literature or Literature, Howard's writings reflect his own thoughts, experiences, and education. The writing reflects the aesthetic tastes of the author, or his/her understanding of a prospective audiences literary tastes. What makes something worth reading again and again is when an author satisfies those with "lower" tastes while providing them with some food for thought. Howard is no exception. In fact, I was surprised while I was rereading the first published Conan story, Howard's The Phoenix on the Sword to find that the author seemed to be hinting at a theory of the value of literature and its role in society.

Howard's Hyborean Age is a mythic world filled with magic and wonder, but it is also a world based on the history of the real world. Howard combined multiple eras of history so that societies whose "real world" existence is separated by centuries could co-exist narratively. Conan's own people, the Cimmerians, are based on a very real historical peoples. Both Herodotus, in his Histories, and Plutarch, in his Lives, mention the Cimmerian peoples (called Cimbri in Plutarch). In The Phoenix on the Sword, Howard appears to expect his audience to have at least a little understanding of the historical Cimmerians in his conversation of the role of literature in civilization. Conan, as protagonist, must hold ideas which the reader sympathizes with for the particular narrative of Phoenix to work.

So what kind of people were the Cimmerians? According to Plutarch they were a people who were pillagers and raiders, but not rulers.

For the Cimmerian attack upon Ionia, which was earlier than Croesus, was not a conquest of the cities, but only an inroad for plundering.
Herodotus, Histories, I, 6

What did they look like? According to Plutarch:

Their great height, their black eyes and their name, Cimbri, which the Germans use for brigands, led us merely to suppose that they were one of those races of Germania who lived on the shores of the Western Ocean. Others say that the huge expanse of Celtica stretches from the outer sea and the western regions to the Palus Maeotis and borders on Asian Scythia; that these two neighbouring nations joined forces and left their land... And although each people had a different name, their army was collectively called Celto-Scythian. According to others, some of the Cimmerians, who were the first-to be known to the ancient Greeks... took flight and were driven from their land by the Scythians. Plutarch, Life of Marius, XI

What was their temperament? According to Homer:

Thus she brought us to the deep-Rowing River of Ocean and the frontiers of the world, where the fog-bound Cimmerians live in the City of Perpetual Mist. When the bright Sun climbs the sky and puts the stars to flight, no ray from him can penetrate to them, nor can he see them as he drops from heaven and sinks once more to the earth. For dreadful night has spread her mantle over the heads of that unhappy folk. Homer, Odyssey, XI, 14

It is Homer's description of the Cimmerians that Howard uses in Phoenix to describe the mood of the people and to separate Conan from his kin. When Conan is asked why the Cimmerians are such a brooding people, Conan responds:

“Perhaps it’s the land they live in,” answered the king. “A gloomier land never was – all of hills, darkly wooded, under skies nearly always gray, with winds moaning drearily down the valleys.” – Phoenix on the Sword

The average Cimmerian is a dour and towering barbarian who destroys civilization then returns to his gloomy homeland only to begin the process again later. Howard's typical Cimmerian is similar to that of the classical scholars, and presents a figure most unlikely to advance the literary arts. But this is where Conan differs from his kin. In The Phoenix on the Sword, Conan is an older man who has conquered on of the greatest nations of the Hyborean Age expressly to free them from tyrannical rule. He conquered to rule, and to liberate an oppressed nation. A far cry from the typical barbarian. By separating Conan from his kin, Howard simultaneously increases the audience's sympathy for the barbarian king while enabling the character to advance a theory of the value of literature.

The Phoenix on the Sword is the tale of a plot to assassinate King Conan, a plot organized my a Machiavellian figure named Ascalante who desires to assume the throne. Ascalante is the product of civilization, but he is the antagonist of the story and so Howard uses his opinions of the Arts as a way to separate him from the audience's sympathy. When he describes a poet who has been brought into his conspiracy he describes the poet in pejorative terms. These terms evolve as the narrative moves from unpublished draft to final published form. Ascalante originally expresses his disdain for Rinaldo (the poet) in a long description:

“Rinaldo – a mad poet full of hare-brained visions and out-worn chivalry. A prime favorite with the people because of his songs which tear out their heart-strings. He is our best bid for popularity.” – Ascalante in Phoenix on the Sword (unpublished First submitted draft)

By the time the story is published the description is changed to the very brief, "“…Rinaldo, the hair-brained minstrel.” [Ascalante in Phoenix on the Sword(published)]. In the published form, Howard leaves out the value of Rinaldo's participation in the plot because it is redundant with information presented later in the story. When Ascalante is asked what value Rinaldo has as a conspirator, Ascalante's response is similar in both the published and unpublished text, but his hatred of Rinaldo is made more clear in the draft than in the published text:

“Alone of us all, Rinaldo has no personal ambition. He sees in Conan a red-handed, rough-footed barbarian who came out of the north to plunder a civilized land. He idealizes the king whom Conan killed to get the crown, remembering only that he occasionally patronized the arts, and forgetting the evils of his reign, and he is making the people forget. Already they openly sing The Lament for the King in which Rinaldo lauds the sainted villain and denounces Conan as ‘that black-hearted savage from the abyss.’ Conan laughs, but the people snarl.” – Ascalante in Phoenix on the Sword (published)

“Rinaldo – bah! I despise the man and admire him at the same time. He is your true idealist. Alone of us all he has no personal ambition. He sees in Conan a red-handed, rough-footed barbarian who came out of the north to plunder a peaceful land. He thinks he sees barbarism triumphing over culture. He already idealizes the king Conan killed, forgetting the rogue’s real nature, remembering only that he occasionally patronized the arts, and forgetting the evils under which the land groaned during his reign, and he is making the people forget. Already they open sing ‘The Lament for the King’ in which Rinaldo lauds the saintly villain, and denounces Conan as ‘that black-hearted savage from the abyss.’ Conan laughs, but at the same time wonders why the people are turning against him.” – Ascalante in Phoenix on the Sword (unpublished First submitted draft)

In both descriptions the poet is shown to be a blind idealist. Rinaldo, it appears, cannot look beyond the Cimmerian stereotypes as presented by Plutarch and Herodotus. Howard doesn't require the reader to have those preconceptions, but for the reader who has read Herodotus and Plutarch the stereotype becomes even clearer. Also by editing down the prose the author, either willingly or at editorial command, displays an amount of trust that his audience can reach the proper conclusion that barbarism typically destroys the valuable within civilization. What is interesting is that while Rinaldo is a conspirator, the poet is an antagonist, he is not a villain. He is a blind a foolish idealist, not acting in his own self interest. Ascalante even goes on to describe Rinaldo's motivations:

“Poets always hate those in power. To them perfection is always just behind the last corner, or beyond the next. They escape the present in dreams of the past and future. Rinaldo is a flaming torch of idealism, rising, as he thinks, to overthrow a tyrant and liberate the people.” – Ascalante in Phoenix on the Sword (published)

“Because he is a poet. Poets always hate those in power. To them perfection is always just behind the last corner or beyond the next. They escape the present in dreams of the past and the future. Rinaldo is a flaming torch of idealism and he sees himself as a hero, a stainless knight – which after all he is! – rising to overthrow the tyrant and liberate the people.” – Ascalante in Phoenix on the Sword (unpublished First submitted draft)

Ascalante specifies what kind of idealists poets are. They seek an imagined perfect society, and will always look for it no matter how good the society they are currently in happens to be. But this is Ascalante, the Machiavellian civilized man, and his opinion about what the value of the poet is. For him the poet is an easily manipulable puppet. What about the barbarian turned king, the protagonist, and oft argued proxy for the author? (It should be noted that many argue that Conan often reflects Howard's own views, this is not an original assertion on my part.)

Conan adores the poet, and understands the criticisms. He is aware that the poet's plays are leading many among the people to despise him, but he too is persuaded of the need for justice. When his chief adviser, Prospero, discusses disdain for Rinaldo, Conan comes to the poet's (and poetry in general) defense. The text is near identical in the published and unpublished format.

“Rinaldo is largely responsible,” answered Prospero, drawing up his sword-belt another notch. “He sings songs that make men mad. Hang him in his jester’s garb to the highest tower in the city. Let him make rhymes for the vultures.”
“No, Prospero, he’s beyond my reach. A great poet is greater than any king. His songs are mightier than my scepter, for he has hear ripped the heart from my breast when he chose to sing for me. I will die and be forgotten, but Rinaldo’s songs will live forever.” – Phoenix on the Sword (unpublished first submitted draft)

“Rinaldo is largely responsible,” answered Prospero, drawing up his sword-belt another notch. “He sings songs that make men mad. Hang him in his jester’s garb to the highest tower in the city. Let him make rimes for the vultures.”
“No, Prospero, he’s beyond my reach. A great poet is greater than any king. His songs are mightier than my scepter; for he has near ripped the heart from my breast when he chose to sing for me. I shall die and be forgotten, but Rinaldo’s songs will live for ever.” – Phoenix on the Sword (published)

For Conan, the atypical Cimmerian, poems and the arts have more power than weapons or royal authority. Not only that, but it is right and just that this is the case. Conan, the barbarian, is the defender of the value of literature, while Ascalante, the civilized man, sees literature as only a tool used to manipulate the foolish. Conan would seek to discuss the past and future, the ideal ones, with the poet, while Ascalante would merely use Rinaldo to destroy what he opposes. Conan's conflict between desiring a free press and swift justice, and the eventual melee that will result because of his favoring of the press, are made clear in the poetic prologue to the final chapter of the narrative.

What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie?
I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky.
The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing;
Rush in and die, dogs – I was a man before I was a king. – The Road of Kings – Phoenix on the Sword (published)

Surprisingly, Conan's love of literature and the arts, and his defense of them, is so deeply rooted that he initially refuses to kill Rinaldo when Rinaldo attacks him. He still believes he can reason with the poet, it is only when he is left no other alternative that he kills the poet (the text is identical in both published and unpublished forms).

“He rushed in, hacking madly, but Conan, recognizing him, shattered his sword with a short terrific chop and with a powerful push of his open hand sent him reeling to the floor.” – Phoenix on the Sword (published)

“He straightened to meet the maddened rush of Rinaldo, who charged in wild and wide open, armed only with a dagger. Conan leaped back, lifting his ax.

‘Rinaldo!’ his voice was strident with desperate urgency. ‘Back! I would not slay you ..’

‘Die, tyrant!’ screamed the mad minstrel, hurling himself headlong on the king. Conan delayed the blow he was loth to deliver, until it was too late. Only when he felt the bite of the steel in his unprotected side did he strike, in a frenzy of blind desperation.

Rinaldo dropped with his skull shattered and Conan reeled back against the wall, blood spurting from between the fingers which gripped his wound.” – Phoenix on the Sword (published)

What is interesting in the narrative is that of all the conspirators, there are twenty in all, none are able to injure Conan with the success of the poet. The poet has both damaged Conan's regime and his body and yet Conan was ever reluctant to, though in the end capable of, slay his greatest enemy.

“’See first to the dagger-wound in my side,’ he bade the court physicians. ‘Rinaldo wrote me a deathly song there, and keen was the stylus.’

‘We should have hanged him long ago,’ gibbered Publius. ‘No good can come of poets..’” – Phoenix on the Sword (published)

What does this tell us of Howard's thoughts regarding the arts? We know that Conan loves them, but we also know how they were used to manipulate the populace and how his own love for them almost cost him his life. Is Howard trying to discuss how Plato's critique of the poets is a good one, while at the same time defending the possible nobility of the poet (as Aristotle does in his Rhetoric)? I think these are questions intentionally posed in the narrative (I know...never guess at intentionality), and make it clear why Conan's first story The Phoenix on the Sword was so compelling to readers when they first read it.

It should be noted that the story was originally submitted as a Kull tale, though I have yet to analyze that draft like I have these two subsequent writings. The Kull version was rejected by Weird Tales and the final (rather than the first) Conan version was the first appearance of what has become a culturally iconic figure.

Ursula K LeGuin, Cory Doctorow, and Copyright

I have been wondering for some time now just how long the SF/Fantasy community will allow themselves to be swindled by Cory Doctorow's attempts to undermine copyright protections for writers. He's been incredibly crafty in his arguments. He has adeptly, and accurately, demonstrated how corporations often claim the copyright instead of the authors who created a product, but he uses this to shift the issue away from "creator ownership" issue into an "us vs. the corporate overlords" argument. Doing so he simultaneously points out a genuine injustice while misdirecting our ire toward the concept of copyright, which in fact protects creators (at least when corporate overlords don't hijack the rights). He has also pointed out that SF/Fantasy fans tend to both download and purchase hard copies of the things they like. In essence, the SF/Fantasy fan steals a peek, then buys the product, thus doing no "real" damage to the right holder.

I have never found Mr. Doctorow's arguments, and he has others, all that convincing. They seem to be overly concerned with "audience" rights and not with creator rights, which are necessary if people want to be able to make a living from this stuff. Certainly, there is some pretty wacky copyright legislation out there (lifetime plus how many years?), but that doesn't mean that the creator of a product doesn't have the right to profit from his or her creation. They should, and do, and current laws protect such rights.

In the past, the majority of the people I've read who seem to have any agreement with me have been corporate shills, and I don't want to just hang out with corporate shills -- or just them and Harlan Ellison (registered trademark) for that matter. So you can imagine my joy at finding that Ursula K. LeGuin also finds Mr. Doctorow's crusade a little too aggressive. It appears that Mr. Doctorow printed "in its entirety, a one-paragraph story that Ms Le Guin sent to the fanzine Ansible." LeGuin took issue and Mr. Doctorow eventually took action and apologized. You can read the original story at LeGuin's website.

LeGuin has accepted Mr. Doctorow's apology, but I'd like you to look at a couple of key phrases in Doctorow's apology which hint that he is also practicing more than a little self-righteous self-justification.

Andrew Burt, the person whom Ms Le Guin chose to communicate the matter to me, is someone with whom I had put in a killfile following an altercation. I delete all emails from him unread, and if he sent me a message, I did not see it.

Unless Andrew Burt (you can read a copy of a letter he wrote Jerry Pournelle here) and Mr. Doctorow engaged in a serious brawl, it seems a bit petty for Mr. Doctorow to have put his emails in a "killfile." I don't believe that Judd Apatow put Mark Brazill in his killfile, even after being told to "Get cancer." But I don't know the nature of the "altercation," I just know that Mr. Doctorow has used a word which has some heavy implications. Though given his frequent use of rhetorical techniques which might make Gorgias blush, I think it might be little more than a heated email/comment section/message board flame war.

In fact, it seems that Burt's major sin (according to the Doctorow piece) is that Burt believes in copyright protection, "Burt is the Science Fiction Writers of America VP who had previously sent a fraudulent takedown notice that resulted in my novel being removed from an Internet document server." So Burt tries to protect Doctorow's copyright, making an error that forces a takedown notice, something LeGuin describes as "An overworked committee mistakenly identified a few works, among many, as infringing copyright; the mistakes were promptly admitted and redressed, with apologies." That appears to be our "altercation." Which makes me think that Mr. Doctorow is a bit like Mark Brazill in all of this, even his apology seems snide and canned. This is implied by his assertion that, "My understanding is that she is unsatisfied and remains upset with me." When LeGuin is on the record as writing, "It may be a bit clouded with arguments and self-justification, but apologising is hard, and apologies are rare and valuable. I accept his in all good faith." Who seems to be the one most in need of justification here?

As for me, I agree with LeGuin's hope that, "In my view, the best thing that could come out of my brush with the Doctorow Doctrine would be this: the honorable reinstatement of the SFWA e-piracy committee, with an expression of appreciation from SFWA officers and members of the honest and effective work they have done for us for so long."

Does DEXTER IN THE DARK Spell Lights Out for the Franchise?

Dexter is back -- or most of him is back—in DEXTER IN THE DARK: A Novel(those of you who support independent bookstores can buy it at Mysterious Galaxy), Jeff Lindsay’s latest installment detailing the brutal exploits of his charmingly witty and only half-heartless serial killer, preying and slaying by his uniquely strict if lethal Harry Code of Conduct. This newest book finds Dexter in crisis – not of conscience, of course. He doesn’t have one. But in a crisis of identity, for Dexter’s mysterious inner fiend -- that giddy playmate that guides his death-dealing and leaves him elated after bouts of marvelous moonlit mayhem –- Dexter’s Dark Passenger is absent without leave.

As if prepping for a wedding and fatherhood aren’t enough to put Dexter off his game, a peculiar crime scene with macabre theological overtones sends Dexter’s Dark Passenger scurrying away, with troubling results for Dexter and his readers. Being out of communion dulls Dexter’s normally razor instincts, humor, and murderous talents when he, and we, need them most. Once again, he attracts the attention of a very dangerous intelligence, this time with a taste for children, but don’t expect the usual combination of chase, wit, twist, and surprise. Dexter is not only in the dark, he’s down right depressed. Jeff Lindsay takes a daring departure from the optimistic mayhem of America’s favorite avenging monster, but it’s a sad, fumbling new path.

Unlike DARKLY DREAMING DEXTER(at Mysterious Galaxy) and DEARLY DEVOTED DEXTER (at Mysterious Galaxy), DEXTER IN THE DARK leaves the complex realm of psychological vagary and broken psyches to dabble in something entirely outside Dexter’s universe: theology. Sans Dark Passenger, Dexter is befuddled, frustrated, and at risk of becoming normal, with all the emotions and vulnerabilities of any normal person, yet his world turns suddenly (and unjustifiably, despite ample narrative exposition) supernatural. Just when Dexter has no powers (not insight, not humor, and the boy can’t even seem to kill), Miami is overrun with them. The sum effect is a kind of amorphous melancholy, both for Dexter and his dear readers. Little help comes from the other characters made so vibrant in previous pages – the few times Dexter isn’t shuffling around in his own empty head, he’s avoiding conversations or being himself avoided. If you crave the slay-and-play criminology twice before scribed so ingeniously by Jeff Lindsay’s pen, brace yourself for page after unfunny, derivative, ill-conceived, if-it-had-to-be-supernatural-why-couldn’t-it-be-Lovecraftian-good page.

Spoiled until now navigating two books of vicious, psychotic violence on the shoulders of a fantastically entertaining monster, this clumsy foray into Anne Rice/DaVinci Code-esque old-god theology and conspiracy is by comparison plodding, simplistic, and dull. Lindsay abandons his established finesse of raising questions without answers, of suggestion and nuance, of abrasive yet oddly loveable and infinitely entertaining characters, and instead offers an obtuse, paint-by-numbers explanation for evil which abdicates Dexter from all moral responsibility for who and what he is, for his adherence to or abandonment of the Harry Code, and ultimately advocates an incoherent pseudo-loyalty to controlled evil. If Harry had read this book, he would have killed Dexter on sight. I found myself by the end rooting for the kids to get run over, shot, or drowned. Poor Rita.

For those who enjoy the Cthulhu mythos or tales with supernatural explanations, DEXTER IN THE DARK might be a fun romp, but this reader prays, to whatever Dark Gods will listen, that Lindsay returns to the world he tells so well –- Dexter’s Miami: wickedly funny, refreshingly mortal, splendidly violent, and mildly-sociopathic.

A History of Pulp Role Playing Games Part 1: The Dawn of Roleplaying Games

Those who wonder how old the connection between "The Pulps" and Roleplaying Games is need look no further than the introduction to the original (three book) Dungeons and Dragons boxed set. In this introduction, Gary Gygax describes who might be interested in playing his new creation:

These rules are strictly fantasy. Those wargamers who lack imagination, those who don't care for Burroughs' Martian adventures where John Carter is groping
through black pits, who feel no thrill upon reading Howard's Conan saga, who do
not enjoy the de Camp & Pratt fantasies or Fritz Leiber's Fafhrd and the Gray
Mouser pitting their swords against evil sorceries will not be likely to find
DUNGEONS and DRAGONS to their taste.

The introduction is filled with names near and dear to the pulp aficionado. Edgar Rice Burrough's character John Carter first appeared in the February through July issues of The All-Story in 1912. TSR also designed an early miniatures wargame on the adventures of John Carter, it was called Warriors of Mars.



Robert E. Howard's famous barbarian Conan debuted at the height of his power in Weird Tales December 1932 issue in "The Phoenix on the Sword," a rewrite of a rejected Kull story titled "By This Axe I Rule." In the tale, Conan is already a mature man and king of Aquilonia and deals swift justice to a band of would be assassins. If you look carefully at the cover of the issue, you will notice that the advertised story, "Buccaneers of Venus," is a John Carter pastiche by Otis Adelbert Kline. Kline eventually became Howard's literary agent. As a gamer, I can't help but speculate that the amphibious antagonist on the cover is an inspiration behind the Kuo-Toa in the D&D game (H.P. Lovecraft's Deep Ones are another obvious influence.)



L. Sprague deCamp and Fletcher Pratt's everyman hero psychologist/enchanter Harold Shea wandered into his first fantastic landscape in the May 1940 issue of Unknown.



To be fair, most fantasy of the pre-Tolkien era was published in the pulps and as influential as these early fantasy tales were to the Dungeons and Dragons game (and are to the current D&D Eberron setting), they are not what most people mean when they are referring to "Pulp Roleplaying Games." Which is a shame since the pulps were filled with dynamic, original, and action packed tales that many modern Game Masters should look to for inspiration. Not every adventure need be a macguffin quest inspired by Tolkien's Lord of the Rings.

The lack of familiarity with, and I mean familiarity with and not awareness of, the underlying pulp inspirations that influenced the creation of role playing games is one of the largest failings of some of today's game designers. When I read Jesse Decker and David Noonan's discussion regarding why modern Dungeons and Dragons avoids explicit attempts at humor in its rulebooks, I near wept.

At no time was there a discussion about why the early rulebooks had humor in them, as opposed to the central reason they gave why there isn't humor any longer. They write, "In short, we worry that it isn't necessarily part of the shared D&D experience, and we don't want to mess up the flow of the game at the table." And in writing that one sentence, they ignore one of the major literary influences on the development of the Dungeons and Dragons game, the stories of Harold Shea by deCamp and Pratt. How can stories, and the tone they inspired, be not "necessarily part of the shared D&D experience?" Without these stories, you might not even have the game itself, particularly considering the deCamp/Pratt stories.

I am not saying this because I believe Gary Gygax to have been intimately familiar with Fletcher Pratt's Naval War Game, though he may have been. I am saying this because of two things. First, the underlying conceit of the Harold Shea stories themselves was probably inspirational to the creation of the "proto role playing game." Second, the humor that continually reared its head in early D&D books was the same kind of humor one found in the deCamp/Pratt stories.

To fully understand the above statement, you must understand the central conceit of the Harold Shea stories. Essentially, the central conceit is that Harold Shea (and his mentor) are able to travel to other dimensions -- many of which contain magic -- if they can alter their perceptions through the analysis of particular equations and logical proofs. When Harold Shea studies his first proof, which sends him to Ragnarök, a gamer can easily see the parallel between Shea looking at the pages upon pages of logic problems and their own experience looking at pages upon pages of rules. When roleplayers study the rules of a game, it is so they can fluidly experience the milieu the game is offering. This is exactly what Shea does in the stories. It should be noted that J. Eric Holmes, the editor of the first Dungeons and Dragons Basic Set, wrote in his book Fantasy Roleplaying Games (Hippocrene Books, 1981 pp. 209-210):

"Years before Dungeons and Dragons was invented, L. Sprague de Camp wrote a story called "Solomon's Stone," published in 1942 in the magazine Unknown Worlds...The story was a fantasy in which the hero exchanges personalities with his alter-ego in the astral world. Here he discovers that the astral self of each living person on earth is the self he imagines or fantasies himself to be in his most private dreams...I am always reminded of "Solomon's Stone," though, when I see the bizarre and wonderful characters created by my friends for the game."

Holmes, who was an adapter and not a creator of the rules, saw the connection between one of de Camp's stories and the underlying concept of role playing games. It isn't hard to imagine Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson being inspired by a character who even more explicitly used a "rules set" to experience fantasy adventure.

Decker and Noonan are fine designers, and they have developed some of my favorite products, but they seem to have lost the connection between the pulps and the game they are working on. Dungeons and Dragons is the scion of pulp literature and we do the game a disservice when we don't acknowledge this fact. And we do the players of the game a disservice when we don't point them in the direction of the things that inspired their hobby. Early editions of the game included bibliographies of inspirational materials, many other roleplaying games still do, but the three core books of the Dungeons and Dragons game lack such references (the Eberron sourcebook does contain some). Decker and Noonan may be aware that roleplaying was influenced by pulps, but they aren't familiar with what those pulps had to offer and it shows in their reticence to include humor in the D&D experience.

Listen to the Geekerati Episode on Popular Medievalism

Last night we had a wonderful chat with Professor Richard Scott Nokes of Troy University about Popular Medievalism. We talked about what it is and where it is, and it's everywhere. We also talked about the connection between playing Dungeons and Dragons and studying Medieval History, and we got a little hint that the reason we call the Middle Ages the Dark Ages is due to bad press from certain people during the Renaissance.

We discussed a lot of different topics, but we spent a great deal of time discussing some of our favorite Popular Medieval movies. Some of the movies we mentioned were: Excalibur, The Lion in Winter, A Knight's Tale, Henry V, The Last Valley, The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, The Sword and the Sorcerer, Krull, and Ladyhawke.

What are some of your favorite Popular Medieval films? Books? Comics? Television Shows?

Listen to the episode and let us know.

Some Thoughts Before We Return to Posts About Popular Culture

When I put up my post regarding my mom's death, it is a very personal action in more ways than one. It is personal in that I am revealing a little bit of my life to the world, but it is also personal in that I am only writing about how I feel (or felt) about the event. In a way, this is very unfair to a number of people that I care deeply about who were also affected by my mom's death.

I am not writing about how they felt, or even about how we dealt with the situation together. I am writing just from my perspective. But I am do this because it is the only point of view I really have. I have no real way of knowing what these other people are experiencing, nor what they experienced, because I have had different experiences. My dad knew my mom years before I did, and I knew her for years before my sister did. Each of us, in a very real way, came to know a very different woman. That said, I would like to try to share what I think some of those differences are.

I am 9 years 8 month and 8 days older than my sister Krista. I was born on "Elvis' Birthday" and she was born on the anniversary of his death, January 8th and August 16th for those of you wondering. Which means that I have 9-plus years of memories about my mom that Krista will never have. It also means, because like many 20-somethings I was very independent of my family for a time, that Krista has some memories that I will never have. And a lot of the memories that my sister has are of my mom's struggle with, and loss to, addiction.

I have no personal experience of what it is like to live in the same apartment as a heroin addict, for which I am grateful. Moreover, I have no experience of what it is like to be a teenager living in the same apartment as a heroin addict. In the grand scheme of life, it is probably one of the last things I would ever want to experience. But my sister did just that, the combination of love and frustration must have been near unbearable. I don't know how I would have dealt with the situation, I hope I would do alright. My sister did much better than I imagine the average person in her circumstances would have.

It is one of the many things I admire about my sister, that she was able to survive that situation. I actually don't think my sister understands how much I admire her period, let alone for her strength in this situation. I think she sometimes thinks that I look down on her for not making some of the same choice that I have made, but that isn't true at all. Being almost 10 years older than my sister meant that I spent a lot of time babysitting her, taking her to the park, or even to concerts I wouldn't have otherwise attended. I changed her diapers on many occasions and must seem, in some way, to be a bit of a parental figure to her and, given my stodginess and geekdom, not even the "cool" parent. So I can see why my opinion is important to her, and how my own life experiences might make her think that I believe the choices I made are the only way to happiness. But I don't believe that at all.

In fact, if people knew a formula to happiness, there wouldn't be philosophy and a lot of life would be a lot easier.

Nine Years Ago Today.

Those of you who have been long time readers will have to forgive me for a "repeat" post, but today is a day that on an annual basis I don't feel like posting about popular culture. Today is the ninth anniversary of my mother's death, and I always feel a need to share on this day. I thought about writing something entirely original, but then I reread what I wrote in 2004 and it captures most of what I want to say. So instead of trying to reinvent the wheel, I will post last year's entry.

This is a picture of my mom in 1971, that blob on her lap is me.

A Day to Listen to the Velvet Underground

I am only 34 years old, but today marks the end of my first seven years without a mom. That is an awkward sentence, but it best captures my sentiments. I am not an orphan, I still have a father. In fact, he should be receiving his Halloween card shortly. Yet a part of me is still very much missing, a large part. October 7th, 1998...10,7,98...those numbers loom large and ominous in my heart and this is the first year I am not completely overwhelmed by them.

My wife and I have intimate conversations often, it is one of the joys of marriage, and she and I were discussing death the other day. Her grandmother had just died at the age of 92. My wife explained it this way, "When someone dies, the world feels a little less complete. Bird songs aren't as joyful, and sunrises are slightly less beautiful." Displaying, as she often does, the magnificence of unedited, awkward, and spontaneous verbal poetry. She was also correct. C.S. Lewis opens his book A Grief Observed with another observation about death:

No one ever told me that grief felt so like fear. I am not afraid, but the sensation is like being afraid. The same fluttering in the stomach, the same restlessness, the yawning. I keep on swallowing.

I still feel this way, not everyday...today.

There are two things that are still difficult for me to do seven years after my mom died when I was 27 (she was 46).

I have a hard time remembering truly happy moments with her...on command. Happy moments enter my consciousness at random moments and seldom on the anniversary of her death. Glimpses of her nymph-like smile...brief auditory illusions of her laughter enter my mind. But the majority of my memories are neither happy nor sad, they are the memories of everyday activities, evening dinners and the question which ever looms over the head of a teenager, "Have you finished your homework?" I remember watching videotapes with her on many occassions, though none as awkward as the time we watched The Hunger, just the two of us and an erotic vampire film. I remember feeling both uncomfortable being aroused by the film, in my mom's presence, while at the same time finding the situation hilarious. This moment just came to mind. There are many more like it, I just can't remember them on demand. In all honesty, I remember my mom as a happy person, a person who added joy to the world. Which is why I have my other difficulty.

I can't understand my mom's addiction, and eventual death due to how it ravaged her body, to heroin. I try, by reading/watching/listening to and about other addicts. I know the narrative of my mom's addictive cycle, I can see each step of her hopeless journey. That's not what I can't understand. I know the things that led to her addiction. What I can't understand is the overwhelming power of it, how addiction stole my mom from me...day by day. Oddly, some really shallow things help. They are a poor substitute for true knowledge, and seem trite when I think hard on them, but they help. These things include the music of the Velvet Underground (in particular, you guessed it, Heroin) and Iggy Pop, the films Permanent Midnight (which I saw just after her death) and Trainspotting, the book and film versions of Razor's Edge, and the writings of C.S. Lewis among other things.

I am the only member of my immediate family I know of who attends church. I was raised secularly. Strange as it sounds my mom found comfort, though she was baffled by it, in my belief. She once asked if I believed, expecting me (the first college student in my family) to laugh at the absurdity of the question. I told her I did and her response lingers with me to this day, "Really?" Her eyes looked at me...proud, confused, unbelieving, yet hopeful. I never was able to tell her that hope was what faith was all about ("Faith is the realization of what is hoped for and evidence of things not seen" Hebrews 11:1). It isn't about "knowledge," little of life is about actual knowledge. This is why Socrates asked us to know ourselves, that is a difficult enough task. Let alone the ability to acquire actual knowledge of something else.

I was notified of my mom's death by answering machine. I was in classes all day and didn't have a cell phone. A series of messages of an ever-worsening condition. Siezures...followed by emergency medical action, my wife and I later read the medical records to piece together a timeline, to see if there was an heroic effort to save my mom. There was. It is not the best way to be notified of death, answering machine, I think it is the worst. I also wish that my mom had been buried not cremated, I would have liked to have had the chance to speak, to say my own words. Instead, I will share the two poems I think best capture the way I feel. One is gender confused (for my situation not its own) and the other is written from an older generation to a younger one, but they will have to do. In addition I would like to add a part of Philip K. Dick's author's note from A Scanner Darkly.

The first poem is by W.H. Auden (and yes it's the poem from Four Weddings and a Funeral but that is such a lovely scene.

Stop all the clocks, cut off the telephone,
Prevent the dog from barking with a juicy bone,
Silence the pianos and with muffled drum
Bring out the coffin, let the mourners come.

Let aeroplanes circle moaning overhead
Scribbling on the sky the message He Is Dead,
Put crepe bows round the white necks of the public doves,
Let the traffic policemen wear black cotton gloves.

He was my North, my South, my East and West,
My working week and my Sunday rest,
My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
I thought that love would last for ever: I was wrong.

The stars are not wanted now: put out every one;
Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
Pour away the ocean and sweep up the wood.
For nothing now can ever come to any good.

The second poem is by Wordsworth:

SURPRISED by joy--impatient as the Wind
I turned to share the transport--Oh! with whom
But Thee, deep buried in the silent tomb,
That spot which no vicissitude can find?
Love, faithful love, recalled thee to my mind--
But how could I forget thee? Through what power,
Even for the least division of an hour,
Have I been so beguiled as to be blind
To my most grievous loss?--That thought's return
Was the worst pang that sorrow ever bore,
Save one, one only, when I stood forlorn,
Knowing my heart's best treasure was no more;
That neither present time, nor years unborn
Could to my sight that heavenly face restore.

Wordsworth wrote Suprised by Joy (C.S. Lewis titled one of his autobiographies after this poem), for his daughter Catherine who had died at the age of four. This poem masterfully captures the grief I feel over the loss of my mom. Everytime I have wonderful event in my life, I want to call her and share the news. That can never happen and it brings the event of her death immediately to mind and my sorrow and feeling of loss are renewed. Every time...without fail. My mom missed my graduation, my wife's master's, my acceptance to graduate school, my wife completing her MFA in film at USC. She will not be there to see her first grandchild, or any of the joy that her grandchildren will bring into the world.

As I stated before, I have continually looked to fiction and biographical narrative to understand my mom's addiction and that is why I am including the following by Philip K. Dick.

This has been a novel about some people who were punished entirely too much for what they did. They wanted to have a good time, but they were like children playing in the street; they could see one another of them being killed --run over, maimed, destroyed -- but they continued to play anyhow...

Drug misuse is not a disease, it is a decision, like the decision to step out in front of a moving care. You would call that not a disease but an error in judgement. When a bunch of people begin to do it, it is a social error, a life-style. In this particular life-style the motto is "Be happy now because tomorrow you are dying," but the dying begins almost at once, and the happiness is a memory..."Take the cash and let the credit go," as Villon said in 1460. But that is a mistake ifthe cash is a penny and the credit is a whole lifetime...

If there was any "sin" t was that these people wanted to keep on having a good time forever, and were punished for that, but, as I say, I feel that, if so, the punishment was far to great...

When my mom first told me of her addiction to heroin she expected me to be angry. A lot of my family was, I think the thought of my mother using heroin was too alien to them to even imagine. I think they viewed her use as somehow a failure on their part. I didn't, I only wanted to know if she was okay. By which I meant was she okay at the time she told me. My mom thought that heroin could make life more pleasant, for her it wasn't a selfish desire for more fun than anyone else was having, because she felt empty and sad on a regular basis. Heroin made her feel happy, like she could live life. But in making her think she could live life, heroin took life from her.

I don't "forgive" my mom for dying, I have never thought there was anything to forgive. I miss my mom and wish she were here. I love her and knowing that makes the missing part not so bad, because (as Lewis might say) the pain we feel now is a part of the love we have.

Biplanes Battle Brilliantly!

I just watched the Red Baron trailer below, and boy am I excited.

See what I mean?

I have been waiting for a WWI pilot film that combines exciting aerial combat with a decent narrative. I enjoyed The Blue Max when I was younger, but I have always wanted more. I watched Flyboys last year and had my desire for dog fights satisfied (the flight scenes were awesome!), but the story was so cliché as to be staid. But did I say that the flight scenes were awesome? 'Cause they were.

It had a Zeppelin for goodness sake!

Casanegra and "The Jungle"

Last night I began reading Casanegra by Blair Underwood (with Tananarive Due and Steven Barnes), in preparation for an event at the Glendora Library this weekend. I have been a fan of Blair Underwood as an actor, and Steven Barnes as a writer, for some time, which is why I have picked up a book that is outside my routine.

If my reading patterns were hiking trails, the genre hiking trail containing Casanegrafor would be fairly overgrown from lack of passage. I don't read a lot of "straight" mystery stories. When I do read a mystery it tends to fall into one of three categories. They are either extraordinarily noir like a James Ellroy novel, science fiction/fantasy related like Steven Brust's Jhereg books, or "literary" like The Moonstone. Thankfully this book falls into the first category (noir) and takes place in one of my favorite noir cities, Los Angeles.

Those of you who listen to my online radio show probably know that when I read or watch something that takes place in Los Angeles, I really want it feel like it takes place in the city where I live. I don't like things that make Los Angeles look too glitzy, or that overlook the dark sides of the city. I also don't like things that make the darker elements of the city look like a post-apocalyptic wasteland. Neither is true. Los Angeles is a wonderfully complex urban environment that has a lot to offer a storyteller and a reader/viewer. I have come to love this city and its neighbors, even though (or likely because) my first five years in Los Angeles were spent in the Baldwin Village section of the Crenshaw district. I often describe Los Angeles as a geode. It looks rough on the outside, but when you crack it open you find some pretty wonderful stuff.

I am only a third of the way through Casanegra, but I can already tell that it does in fact take place in the "city I live in." But I did encounter one little bump along the way, and it happened very early. The book describes one of the characters in the following way, [she] "had more brokers on her speed-dial than a girl from the Baldwin Hills "Jungle" had any right to fantasize about." I had to do a quick double take. From my understanding, "Baldwin Hills" is the more affluent area just West of La Brea, whereas Baldwin Village, "The Jungle," is the area East of La Brea is the thoroughly gang dominated neighborhood where I used to live.

If you click on the map below you will be directed to a larger image where you can see three arrows. The green arrow is the intersection of Hillcrest and Martin Luther King Jr. which, according to Wikipedia, marks the center of "the Jungle." You can also see La Brea, as a dividing line, on the far west of the map.
Baldwin Village was not very far from Culver City, where my wife and I went to mass, but the environments were night and day. I still believe that the inner city grocery stores are given lower quality produce and dairy products.

The purple arrow along Rodeo Road is the location of my old apartment, the track across the street is Dorsey High School.

The red arrow marks the location where the body of the Black Dahlia was discovered, it is about two blocks away from the Krispy Kreme on Crenshaw across the street from the Baldwin Hills Crenshaw Plaza Mall.



It was after checking the map and reading up on what "exactly" is considered The Jungle that I overcame my little speed bump. I think it would be fair to say that since the "Baldwin Hills" mall is in the Jungle that one might imagine someone referring to the area as Baldwin Hills instead of Baldwin Village. So I was able to jump back into the book and continue my walk along the path. I do have some stories regarding my experience living in the area, but most of those will have to wait for another time. Needless to say, watching Remember the Titans early on a Wednesday afternoon at the Magic Johnson theaters is not on the list of wise choices I have made, but it was a choice I was glad to have made.

Impoverished Ninjas Resort to Robbing Convenience Store

And here I thought with Kane Kosugi (son of legendary ninja Sho Kosugi, and star of the Ninja Warrior reality show) starring in War that ninjas were doing better than this financially.

Difference Between Science Fiction and Fantasy

Janice Harayda, over at One-Minute Book Reviews posted (and linked) some comments Michael Crichton made three decades ago with regard to the state of science-fiction and fantasy literature. To quote:

“As a category, the borders of science fiction have always been poorly defined, and they are getting worse. The old distinction between science fiction and fantasy – that science fiction went from the known to the probable, and fantasy dealt with the impossible – is now wholly ignored. The new writing is heavily and unabashedly fantastical.

“The breakdown is also seen in the authors themselves, who now cross the border, back and forth, with impunity. At one time this was dangerous and heretical; the only person who could consistently get away with it was Ray Bradbury. Science fiction addicts politely looked the other way when he did books such as Dandelion Wine and the screenplay for John Huston’s Moby Dick. It was assumed he needed the money.”

Michael Crichton “Slaughterhouse Five” in The Critic As Artist: Essays on Books 1920–1970 With Some Preliminary Ruminations by H.L. Mencken (Liveright, 1972), edited by Gilbert A. Harrison

It's interesting to me that Crichton, thirty-five years ago, is making a complaint that still is voiced in the speculative fiction community to this day. Before commenting about whether his assertion that there exists a distinction between fantasy and science fiction is prima facie true, I think it is important to examine the definition of each he offers.

According to Michael Crichton useful definitions for fantasy and science fiction are:

SCIENCE FICTION -- fictional narratives about what is known or probable according to our current understanding of physics, history, etc.

FANTASY -- fictional narratives dealing with the impossible.

It seems to me that these definitions are simultaneously too narrow and too broad. His definition of science fiction, as presented in the quote above and my (possibly ill-conceived) restructuring of it, might lead itself to include a great deal of literary fiction I might not consider to be science fiction. This is even true if I add the word "speculative" prior to the word fiction, which may make for a more robust definition. I can imagine a whole array of speculative fiction about the known that might not be science fiction, though I think to do so I have to ignore an underlying a priori "common sense" understanding of science fiction. Examples of such stories might include Ludlum spy novels or Kathy Reich's forensic anthropology murder mysteries.

Similarly, the definition is too narrow because it leaves no room for the truly speculative story, the story which gets us to question our current understanding of science and inspires younger readers to question and refine that understanding later in life. An Example of this would include the Foundation Series. Think about it. Have we developed faster than light travel, psionics, "Psychohistory," or "PSYCHOLOGY?" Those of you who are familiar with the stories will know that "PSYCHOLOGY" is very different from modern Psychology. All of those things are not only not possible, but most are likely to be improbable.

One could make similar complaints regarding the Crichton definition of fantasy, which includes an underlying assumption that you and he agree regarding what is impossible. Having read Travels, I wonder at how narrow "the possible" is in Crichton's mind.

All of this leads me to what I think is the problem with rigid distinctions, as opposed to "marketing" distinctions, when it comes to defining boundaries for literary genres which deal with the imagined or "speculated." I won't be so bold as to offer definitions that I think distinguish the two, but I will say that I believe that science fiction is a sub-genre of fantasy. This largely stems from my belief that both deal, at some level, with the imagined. Thus the "weird tale" and "horror" story, among others, also fall into sub-genre of fantasy. Needless to say, my understanding of fantasy is extraordinarily broad, possibly too broad. But I don't think so. I think that the fantastic is where the human mind creates some of the most interesting stories. I also think that the science in some science fiction is so far beyond our current ken that it is analogous to magic. Hmm...isn't that Clarke's third law?

My opinion in this regard is heavily shaped by what I read and enjoy. Looking at the origins of science fiction, one finds it's publishing history inexorably merged with the publishing history of fantasy. I have a great love of the pulps and this leaves me wondering where various characters/stories I enjoy would be placed. Is John Carter of Mars a science fiction or fantasy character? What about Carson Napier who has similar adventures, but with a more scientific origin? What about the world of the "Moon Maid" which was in origin an allegory discussing the world under Bolshevik rule? Where does Starship Troopers fall? (Giant Bugs? Wouldn't the exoskeleton's collape?) John Scalzi's Old Man's War? (Sadly not on the shelf of my local B&N, likely one reason why I shop at the Mystery and Imagination bookstore.) HP Lovecraft's stories of "alien terror?"

Stories that blur the distinction between fantasy and science fiction are as old as the genre themselves, smartly Crichton notes this, so is it useful to have a distinction?

I think there is, but I don't know exactly where to place that distinction except to say that science fiction stories attempt a scientific (even if it is an imaginarily scientific) description of the fantastic things they describe. But where does that leave the Harold Shea stories? D'oh.

What are your thoughts on the subject?

Zombies. The real threat to American safety.

Hat tip to Chris Roberson.

While the Rest of the World "Talks Like a Pirate"

I'm going to SLAM EVIL like the Phantom!

Spawned from the inventive mind of Lee Falk in February 1936, (that's two years before Superman for those of you counting), the "Ghost Who Walks" and his dog Devil became the scourge of pirates everywhere.

I am officially renaming International Talk Like a Pirate Day to the more heroic International Act Like the Phantom Day. And the next time some one says to me, "show me yer booty ye swab," I'm going to whip out my twin .45s and gun em down in the street.

The Wheel of Time Turns: RIP Robert Jordan

As I was doing my daily internet routine yesterday, I came across some sad news at SF Signal. James Oliver Rigney, Jr., known by most as Fantasy author Robert Jordan, died yesterday of complications from primary amyloidosis with cardiomyopathy. For his fans, this news is devastating enough, but I think this also ranks as a major blow to Fantasy fiction.

In defending that statement let me say, that while I have read all of the published "Wheel of Time" books, I have never been a devoted fan of "Robert Jordan's" fantasy tales. I have been in many conversation with others who were critical of the series and usually agreed with their criticisms that the series was "derivative" and did little that is new in speculative fiction. I have also been frustrated by the long wait between novels and the apparent attempt by the author to leave no narrative strand resolved. Each book added new complications while rarely resolving the complications of prior books and each book was so convoluted that I often had to reread the entire series when a new book came out just to know what was going on in the most recent book.

Those words above don't seem to be those that would be written by someone who believes that the loss of Rigney, at a relatively young age I might add, is a tragic loss to the Fantasy genre. But that is exactly how I feel.

Though I primarily read the books so that I could discuss them with friends who were more devoted, and enthusiastic, fans than I, I read them and as I did so I noticed something magical about the works.

What's this? Magic in something I found flawed? Yes, magical.

These were books which were wonderful introductions, surveys if you will, to the entirety of speculative fiction. By using the most common trope, the young boy on a quest, as the foundation of the story and adding elements from across speculative fiction, Rigney created a series that was the perfect gateway series into the hobby. His series was the perfect "second series" to recommend to potential Fantasy fans who wanted to know what to read when they were done with Lord of the Rings. Yes, his "world" borrowed liberally from the tropes established in that canonical series, but he also introduced tropes from other sf/fantasy tales. Do you want a series that makes Dune less daunting to the new reader? Explain to them how the Bene Gesserit are similar to the Aes Sedai and that Paul Atreides is similar to Rand al'Thor, heck there are even devoted bedouin tribe awaiting the arrival of a messianic figure. "Wheel of Time" borrowed from Dune as well as The Lord of the Rings. The list doesn't stop there. It could include Milton's Paradise Lost, the whole King Arthur ouevre, Susan Cooper, Ursula LeGuin. Name an author of speculative fiction, and Rigney probably melded some of their concepts into his fiction.

This was intentional. The "Wheel of Time" was supposed to be a "collective myth" which mirrored all other possible myths. In writing this series Rigney created a sampler of the fantasy and science fiction genres. If you could read and enjoy "The Wheel of Time," you would most certainly enjoy the fiction of other, arguably more proficient, writers of speculative fiction.

"Robert Jordan" was a gift to the fantasy field. He was a regularly best selling author whose works pointed to other works by which one could expand their appreciation of speculative fiction. At least he was when I talked with my friends. I have never been one to criticize my friend's tastes in fantasy, only to find what they enjoy and to use those as springboards for new adventures. In conversations with my friends who are fans of "Jordan," I found near limitless opportunity to recommend further readings. Friends who read "Jordan" on a lark, because he was a best selling author, became long time fans of sf/f after discussing the novels with me.

That is a great gift to the genre and one which I am sad to see go. This leaves two authors who have left unfinished fantasy sagas in the past year. David Gemmell passed away before he could finish his exciting retelling of the Trojan War, and now it appears that "Robert Jordan" has passed away before finishing his epic saga.

You can discuss your thoughts regarding this and other topics with me on my radio show geekerati tonight at 7pm pacific.

My Childhood Dreams are Coming True. A Tron Sequel is in the Works.

Every now and then we here at Cinerati get an exclusive interview. After reading in the Hollywood Reporter that a sequel to Tron was in the works, I rushed to my Rolodex and pulled up the name of someone with an intimate connection with the project.

I'd like all of you to welcome our guest today. Our good friend Bit will be answering our questions regarding the new Tron film.

Hi Bit, are you excited about the new "Tron" sequel being produced by Sean Bailey and Steven Lisberger?


YES

Do you know who will be directing the movie?


YES

Can you tell us the name of the person who will be directing the movie?


NO

Do you really know who will direct the movie?


YES, YES, YES, YES!

But you still can't tell us his name?


NO

Why not?



Hmm...oh, that's right you can only answer yes or no questions, correct?


YES

That being the case, I don't want to try and wrangle too much information out of you. I guess those who want to know more ought to just read Borys Kit's article over at the Hollywood Reporter right?


YES, YES, YES, YES!

After you all read the article. If you want to talk about it, you can join us over at Geekerati on Monday night at 7pm Pacific.

Shoot 'Em Up: Can we decide if this is an action comedy or an ironic complaint please?

I watch a lot of movies, which means I watch some good movies and a lot of bad movies. The two worst movies I have seen this year are Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter (on the small screen) and Shoot 'Em Up (on the big screen). The fact that I watched Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter in the first place should be a hint that I am not exactly a snob when it comes to the movies I watch and love. Hawk the Slayer is one of my all time favorite films after all. But my love of cheesy films doesn't change the fact that not only is Shoot 'Em Up not a good movie, it isn't even a fun movie.

Let me give you a quick rundown of the plot.

BEGIN SYNOPSIS --The film opens with LONE WOLF, not the character's name but the character's type (Clive Owen), sitting at a bus bench waiting for public transit. Suddenly, a pregnant woman, quickly followed by a horde of thugs, runs by LONE WOLF. LONE WOLF follows, helps lady give birth to CUB (by shooting the umbilical cord with a gun no less), and enters into a 3-Day (90 minutes our time) gunfight while trying to protect CUB from the DAIMYO's assassin (Paul Giamatti) and his legion of underlings. While protecting CUB, LONE WOLF recruits LACTATING PROSTITUTE to feed CUB (CUB's mother dies early on in the continual gunfight) while the 90 minute gunfight ensues. The gunfight goes from one level of extreme action to another, raising the stakes as far as it can (sometimes to absurd levels), but finally reaching a plateau and arguably a decline after a parachuting gun battle where the thugs become a thunderstorm's worth of "corpse-drops." END SYNOPSIS

So far, the film sounds like it could be a great amount of mindless fun inspired by every action film we have ever seen. Everything from Hard Boiled to The Spy Who Loved Me are referenced in the action sequences (there's even a nod to Snakes on a Plane), which brings me to my criticism. This film cannot decide whether it is a rip roaring action comedy like Kung Fu Hustle, which plays with tropes, or if it is Hot Shots: Part Deux. The film stumbles between wonderful action and bizarre spoof.

Whether it is the name of the lactating prostitute, DQ -- you know for Dairy Queen, or the protagonists absurd addiction to carrots and Bugs Bunny quotation, the film continually inserts jokes which detract from the action narrative rather than add to it. The director can't even decide whether he is attempting to give us a visual argument why Clive Owen should have been James Bond or whether he is making fun of the Bond character (the opening gunfight has a Walther reference).

Even the action sequences, which are the best part of the film, finally reach a point of saturation. At some point the director ran out of ideas regarding how to out do the action in the previous scene. From my point of view, that would be about the time of the "corpsedrops" falling on my head scene. The parachuting gunfight is brilliant, but what follows seems dull in comparison. The film lacks a sense of pace and when the action stops, which doesn't include the sex scene during which the gunfight continues, it is to insert some really bizarre imagery. The highest example being when Paul Giamatti milks the breast of the dead pregnant woman. Another being the fact that the cause of the gunfight is due to the DAIMYO needing the baby for a marrow transplant and of his entire "baby factory" only one came out compatible.

If Shoot 'Em Up is an homage to John Woo, then it is an homage to the "Say You're Impotent" scene at the end of Hard Boiled which forgets that the best part of that film was the tension regarding the undercover cop and whether or not he will survive.

I like Clive Owen and Paul Giamatti and I think that Monica Bellucci is one of the most beautiful women in the history of the world. But even given those factors, I can't recommend Shoot 'Em Up unless you don't find being stabbed through the brain with a half eaten carrot to be to implausible. If that is the case, you might just enjoy it. As for saying, "I'll just catch it on DVD," let me just say the following. If you are going to see Shoot 'Em Up, make sure you see it on the big screen. It is a bad movie, that is only made worse by watching it on the small screen. Any scene that it has worth seeing, must be seen on the big screen.

Ah, Sweet Nostalgia.

I want my...I want my...I want my YouTv...

I remember the early days of Music Television. You remember right? Back when they still played music and videos. One of my favorite songs was the Buggles "Video Killed the Radio Star." Watch the above video and you might see why.

Thanks to Jackie Danicki for pointing this one out.

Are You Ready to Ruuuuuummmmbbbllllle (Sacriligiously?!)

Then it's time for a little Bible Fight action.

Hat Tip to Greg Costikyan's Play This Thing site.

The Latest Gamer Meme: How Many Do You Own?

Since the announcement, and release at Gen Con, of Hobby Games: The 100 Best there has been a running meme where gamers list which games within the 100 they own and/or play. Never one to give up an opportunity to brag regarding my gaming and gaming collection, I thought that I would join in the fun.

The format that has become common in this meme is to take the full list of 100 games and italicize those that one owns and italicize and bold those that you both own and have played. I won't be doing that. I want to add some brief thoughts as to what I think of those games I own, and/or have played, so I will be doing several posts instead of the one.

Today, I taking the first 15 games and later posts will cover the remainder of the list.

1. Bruce C. Shelley on Acquire: I picked up the most recent edition of this classic Sid Sackson boardgame when it was part of a liquidation sale at a local Wizards of the Coast store, back in the day. In the years that I have owned the game, I have yet to open it. From what I have read, and heard, about the game, I am doing myself a great disservice. I fully plan on playing this game, when and if I can convince my gaming group to take another weekend off from roleplaying.



2. Nicole Lindroos on Amber Diceless: As a "how to" guide for gamemastering a roleplaying game, this product is amazing. As an actual roleplaying game itself...yawn. It is a great setting, and the bidding war during character creation is genius, but the "whoever is better wins unless player/gm are super-creative" system of resolution is kind of a cop out. If you have a great GM of a particular breed, this is a great game. If you have a great GM of a different breed or an average GM, this game can be awful. All of which is a pure product of the rules. To be honest "better person wins unless it advances the story or meets GM/Player whim" isn't a game system, it's storytelling guidelines. Once Upon A Time is as much a roleplaying game as Amber. That said, let me re-emphasize that the gamemastering techniques section of the rulebook were, and are still, ground breaking.



3. Ian Livingstone on Amun-Re



4. Stewart Wieck on Ars Magica: This was the first real "story driven" rpg I ever played. The system was simple when it needed to be, technical when it needed to be, and arcane when dealing with magic. The games that are "legacies" of Ars Magica are legion, all the Storyteller books for example, yet most lack the simple fun of this game. This was another game with a great section on GM-ing.



5. Thomas M. Reid on Axis & Allies: This is the game, more than any other, that made me like wargaming. It isn't the most robust of wargames, but it is easy to play and understand and translates its subject well into rules format. Sure it takes hours to set up and possibly days to play, but I have some fond memories of this game. Memories which are only surpassed by my Broadsides and Boarding Parties memories.


Tracy Hickman on Battle Cry: Prior to playing this game, I imagined that all wargames needed to take a long time to play, but the Command and Colors system utilized in this game proved me wrong. The rules are simple and swift, the game almost takes longer to set up than play, and you can simulate numerous battles of the Civil War in an afternoon. This game is why I bought Battlelore.


6. Philip Reed on BattleTech: My parents would have been happier if I hadn't discovered this game my Junior year of high school. Between work, baseball, and BattleTech, I didn't spend a lot of time with family. I still have yet to play the game with miniatures instead of cardboard stand ups though.



7. Justin Achilli on Blood Bowl: The most recent edition, especially whatever digital rulebook is currently available, might be the most balanced and fastest playing version, but give me the crazy Second Edition with the Astrogranite gameboard and the crazy expansion books any day of the week. I want to roll numbers, not symbols. I just think the second edition did a better job of conveying the background and feel of the game, and that's why I keep coming back.



8. Mike Selinker on Bohnanza



9. Tom Dalgliesh on Britannia: I'm still waiting for a chance to play my beautiful Fantasy Flight Games edition.



10. Greg Stolze on Button Men: A game you can play anywhere, at anytime, like while wandering through the convention halls? I'm in. This is a simple game to play that is just great, cheap, silly, fun.



11. Monte Cook on Call of Cthulhu: Universally accepted as the "best" horror rpg. This is more due to the source material (and the excellent written adventures) than the rules, though those are serviceable. The one innovation that set this apart from games before it, and which has been poorly imitated later, is the addition of sanity rules by which player's characters can go mad, mad, mad I tell you. Not a great game for "campaign" play, but if it were would players ever actually be able to feel the "fear" that ought to be a part of a horror game?



12. Steven E. Schend on Carcassonne: I am still waiting to crack open my copy of this game. Though I hear it is one of the great "gateway" games.



13. Jeff Tidball on Car Wars: The summer after 8th grade had my friends, and me, blowing the living snot out of one another in our post-apocalyptic automobiles. I couldn't watch Mad Max without immediately wanting to play a follow up Car Wars game.



14. Bill Bridges on Champions: You wouldn't know it from the current edition, but this game was once much easier to learn than D&D. Champions was the first superhero rpg I ever played, and it has set the benchmark against which all others are governed. I believe that earlier editions were more free-form and left more room for on the fly creativity. The current rules set has become very "granular" and players often take a "What is on the character sheet is what you can do approach" that wasn't emphasized in older editions. That said, this is still a great game and the best "war game" simulation of super heroic combat ever crafted. As far as playing it as an rpg, I take mine Mutants and Masterminds (though it is becoming a little to granular) or DC Heroes (my favorite superhero rpg) now. But I have to say...those days of Rob saying, "Meanwhile...back at the ranch--Pachew, Bang, Pachew," those are priceless.

The Trojan Horse: Could it really have worked?

A friend of mine and I often discuss whether the Greeks actually could have used a hollow wooden horse to trick the Trojans as depicted in the Iliad. My friend firmly believes that no one would be dumb enough to fall for this trick, but if the video below is any indication lots of people might be dumb enough to fall for it. Though it appears that the descendants of the original Trojans have learned their lesson and that the Australian military are wise to Greek tricks as well.

Hat tip to Got Medieval via Unlocked Wordhoard.

What You Should Watch/Read/Play

Tonight's episode of Geekerati, themed "What You Should Watch, Read, and Play," will feature an interview with James Lowder who edited Hobby Games: The 100 Best for Green Ronin Publishing. James will discuss the upcoming book, which will be released on September 15th, and give us some thoughts on what he thinks we should all be watching, reading, and playing, as will all of our regular panelists. Give a listen and see what we think, or give us a call at(646) 478-5041 during the show.

The show starts at 7pm Pacific and airs for an hour. You can listen to an archive of the episode approximately 20 minutes after the show airs, this is largely due to our "bonus footage" conversation which makes the recorded show last 20 minutes longer than the aired show.

More Print Periodical Woes and Some Good News Too.

Before I write about a couple of items that I think are great news for those who like games etc., I would like to point out that we have another casualty on the print periodical front. My last post was about the future of print newspapers. In it, I mentioned that Premiere magazine and Disney Adventures had been canceled and would likely only exist in digital format.

I didn't mention, though I should have, that both Dungeon and Dragon magazine ended publication this month in an event that caused great stir in the gaming community. I should have mentioned Dungeon and Dragon if only to point out that when magazines with circulations over half-a-million are going digital only, it should not have surprised gamers that Dungeon and Dragon (who have a much lower circulation) should move to that format.

That said...it appears that Inquest Magazine, the magazine for the collectible card game hobby, is also closing its shades with no word whether it will go digital or not. There are a lot of great things about this here digital revolution, but watching all these magazines fold up isn't one of them.

NOW FOR THE GOOD NEWS.

There are several games coming out in the near future which make me absolutely giddy.

First, there will be a new edition of the Tales of the Arabian Nights boardgame. Z-Man Games will be releasing the new edition some time next year. Tales is one of those crazy games which cause ridiculous bidding wars on ebay. The game can cost upwards of $200.00, on a good day. I remember playing this game with my friend Roger Frederick a couple of times and marveling at how much fun we had.

Second, Fantasy Flight Games will be doing new versions of Cosmic Encounter and Borderlands as well as a Twilight Imperium adaptation of the old Avalon Hill Dune boardgame.

If only I had unlimited time to play games.

Oh, and the Solomon Kane roleplaying game will be shipping this October. I really can't wait for this gem. I wish I was one of the lucky few who purchased it at Gen Con.

Newspapers and Magazines...Paper or Electron?

In a recent article for the National Journal, William Powers discusses his thoughts on the current state of the "newspaper crisis." Are they here to stay or are they going the way of the dinosaur and the Stanley Steamer automobile. In the article, Powers briefly addresses the concerns of the newspaper fan and the newspaper employee and points out that:

Up-to-date information is the coin of the realm, and it's rare to meet a successful person who doesn't follow the news. They may not get it from the hard-copy newspaper, but most online news originates in traditional newspapers and newspaper-related organs such as the Associated Press. In other words, the basic product the papers produce still helps the fittest to thrive.

It might seem that Powers is waxing Pollyanna on us, but I don't think so. News is a commodity in the "information age" and will be for time to come. Whether that news is about sports, business transactions, or Lindsay Lohan doesn't matter. People want information.

But does that mean that they want to read the news on "paper?"

Eyewitness television news didn't kill paper, what about the internets?

Powers doesn't answer this question in his piece, though I expect he'll be writing about the future of paper as a medium soon, but he does mention that Rupert Murdoch is fighting to purchase the Wall Street Journal (one of the nation's leading bird cage fillers).

Powers seems to be hinting that paper may not be dead as paper, but then what does Powers think about the following?

Premiere magazine, which had a circulation of over 500,000, is now purely digital and has featured our friend David Chute.

Disney will cease publication of its 1,000,000 circulation strong Disney Adventures.

And while the Journal is a leader in print, it also has one of the best web interfaces of any news publication.

Which direction is the news going?

Will Mark Cuban's comments regarding bandwidth capabilities have any effect? In other words, do we need paper because we will lack bandwidth?

Comic Book Tombs

Following the concerns of George Miller, we here at Cinerati wonder, "Are comic books more than their cover art?" The L.A. Times Calendar section has an interesting story about a certain strain of collecting which is more about investment and less about enjoyment.

I have a small comic book collection that is contained in four or five boxes. At the urging of my wife, I've been considering two option. The first, I save them for my children to enjoy, i.e., consume. Or, I could give the age appropriate titles to a local boys and girls club for those kids to consume. By destroy, I mean rip out the pages, add their own commentary, use the book as a tracing guide, etc... I figure that if the kids actually get the joy of actually using the book then the comic would have served its purpose more fully than if it was laid down in a safety deposit box encased in plastic. Collecting for its own sake, without an appreciation of the thing collected, is a sterile and pointless exercise.

Weren't the pages in the books in Gatsby's library uncut?