<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Kaedrin Weblog</title>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/</link>
<description>Thoughts and ramblings on culture, movies, politics and more; updated every Sunday.</description>
<copyright>Copyright 2013</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 20:19:39 -0500</lastBuildDate>
<generator>http://www.movabletype.org/?v=5.12</generator>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 


<item>
<title>Amazon Pilots</title>
<description><![CDATA[I mentioned the other week that Amazon released 14 pilot episodes for original series. They haven't made a decision about which series will get picked up, but I watched a bunch, so here are some thoughts.  High level summary: "Meh."

<ul>
<li><em><strong>Zombieland</strong></em> - This was probably the only show I was actually curious about, and it acquitted itself reasonably well.  It's tough to compete with the talent of the movie, but it actually worked well enough, and some of established in the movie actually fits the TV mold (notably the "Zombie kill of the week"). It's clearly not hitting on all cylinders and it's not as polished as the movie, but it has potential, and I could see myself watching this.</li>
<li><em><strong>Alpha House</strong></em> - This show about 4 Republican congressmen who are roommates clearly has the best pedigree. Name actors, Doonsbury writer, and so on.  That talent does show in the final product, which is probably the most composed of the shows that I watched. But it wasn't all that funny, and the one-sided politics means that it won't be surprising or interesting either. Again, the pilot was fine, and there's potential here, but I could also see this crashing and burning.</li>
<li><em><strong>Onion News Empire</strong></em> - As a fictional show about a ridiculous news channel (i.e. it's not an actual fake news show, it's a story about people who put on a real news show that's, uh, fake), this one was ok, and I chuckled at a few jokes, but it's ultimately nowhere near the level of brilliance that the Onion is capable of. Again, I suppose it could grow some legs, but I was fairly disappointed by this one.</li>
<li><em><strong>Those Who Can't</strong></em> - This show about a misanthropic trio of teachers who act outrageous and inappropriately towards their students sounded awful, but was surprisingly engaging.  It's got a sorta <em>It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia</em> lite vibe going on.  It seems a little too reliant on the characters' apathy, which is a joke that could get old pretty quickly, but I could see this working if given room to grow.</li>
<li><em><strong>Browsers</strong></em> - People started singing and I immediately checked out.  It's actually one of the better reviewed shows, but I couldn't even be bothered with watching it.</li>
</ul>

That's what I watched. I wasn't too enthused by any of the episodes, but I think that's more of an issue with Amazon's process here than the shows themselves.  Comedy shows are cheap to produce (which is no doubt why Amazon is starting with them), but they usually take a few episodes to establish themselves and grow into their premise.  There are very few comedies that launch with a pilot that is representative of what the show will ultimately become.  A few of these episodes show promise, but who knows how any of them would play out. I watched them because I was curious, but that's because this is a sorta novelty thing.  Perhaps if I came away from this experience with more than a "meh" feeling, it would be different, but at this point, I'm not particularly inclined to take more chances on these Amazon shows, which has to be a problem for Amazon.  I'll be curious to see which shows get picked up and move forward (though apparently <em>Zombieland</em> won't, according to the <a href="https://twitter.com/RhettReese/status/335218469941428224">creator's tweets</a>, which indicate that fans of the movie really killed the show for some reason...)]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002651.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002651.html</guid>
<category>Arts &amp; Letters</category>
<pubDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 20:19:39 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Weird Book of the Week</title>
<description><![CDATA[At this rate, the <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/cat_weird_movie_of_the_week.html">Weird Movie of the Week</a> category of this blog will soon contain more non-movies than actual movies. Nevertheless, this one was too good to pass up, and it's brilliance only really requires a picture of the cover of the book:

<div class="image">
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0671319590/kaedrin"><img src="http://kaedrin.com/images/books/therighttoarmbears.jpg" alt="The Right to Arm Bears" border="0"></a>
</div>

<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0671319590/kaedrin">The Right to Arm Bears</a>. That's just glorious, is it not? It turns out that it's really just another in a long line of mildly misleading covers and ridiculous artwork from Baen Books (a publisher I actually really like, but damn their covers are just awful).  The book is actually an omnibus of three older, out of print books ( "Spacial Delivery", "Spacepaw", and "The Law-Twister Shorty"), none of which approaches the titular splendor of "The Right to Arm Bears" (though "Spacepaw" ain't half bad).  It's true, these books are about humans interacting with an alien species of giant, intelligent bears, but I'm guessing they don't dress up in special forces gear, chew a cigar, wear berets, or tote human weaponry around.  The synopsis isn't quite as bonkers as the cover:
<blockquote>Planet Dilbia is in a crucial location for both humans and their adversaries, the Hemnoids. Therefore making friends with the Dilbians and establishing a human presence there is of the utmost importance, which may be a problem, since the bearlike Dilbians stand some nine feet tall, and have a high regard for physical prowess. They're not impressed by human technology, either. A real man, er, bear doesn't need machines to do his work for him.
<br><br>
But Dilbians are impressed by sharp thinking, and some have expressed a grudging admiration for the logical (and usually sneaky) mental maneuvers that the human "shorties" have used to get themselves out of desperate jams. Just maybe that old human craftiness will win over the Dilbians to the human side. If not, we lose a nexus, and the Dilbians will learn just how unbearable Hemnoids can be....</blockquote>
Reviews seem middling to poor, actually, though I have to give credit to the guy who titled his review "A bearable read".  Well played, sir. (Hat tip to <a href="http://www.staffersbookreview.com/">Justin</a>, who has some <a href="http://www.staffersbookreview.com/2013/05/duck-and-covers-is-the-baen-art-director-taking-side-jobs.html">more great/horrible covers</a>.)]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002647.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002647.html</guid>
<category>Arts &amp; Letters</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 22:17:58 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Star Trek: TNG Tidbits</title>
<description><![CDATA[The Star Trek: The Next Generation Third Season BD came out recently, replete with bonus materials. Of course, it's obscenely expensive (Star Trek releases have always been so) and probably only purchased by obsessives. Us normal fans just fire up episodes on Netflix pretty easily, but then we miss out on remastered HD visuals and bonus features. Fortunately for us, <a href="http://www.aintitcool.com/node/62192">Hercules from AICN has done a seemingly comprehensive recap</a> of all those special features, and there's lots of behind the scenes gems to be had.  The general consensus is that season 3 is where TNG turned the corner from a decent show into a great show, and a lot of these features apparently focus on that. Some interesting tidbits:

<blockquote>
* A "technobabble generator" created as a joke by a friend of Shankar became a frequently utilized not-joke writers' room tool.
</blockquote>
Always funny to hear about the <a href="http://whatever.scalzi.com/2009/10/13/teching-the-tech/">teching the tech</a> tendencies of the writers...
<blockquote>
* Moore and Braga lament that "Star Trek: Generations," which they labored on for a year, didn't turn out as well as "All Good Things," which took two weeks to write.
<br><br>
* Piller argued against the other writers who wanted Wesley to stay true to his fellow cadets in the season-five episode "The First Duty." Piller prevailed and Wesley did end up throwing his friends under the bus to put Starfleet Academy honor first. The episode, relates Shankar, is now used at the U.S. Air Force Academy to teach cadets about the honor code.
<br><br>
* The writers reveal Brent Spiner grew weary of stories involving Data's cat Spot. As a practical joke, they inserted into one script a scene in which Data invents a collar that translates Spot's meows into English.
<br><br>
* One storyline that was much fought for before Piller shot it down was to kill Will Riker and replace him permanently with his transporter-mishap doppleganger Tom Riker. "It was a chance to reinvent the character," explains Moore.
<br><br>
* Patrick Stewart, perhaps envious of William Shatner, apparently told every TNG writer he met that Picard wasn't "shooting and screwing" enough.
<br><br>
* Behr had a great episode idea about Picard getting promoted to admiral and Riker given the captaincy of the Enterprise -- and how Picard dealt with the promotions. But Roddenberry insisted Picard's insecurities regarding his new life were out of character, and the script was scrapped. That concept evolved into the episode in which Picard gets boned on the pleasure planet.
<br><br>
* Frakes was always annoyed when the writers made Riker turn down offers of commanding his own ship. He (and many fans) felt his willingness to decline a captaincy was out of character.
</blockquote>
Frakes hits the nail on the head with that last one. I mean, I get why it was done (the show must go on, and having Riker off on some other ship would be either contrived or lame), and it made for some good episodes (The Best of Both worlds 2 parter with the Borg being the most obvious), but the character of Riker was such an experience hound, always game for just about anything, that it's hard to believe he would turn down a captaincy.
<blockquote>
* Ironically given the subject matter of his first script, Moore was not a fan of children living aboard the Enterprise. He also never understood why a psychotherapist was always sitting on the bridge next to the captain. Moore was also no fan of the replicator, which he believed an enemy of drama.
<br><br>
* Rick Berman, Brannon Braga and Moore all once lamented that they should have saved "Yesterday's Enterprise" for the plot of the "Generations" movie, with the Kirk-Spock Enterprise swapped for the Garrett-Castillo one.
<br><br>
* The staff, which at the time included future "Battlestar Galactica" mastermind Ronald D. Moore, would often refer to Data as "a toaster."
</blockquote>
Lots of other interesting stuff in Herc's post...]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002646.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002646.html</guid>
<category>Movies</category>
<pubDate>Sun, 12 May 2013 13:37:05 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Kindle Updates</title>
<description><![CDATA[I have, for the most part, been <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002280.html">very pleased with using my Kindle Touch</a> to read over the past couple years. However, while it got the job done, I felt like there were <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002290.html">a lot of missed opportunities</a>, especially when it came to metadata and personal metrics.

Well, Amazon just released a new update to their Kindle software, and mixed in with the usual (i.e. boring) updates to features I don't use (like "Whispersinc" or Parental Controls), there was <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/ref=hp_200729990_progress?nodeId=200729990#progress">this little gem</a>:

<blockquote>The Time To Read feature uses your reading speed to let you know how much time is left before you finish your chapter or before you finish your book. Your specific reading speed is stored only on your Kindle Touch; it is not stored on Amazon servers.</blockquote> 

Hot damn, that's exactly what I was asking for! Of course, it's all locked down and you can't really see what your reading speed is (or plot it over time, or by book, etc...), but this is the single most useful update to a device like this that I think I've ever encountered.  Indeed, the fact that it tells you how much time until you finish both your chapter and the entire book is extremely useful, and it addresses my initial curmudgeonly complaints about the Kindle's hatred of page numbers and love of percentage. 
<div class="image">
<img src="http://kaedrin.com/images/books/kinde-timetoread.jpg" alt="Time to Read in Action" border="0"><br>
<em>Will finish this book in about 4 hours!</em>
</div>
The notion of measuring book length by time mitigates the issues surrounding <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002536.html">book length</a> by giving you a personalized measurement that is relevant and intuitive. No more futzing with the wild variability in page numbers or Amazon's bizarre location system, you can just peek at the remaining time, and it's all good.
<br><br>
And I love that they give a time to read for both the current chapter and the entire book.  One of the frustrating things about reading an ebook is that you never really knew how long it will take to read a chapter. With a physical book, you can easily flip ahead and see where the chapter ends.  Now, ebooks have that personalized time, which is perfect.
<br><br>
I haven't spent a lot of time with this new feature, but so far, I love it. I haven't done any formal tracking, but it seems accurate, too (it seems like I'm reading faster than it says, but it's close).  It even seems to recognize when you've taken a break (though I'm not exactly sure of that). Of course, I would love it if Amazon would allow us access to the actual reading speed data in some way. I mean, I can appreciate their commitment to privacy, and I don't think that needs to change either; I'd just like to be able to see some reports on my actual reading speed.  Plot it over time, see how different books impact speed, and so on. Maybe I'm just a data visualization nerd, but think of the graphs! I love this update, but they're still only scratching the surface here.  There's <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002290.html">a lot more there for the taking</a>. Let's hope we're on our way...]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002640.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002640.html</guid>
<category>Arts &amp; Letters</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 20:42:55 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Jack Glass</title>
<description><![CDATA[Adam Roberts' novel <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0575127627/kaedrin">Jack Glass</a> presents us with a delicious mashup of pulpy SF and golden-age mystery. I am much more familiar with the former than the latter, but that simple description alone was enough to garner interest, and when this won the <a href="http://file770.com/?p=12250">British Science Fiction Award for best novel</a>, that just made the choice easier. Having read it, I find it mildy disappointing that this didn't make the <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002609.html">Hugo shortlist</a>, which is amusing to me, since my first exposure to Adam Roberts was his <a href="http://punkadiddle.blogspot.com/2009/07/hugos-2009.html">takedown of the 2009 Hugos</a>... But I digress, back to the novel.
<div class="image">
<a href="http://kaedrin.com/images/books/jackglass.jpg"><img src="http://kaedrin.com/images/books/jackglass_sm.jpg" alt="Jack Glass Cover Art" border="0"></a>
</div>
The story is broken up into three chunks, each a mystery that draws upon classic tropes like the locked-room mystery or country house murder.  We're informed early on that the titular Jack Glass is the murderer in all instances, so these mysteries don't really take on the typical whodunit form... it's perhaps more accurate to see them as a <em>how</em>dunit.  Each story contains elements of the other - all have some element of a locked-room mystery, for instance - and each story leads into the next smoothly enough. Again, I'm not particularly familiar with golden-age mystery stories, but these are archetypes we've seen many times before.  Many have claimed it's also a pastiche of golden-age SF, and that's true to a point, though I find it to be towards the end of that hallowed era.  I found it reminiscent of stories like <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0312749511/kaedrin">The Space Merchants</a> or <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1876963468/kaedrin">The Stars My Destination</a>, more like the output of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurians">Futurians</a> than, say, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_W._Campbell">Campbell's</a> stable.
<br><br>
The first section is a prison story, and a rather grim one at that.  Roberts does an exceptional job establishing the characters and the setting, an impressive feat considering that there are 7 main characters in this story. The science fictional twist on your average prison story is that this prison is an asteroid.  7 prisoners are dropped off on the asteroid and given minimal supplies and a tiny habitable bubble. If they can survive for 11 years under those conditions, they can go free.  Of course, in order to survive, they have to excavate the rock, find water, build out a whole tunnel system, etc...  Theoretically, whether the prisoners survive the ordeal or not, the company that imprisoned them is left with an asteroid that can be sold as a dwelling to someone.  Escape is impossible, as they're surrounded on all sides by millions of miles of the nothingness of space - like an Alcatraz in space. It's a clever spin on an old story, and Roberts does a great job setting the stakes.  Roberts makes deft work of establishing the 7 main characters - 3 typical alpha males, 2 quasi-alphas, 1 doomed and whiny fat dude, and a cripple (which, actually, isn't as big a deal in zero-gravity).  This isn't a pleasant story, and the ending is rather far-fetched, but it's a good way of establishing the world this book is set in...
<br><br>
The second section is the country house murder mystery, and this one is told mostly from the perspective of Diana and her sister Eva.  They are the daughters of a clan of information gatherers, rather highly placed in the hierarchy of the solar system.  One of their servants winds up dead, and Diana, who is a big mystery buff, seeks to find out who did it.  When she is informed that it was, in fact, the notorious murderer Jack Glass, she is mightily confused about how he could possibly have achieved that. When rumors that someone has discovered Faster Than Light (FTL) travel appear, things start to get even more hairy for our protagonists.
<br><br>
I was not quite sure what to make of this section for a while. Diana and Eva aren't immediately the most likable characters, though they eventually grow on you.  They're both genetically optimized to solve problems. Eva is more into hard sciences and physics, while Diana is more personable.  They both seem to have been bred to leverage sleep and dreams to solve their problems, which makes perfect sense, but which I always find a bit annoying because I don't like the untethered nature of prose that describes dreams.  This is more my failing than Roberts, though, so take that with a grain of salt.  
<br><br>
The third story is a straight up whodunit murder, except that we know that Jack Glass did it.  That being said, we have no idea how he did it, and despite there being multiple witnesses and a confined space (another locked room, it seems), no one saw him do it. Confused? Good!
<br><br>
Along the way we've got some interesting speculations on FTL, a clever (if distressing) explanation of the Fermi Paradox, and even some speculation on "Champagne Supernovae" (as Roberts notes in his acknowledgements "'Champagne Supernovae' are a real phenomenon, one that puzzles real astrophysicists, and which are, I'm sorry to say, really named after the Oasis song.")  All of this science is covered in plain language and is easily understood while still being clever and intriguing.  Roberts clearly gleans the notion that science fiction is a literature of "ideas" and manages to infuse a few surprises into those old hoary tropes like FTL.
<br><br>
All in all, it's a very enjoyable book.  A little grim at times, it's nonetheless very well constructed, well written, and clever. And if you're the type to judge a book by its cover, you'll still be in for a treat, as the cover art is fantastic. If any of this sounds interesting, this is most certainly a worthwhile read...]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002639.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002639.html</guid>
<category>Science Fiction</category>
<pubDate>Sun, 05 May 2013 18:52:45 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Game Dev Irony</title>
<description><![CDATA[One of my favorite iPhone games is called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Dev_Story">Game Dev Story</a>.  It's basically a simulation game where you build a game studio from the ground up. You hire staff, pick which games your company creates, market them, etc... Once you build your company up and start putting out great games, you get high ratings, win awards, and most importantly, you sell a lot of games (which allows you to hire more staff, etc... and thus put out even better games!).  It's an addictively fun game, but it's also not particularly deep.
<br><br>
That's not the worst thing in the world, of course, and when it comes to iPhone games, that sort of simplicity is actually a plus.  Enter a new game called <a href="http://www.greenheartgames.com/">Game Dev Tycoon</a>.  It seems to be the same basic concept, but it looks to have more depth to it, so I'm halfway there in terms of wanting to purchase it.  It was made by Greenheart Games, an indie developer consisting of two brothers.
<br><br>
And get this: Knowing it would be pirated anyway, they went ahead and released a cracked version of their game on torrent sites.  They even helped seed it.  However, they added a twist to <a href="http://www.greenheartgames.com/2013/04/29/what-happens-when-pirates-play-a-game-development-simulator-and-then-go-bankrupt-because-of-piracy/">the version they released</a>:
<blockquote>
The cracked version is nearly identical to the real thing except for one detail&#8230; Initially we thought about telling them their copy is an illegal copy, but instead we didn&#8217;t want to pass up the unique opportunity of holding a mirror in front of them and showing them what piracy can do to game developers. So, as players spend a few hours playing and growing their own game dev company, they will start to see the following message, styled like any other in-game message:

<blockquote>Boss, it seems that while many players play our new game, they steal it by downloading a cracked version rather than buying it legally.
 If players don&#8217;t buy the games they like, we will sooner or later go bankrupt.</blockquote>

Slowly their in-game funds dwindle, and new games they create have a high chance to be pirated until their virtual game development company goes bankrupt.
</blockquote>
It's a brilliant and ironic move, but the irony doesn't end there.  It turns out the players of the pirated version are a little dense.  They started going out on the internet and posting absurdly unaware comments in forums, wondering (for example) if there's an in-game way to research DRM to protect their (fictional) games (!?):
<blockquote>
"I can't progress furher... HELP!" one user wrote. "Guys I reached some point where if I make a decent game with score 9-10 it gets pirated and I can't make any profit.
<br><br>
"It says blah blah our game got pirated stuff like that. Is there some way to avoid that? I mean can I research a DRM or something?"
<br><br>
Said another user: "Why are there so many people that pirate? It ruins me! Not fair."
</blockquote>
Oh the irony. It hurts!  But I'm guessing it hurts the developers even more, so I just went out and bought the game. If you like sim games and this sounds interesting, <a href="http://www.greenheartgames.com/">why not give it a shot</a>. This sort of genius should be rewarded (and so far, 93% of their users are pirates!). (Thanks to <a href="http://chizumatic.mee.nu/">Steven</a> for finding this story)]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002635.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002635.html</guid>
<category>Video Games</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 21:30:01 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Trance</title>
<description><![CDATA[Danny Boyle's new movie <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1924429/">Trance</a> is one of those reality-bending films that constantly has you wondering if what you're seeing is real. It takes some deserved flak for being more concerned with plot machinations than characters, and boy does that plot go in some ludicrous directions, but if you're the type of person who likes the tick-tock puzzles of movies like <a href='http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1375666/' title='IMDB: Inception'>Inception</a> or <a href='http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0480669/' title='IMDB: Timecrimes'>Timecrimes</a>, I think you'll enjoy it. And if you don't, it would still probably fall under the not wholly depressing category of "Interesting Failure." Personally, I've been in a bit of a lull when it comes to keeping up with new releases, so I found this one to be engaging and energizing in a way that most 2013 releases have failed to achieve (though, true, I have been woefully neglectful of a lot of movies I probably should have seen).
<br><br>
The movie opens with a bang, an art heist, complete with an "inside man" (Simon, played by James McAvoy) who manages to stash the stolen painting away from both the authorities and the criminals. Alas, it appears that during the heist, Simon gets a rather nasty bump on his head and claims amnesia.  The criminals, lead by Franck (Vincent Cassel), attempt to extract the location of the stolen painting via some rather intense torture, but eventually decide that Simon's amnesia is real. This leads them to consult a hypnotist, Elizabeth (Rosario Dawson, who they think might be able to extract the location of the painting. But Elizabeth has ideas of her own, and you begin to wonder if she's really uncovering lost information... or is she implanting information for her own purposes?
<br><br>
That's a pretty raucous mashup of cliches going on right there. You've got the heist (of notoriously impossible to fence artwork no less), you've got amnesia, and you've got hypnotism, the latter of which drives you to constantly question what you're seeing on screen (there's more tropes to be had here, especially as the story starts to really twist and turn).   It starts off plausible enough, saunters into ludicrous territory, which would be bad if it didn't rocket past that phase and into some next-level bonkers stuff towards the end.  As previously mentioned, the characters are rather thin here, and there's not really enough there to provide the required weight to the plot, particularly when you reach the very end (there's a relationship there that I think it's hard to buy).
<br><br>
That being said, Danny Boyle's propulsive, visually striking style certain keeps things moving at a fast, entertaining pace. So while the characters may not have been fleshed out as well as I'd like, I did find myself fully engaged at all times. While Boyle's style doesn't completely make up for ridiculous plot points or thin characters, it does elevate the film beyond simple schlock.  The pounding soundtrack also works really well here. The performances are solid all around, but extra credit goes to Rosario Dawson's fearless performance here. She's channeling that sultry femme fatale archetype, but as it turns out, she might be the actual heroine of the story too, and she plays it well. Dawson has some nude scenes too, and not mere glimpses either.  I suppose you could say that the nudity is integral to the plot, though it's a pretty big leap. Not that I'm complaining.
<br><br>
Ultimately, I enjoyed it for what it was: an outlandish thriller with preposterous twists and turns that were nonetheless completely engaging and entertaining. I had a lot of fun with this, but then, I tend to enjoy these sorts of reality-bending puzzle movies. Fans of more character-based drama may come away unfulfilled, but I had a good time and it's a film that's stuck with me for a couple weeks now. ***]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002626.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002626.html</guid>
<category></category>
<pubDate>Sun, 28 Apr 2013 15:24:45 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>The State of Streaming</title>
<description><![CDATA[So <a href="http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/22/netflix-beats-analyst-estimates-with-29-2-million-us-subscribers-and-1-billion-in-q1-revenue/">Netflix has had a good first quarter</a>, exceeding expectations and crossing the $1 Billion revenue threshold.  Stock prices have been skyrocketing, going from sub 100 to over 200 in just the past 4-5 months.  Their subscriber base continues to grow, and fears that people would use the free trial to stream exclusive content like <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002566.html">House of Cards</a>, then bolt from the service seem unfounded. However, we're starting to see a fundamental shift in the way Netflix is doing business here.  For the first time ever, I'm seeing <a href="http://seekingalpha.com/article/1359941-netflix-subscriber-growth-leading-to-margin-expansion?source=google_news">statements like this</a>:
<blockquote>
As we continue to focus on exclusive and curated content, our willingness to pay for non-exclusive, bulk content deals declines.
</blockquote>
I don't like the sound of that, but then, the cost of non-exclusive content seems to keep rising at an absurd level, and well, you know, it's <em>not exclusive</em>.  The costs have risen to somewhere on the order of <a href="http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/24/netflix-spends-2b-per-year-on-content-primarily-on-licensing-movies-and-tv-shows/">$2 billion per year on content licensing and original shows</a>.  So statements like this seem like a natural outgrowth of that cost:
<blockquote>
As we've gained experience, we've realized that the 20th documentary about the financial crisis will mostly just take away viewing from the other 19 such docs, and instead of trying to have everything, we should strive to have the best in each category. As such, we are actively curating our service rather than carrying as many titles as we can.
</blockquote>
And:
<blockquote>
We don't and can't compete on breadth with Comcast, Sky, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Sony, or Google. For us to be hugely successful we have to be a focused passion brand. Starbucks, not 7-Eleven. Southwest, not United. HBO, not Dish.
</blockquote>
This all makes perfect sense from a business perspective, but as a consumer, this sucks.  I don't want to have to subscribe to 8 different services to watch 8 different shows that seem interesting to me. Netflix's statements and priorities seem to be moving, for the first time, away from a goal of providing a streaming service with a wide, almost comprehensive selection of movies and television.  Instead, we're getting a more curated approach coupled with original content. That wouldn't be the worst thing ever, but Netflix isn't the only one playing this game.  <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/04/22/which-of-amazon-s-tv-pilots-should-go-to-series.html">Amazon just released 14 pilot episodes</a> for their own exclusive content. I'm guessing it's only a matter of time before Hulu joins this roundalay (and for all I know, they're already there - I've just hated every experience I've had with Hulu so much that I don't really care to look into it). HBO is already doing its thing with <a href="http://www.hbogo.com/">HBO Go</a>, which exlcusively streams their shows.  How many other streaming services will I have to subscribe to if I want to watch TV (or movies) in the future? Like it or not, fragmentation is coming.  And no one seems to be working on a comprehensive solution anymore (at least, not in a monthly subscription model - Amazon and iTunes have pretty good a la carte options).  This is frustrating, and I feel like there's a big market for this thing, but at the same time, content owners seem to be overcharging for their content.  If Netflix's crappy selection costs $2 billion a year, imagine what something even remotely comprehensive would cost (easily 5-10 times that amount, which is clearly not feasible).  
<br><br>
Incidentally, Netflix's third exclusive series, <a href='http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2309295/' title='IMDB: Hemlock Grove'>Hemlock Grove</a>, premiered this past weekend. I tried to watch the first episode, but I fell asleep. What I remember was pretty shlockey and not particularly inspiring... but I have a soft spot for cheesy stuff like this, so I'll give it another chance. Still, the response seems a bit mixed on this one. I did really end up enjoying <em>House of Cards</em>, but I'm not sure how much I'm going to stick with <em>Hemlock Grove</em>...]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002629.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002629.html</guid>
<category>Movies</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2013 21:28:57 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Weird Movie of the Week: Gumiho</title>
<description><![CDATA[Last time on <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002586.html">Weird Movie of the Week</a>, we looked at a touching tale of trash men, accordions, and tiny third arms.  This time, we've got tails. Lots of tails. It's called <em>My Girlfriend Is a Gumiho</em>:
<blockquote>
After meeting a mysterious yet very beautiful girl, a wannabe action star discovers that she's, in fact, a gumiho -- a legendary fox with nine tails -- who longs to transform herself into a true human.
</blockquote>
Alright, so technically it's a TV show, but I think it sounds weird enough to qualify. The whole thing is available on Netflix Instant, so I guess I can add another show to <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002608.html">my list</a>...
<br><br>
<strong>Update:</strong> Kaedrin friend Dave points out that an even more amazing Korean series is available on Netflix Instant. It is called (I swear I'm not making this up), <em>Vampire Prosecutor</em>:
<blockquote>Prosecutor Min Tae Yeon transforms into a vampire, but he survives by drinking blood sold on the black market rather than by preying on the living. His special powers also give him an edge in solving murder cases.</blockquote>
So he's a veggie vampire that uses his powers... in the court of law! Awesome. Added to queue.]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002627.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002627.html</guid>
<category>Weird Movie of the Week</category>
<pubDate>Sun, 21 Apr 2013 19:29:32 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>The Eye With Which The Universe Beholds Itself</title>
<description><![CDATA[A <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002609.html">couple weeks ago, I mentioned</a> that Ian Sales' novella <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B007Y4CWZG/kaedrin">Adrift on the Sea of Rains</a> won the Short Fiction award at the 2012 British Science Fiction Association Awards. I mentioned that <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002504.html">I didn't particularly love it</a>, though I did find it very well written. And of course Ian Sales stumbled onto my post (and my old review), but he just seemed happy that I cared enough to write a review and even offered to send me a review copy of the next novella in the series (called the Apollo Quartet). I declined, opting to simply buy the book, as I know that every sale counts for self-published authors, and this time around, I found that I enjoyed the story much more.
<br><br>
The Apollo Quartet stories are basically alternate history speculations centering around the Apollo program, with some bigger SF tropes added in for flavor.  <em>Adrift on the Sea of Rains</em> featured the brilliant premise of a large moon base witnessing the nuclear destruction of Earth.  While I wasn't ultimately satisfied with the story, that premise (which I've only really given half of) is fantastic.  <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00B2KI5QI/kaedrin">The Eye With Which The Universe Beholds Itself</a> takes its time getting to the driving forces behind the story, but I ultimately found it a much more rewarding read.
<br><br>
The story follows Brigadier Colonel Bradley Elliott, USAF, as he is sent to investigate the possible disappearance of a human colony on an exoplanet. Twenty years earlier, Elliott was the first man to land on Mars. Something happened during that first trip to Mars that lead the higher ups to bring Elliott out of retirement and send him to investigate the exoplanet, but I won't ruin that excitement, and indeed, I may have already said too much.
<br><br>
I found the entire story much more enjoyable this time around.  Elliott makes for a good protagonist, and there's much less angst here than there was in the previous story.  Sales certainly knows his stuff, both from a technology standpoint and from a prose style standpoint.  Even when he takes a scientific leap, such as the faster-than-light travel system used to travel to the exoplanet (which is 15 light years away), he seems to be able to ground it enough that it doesn't feel like a ridiculous affectation. I still find Sales lack of quotation marks around dialog to be a bit distracting, but it was also less notable here because there is less dialog (that, or I was just more engaged with the story and didn't notice as much).
<br><br>
I did get a little worried at one point when it seemed like the story had ended and a short little glossary came up, but when you get to the end of the glossary, there's an epilogue that contains the real kicker that was a real eye opener. That structure is a bit strange, but then, the glossary contains a lot of interesting info on the alternate history here (for instance, that's where we learn the details about how the Soviets landed on the moon first, thus inspiring the US to go to Mars), and the kicker in the conclusion does take on an added resonance when you've read some of the entries in the glossary.  So where <em>Adrift on the Sea of Rains</em> started with a brilliant premise and trailed off (for me, at least), <em>The Eye With Which The Universe Beholds Itself</em> takes a little time to get going, but ends with more satisfaction. I'd certainly recommend <em>The Eye With Which The Universe Beholds Itself</em> if this sounds at all interesting to you (it's not closely tied to <em>Adrift on the Sea of Rains</em>, so no worries starting with the second installment either). Next up in the reading queue, the BSFA Novel award winner, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0575127627/kaedrin">Jack Glass</a> (which has been in the queue for a while, but only recently became available in the US).]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002622.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002622.html</guid>
<category>Science Fiction</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 21:56:45 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Link Dump</title>
<description><![CDATA[I sure do seem to be leaning on these link dump posts of late, sorry about that, but things have been busy, so time for writing is sparse. By which I mean that I'm actually spending too much time faffing about in the internets, hence actually having a bunch of links to dump.  Speaking of which:

<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/14/magazine/and-now-deep-thoughts-about-deep-thoughts.html">And Now, Deep Thoughts About &#8216;Deep Thoughts&#8217;</a> - Really just an excuse to partake in some Jack Handey brilliance, but also an interesting note about how Handey has influenced modern poetry.
<blockquote>
This past fall, while teaching poetry to undergraduates, I witnessed something of a literary tragedy. Each week, I asked a few students to read a contemporary literary journal of their choosing and present one poem that particularly struck them. An unmistakable pattern began to emerge. In the final week of the quarter, I voiced my discovery: "Have you guys noticed that you gravitate toward poems that are like 'Deep Thoughts,' by Jack Handey?"
<br><br>
Crickets. Blank stares. 
<br><br>
To a person, all the students were born in or after 1990; not one of them knew to whom I was referring. Therein lies the tragedy.
</blockquote>
Quite tragic.  Apparently a lot of poets these days attempt to go for that Handeyesque style, without even really knowing Handey.  Interesting.
</li>
<li><a href="http://twentytwowords.com/2013/04/04/how-the-sky-would-look-if-the-planets-were-as-close-as-the-moon-8-pictures/">How the sky would look if the planets were as close as the moon</a> - I don't really have anything insightful to say here. It's just cool.</li>
<li></li>
<li><a href="http://sportballsreplacedwithcats.tumblr.com/">Sports Balls Replaced With Cats</a> - Niche site of the week.</li>
<li><a href="http://distincthomme.com/interview-with-kevin-stewart/">Interview with Kevin Stewart</a> - Who? Oh, he's actually <a href="http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/professor-badass">Professor Badass</a>.  Ok then.</li>
</ul>

That's all for now!]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002620.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002620.html</guid>
<category>Link Dump</category>
<pubDate>Sun, 14 Apr 2013 20:20:08 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Recent and Future Video Gamery</title>
<description><![CDATA[So I've been pretty mum on video games of late, and there's a reason for that: I haven't been playing them much.  I seem to have moved on for a while. For instance, those <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002525.html">50 books</a> didn't read themselves. The last game I was really into was <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002338.html">Mass Effect 3</a>, but this dip in interest was already in full swing when I started that one (which did nothing to reverse the trend, sad to say).  But maybe this sort of thing is cyclical, as I've started to get the itch for some video gamery again.  What have I been fiddling with lately, and what am I looking forward to?

<ul>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioshock">BioShock</a> - Note, I'm not talking about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BioShock_Infinite">BioShock Infinite</a>.  That would be <em>timely</em>, and we don't do things like that here at Kaedrin. I actually picked up the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B009WI7V9E/kaedrin">BioShock 1 and 2 collection</a> a little while ago and have slowly been making my way through it.  Great atmosphere, some harrowing choices, and a combat system that's not all that fun. It's a first person shooter, but something about it just strikes the wrong chord with me.  Part of it is the way enemies move, and another part is that ammo is scarce (there seems to be some sort of scaling system that allows you to find more stuff when you're running low, which is nice I guess, but also just annoying).  I suppose expectations play a role here too, as this is a game that gets praised to high heaven by everyone, and it's been around for so long that at this point I'm bound to be disappointed. That's the drawback of the Kaedrin system, I guess. Still, I'm interested enough that I will most likely finish.</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soulcalibur_V">Soul Calibur V</a> - I've never been that into fighting games, so I figured I'd give one a shot a while ago. Let's just say that I'm not very good at this game and that I'm not really willing to put in the practice time to figure it all out. I'd rather just create dumb custom characters, and even that gets dull pretty quickly.  So this is perhaps not the game's fault, but I'm not doing so well with this one.</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FTL:_Faster_Than_Light">FTL: Faster Than Light</a> - Now this is a little more my speed.  It's a pretty straightforward looking strategy game that nevertheless has a deceptively deep gameplay.  The game basically amounts to micromanaging a spaceship as you try to guide it across several sectors, all whilst being pursued by an enemy fleet.  Simple setup, and basic gameplay, but it's fun, and it's something that's pretty easy to pickup and play, no huge investment of time needed.  A single game can last an hour or so, but it has a high replay value.  I'm no expert or anything, but I'm enjoying it and will continue to play.</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitman:_Absolution">Hitman: Absolution</a> - The only game in this post that I haven't started yet. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitman:_Blood_Money">Hitman: Blood Money</a> was a game that really grew on me. I still think it's absurd to win the games exactly how you're supposed to without consulting outside guides or anything like that, but the value is that it's fun to come up with alternate strategies or just go completely rogue and kill everyone. Anyway, this is the first entry in the series since <em>Blood Money</em>, so I figure I should try it out.</li>
</ul>
And that's that. Not an entirely successful reentry into the world of gaming, but it's something.]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002615.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002615.html</guid>
<category>Video Games</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2013 20:11:42 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Link Dump</title>
<description><![CDATA[I've had some ideas for longer posts lately, but the problem with that is that they're <em>longer posts</em> and thus take a while to write.  I haven't really started any of them either, so there's that too. In the meantime, here's some links to stuff. Enjoy:

<ul>
<li><a href="http://mattcornell.org/blog/2013/04/roger-eberts-letterto-a-young-film-critic/">Roger Ebert's Letter to a Young Film Critic</a> - Whether you're a big fan of Roger Ebert or not, you have to admit that he had a huge impact on the appreciation of film in this country. He passed away this past week, so lots of things like this have been popping up.  In this case, he went out of his way to give some encouragement to a 14 year old kid who was handing out movie review newsletters at his school (in 1987). Just more evidence of a decent, hard-working, generous guy.</li>
<li><a href="http://youtu.be/OkwVz_jK3gA">Siskel &amp; Ebert Outtakes</a> - Perhaps a bit less polished, but this video of outtakes captures that lightning in the bottle chemistry of Siskel and Ebert.  For reference, you can also head over to <a href="http://siskelandebert.org/">siskelandebert.org</a> to check out archives of old shows.  Big timesink, but the shows are a lot of fun!</li>
<li><a href="http://www.vulture.com/2013/04/photo-of-tom-hardy-and-a-boy-dressed-as-bane.html">That Time Tom Hardy Took a Photo With a Boy Dressed As Bane and We All Died</a> - Tom Hardy is a good sport. </li>
<li><a href="http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/afp/130313/us-hair-archaeologist-recreates-coiffures-antiquity">US 'hair archaeologist' recreates coiffures of antiquity</a> - The headline pretty much says it all, but for good measure:
<blockquote>By day, Janet Stephens cuts and colors at a hair salon. By night, she is an amateur archaeologist, meticulously recreating hairstyles dating back to the times of Roman antiquity.</blockquote>The Indy Jones of hair?  [via <a href="http://www.midnitetease.com/">MidniteTease</a>]
</li>
<li><a href="http://www.mymodernmet.com/profiles/blogs/dragon-ball-z-makankosappo-kamehameha">Japanese Schoolgirls Perform Superhuman Energy Attacks</a> - A gem from the <a href="https://delicious.com/mciocco/i'mnotscaredenoughofthejapanese">i'mnotscaredenoughofthejapanese</a> tag I have on Delicious, this is sorta like Planking, but instead of being stupid, it's girls taking pictures of themselves as if they are actually performing superhuman energy attacks, a la Dragonball Z. Brilliant.</li>
</ul>

There you have it.]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002614.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002614.html</guid>
<category>Link Dump</category>
<pubDate>Sun, 07 Apr 2013 18:10:45 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>2013 Hugos</title>
<description><![CDATA[The <a href="http://www.thehugoawards.org/hugo-history/2013-hugo-awards/">nominations for the 2013 Hugo Awards</a> were announced last week. The Hugos, while probably the most recognizable and representative award for science fiction and fantasy fandom, are also still, you know, awards. Like all awards everywhere and for everything, there is an inevitable and usually entertaining backlash consisting of usually pretty high profile folks railing against what they perceive as mediocrity. For a superb example of this sort of thing, see <a href="http://www.christopher-priest.co.uk/journal/1077/hull-0-scunthorpe-3/">Christopher Priest's takedown of last year's Clarke Award nominees</a> (the Clarke is a British SF&amp;F award, and Priest's polemic hit especially hard since, you know, he's an upstanding author who has won the award in the past).  Filled with just the right amount of invective and hyperbole that it's entertaining and funny without seeming like he's just some old crank.  Will this year's Hugo backlash fare as well? It's still early in Hugo season, but things have certainly started off with a bang, as <a href="http://www.staffersbookreview.com/2013/04/can-we-stop-talking-about-the-hugos-now.html">Justin from Staffer's Book Reviews</a> asserts that the Hugos are "utter twaddle":
<blockquote>
...the Hugo voter has a certain style it looks for in its fiction. Hugo-style, if you will, is like Gangnam-style only without the distracting Korean guy riding a horse, replaced with Charles Stross and Connie Willis on a podium holding a... rocket ship. I admit Gangnam-style doesn't have nearly as much sex appeal. In other words, Hugo nominated books tend to be recognizable. On the one hand because they are mostly written by Stross, Willis, John Scalzi, China Mieville, Robert Charles Wilson, Lois McMaster Bujold, Ian MacDonald, and active members of the Live Journal community, but also because they fit a certain motif that's difficult to pin down. I'll fall back on the old pornography argument, "I know it when I see it."
<br><br>
None of this accusation of style is a criticism of the award, quite the contrary. I believe the populist nature of an award like the Hugo is vitally important. It captures the kinds of novels that more elitist awards fail to - books people love to read. I've tried several times to read John Crowley's <em>Little, Big</em> (which was, ironically enough, nominated for a Hugo in 1982) and it just isn't any fun. Like <em>Little, Big</em> though, the best novel category almost always has a wild card - something that doesn't quite fit in to the Hugo mold - and sometimes they win. These winning standouts usually represent something that can't be ignored for societal (<em>Windup Girl</em>), cultural (<em>Among Others</em>), or inferiority inferiority complexacle (<em>The Yiddish Policeman's Union</em>) reasons.
</blockquote>
So far, so good, and not too critical, though you can see the beginnings of his ultimate problem with the Hugos up there in that first paragraph. After giving two examples of worthy novels that weren't nominated (Elizabeth Bear's <em>Range of Ghosts</em>, and NK Jemisin's <em>The Killing Moon</em>), he starts to get to the heart of the matter.
<blockquote>
Books like Bear's and Jemisin's are missing not because they aren't good enough or even because they aren't the kinds of books Hugo voters support, but because of an impenetrable culture of voting habits that precludes them from being part of the discussion. Those habits involve Lois McMaster Bujold, John Scalzi, and (of late) Seanan McGuire who are as likely to be nominated for a Hugo as Barrack Obama is to be heckled at the San Antonio Stock Show &amp; Rodeo.
</blockquote>
In essence, anyone who follows the Hugos, even just in the Best Novel category, is bound to notice the same 6-7 names popping up year after year. The aforementioned Stross, Willis, Scalzi, Mieville, Wilson, Bujold, MacDonald, etc...  It looks like we can add Seanan McGuire (aka Mira Grant) to the list, as she's made the shortlist for the past three years due to her Newsflesh trilogy of zombie books.  And there are plenty of others who don't publish often enough to achieve that sort of repetition.  The question that is being raised is not whether or not these are good authors, but whether or not every single work each of these authors produce needs to be nominated.  The argument becomes a little more pronounced in some of the other categories, like the Dramatic Presentation, Short Form (i.e. TV shows):
<blockquote>
....best dramatic short form can be summarized in one sentence: why does an award exist when 60% of the nominees year in and year out are from one creative enterprise?
</blockquote>
He's talking about <em>Doctor Who</em>, which has garnered at least 2 and usually 3 nominations per year since it was rebooted in 2006 (and has won the award every year except for one, when the Hugo went to another frequent nominee, Joss Whedon, for his admittedly worthy <em>Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog</em>). In fairness, as someone pointed out in the comments, this could very well be due to the way in which television is distributed.  The Hugos are, technically, a worldwide award, and <em>Doctor Who</em> is actually distributed pretty well around the world, often airing at the same time or only a week or two later.  Other shows air seasons in different years, etc... which makes it hard for some of them to gain traction.  Anyway, similar arguments can be made for some of the other categories, some of which don't really change at all from year to year (particularly the "fan" categories, though I get the impression that that is a bit too insular for even me to care about).
<br><br>
It's a fair point. I mean, I know that Neil Gaiman is a good author, do we need to nominate everything the dude does? The post takes a pretty critical eye on recent Kaedrin favorite Lois McMaster Bujold, perhaps unfairly comparing her to Heinlein, but on the other hand, Justin is dead on when he wondered why <em>Cryoburn</em> needed to be nominated.  I like the book just fine, but it's pretty clear why it was nominated: it was the first entry in a beloved series in 10 years.  People were just so happy to spend some more time with (the admittedly great character of) Miles Vorkosigan that they just went and nominated the book, almost automatically.  Again, I enjoyed the book, but I'd put it somewhere towards the middle of the pack of Bujold's work, nowhere close to that amazing late 90s run starting with the Hugo winning <em>Mirror Dance</em> and finishing with the Hugo nominated <em>A Civil Campaign</em> (which had quite stiff competition that year). I think you could make the same argument against this year's nominee,  <em>Captain Vorpatril's Alliance</em>, though I think that one is a step above <em>Cryoburn</em>.
<br><br>
The problem with all of this, of course, is that there is no real solution.  Sometimes an author legitimately goes on a tear of great writing.  Justin seems to think highly of Heinlein, who went on his own tear of frequent nominations/wins in the late 50s and early/mid 60s.  Will Bujold or Mieville prove to be as influential or long-lasting as Heinlein? Well, that's sorta missing the point, isn't it? I'm sure someone in the 60s was all "Heinlein is a good author, but what about all that weird polyamorous sex crap? Do we need to nominate him <em>every</em> year?"
<br><br>
To be perfectly honest, I don't read enough newly published SF/F to really say that this year's slate is good or bad. I've read two of the nominees: <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002355.html">Redshirts</a> and <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002492.html">Captain Vorpatril's Alliance</a>.  I liked both of these books, and managed to read through them really quickly, but I would not have been surprised at all if they weren't nominated. It's not that they're bad - they're both good - but it's hard not to take Justin's point to heart.  Are people nominating these books because they're really the best books, or because Scalzi and Bujold are super popular? Of the other three nominees, the one I'm most likely to read is <em>2312</em>, by Kim Stanley Robinson (incidentally, this is his 5th nomination), and from what I've seen, I'd probably be better off reading Robinson's <em>Mars</em> trilogy.  I'm not going to read <em>Blackout</em> because I'm fucking sick of zombies and it's the third book in a series, and <em>Throne of the Crescent Moon</em> is a fantasy, which is fine, but I'd rather spend my time catching up on other fantasy stuff.
<br><br>
So this post contains a lot of whinging and not a whole lot of real, genuine insight.  I'm not really in a position to refute Justin's position, and I can certainly see that he's correct, but on the other hand, I don't know that it's the worst thing evar either.  A lot of this seems like shouting at gravity to me.  Yeah, you see a lot of the same authors from year to year.  This is going to happen on a populist award list, and the authors do change over time. The grand majority of the frequent nominees mentioned in this post emerged in this century, with a few having started in the 1990s. Some (Seanan McGuire) have emerged in the past few years.  I would certainly welcome fresh and interesting nominees, but it doesn't really bother me to see the likes of Scalzi and Bujold either. Ultimately, it's <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002373.html">all a subjective enterprise</a>, so while it's fun to read cranky responses to the ballot, we should probably keep in mind that just because something you don't like was nominated doesn't mean the whole enterprise is doomed.
<br><br>
And, just for fun, some miscellaneous thoughts on the Hugos:
<ul>
<li>There is a lot of angst around the dearth of short story nominees (<a href="http://blog.worldswithoutend.com/2013/03/2013-hugo-short-stories-unleashed/">two of which are available online for free</a>), due to a Hugo rule that in order to be nominated, an entry must receive at least 5% of the vote (and there's a minimum of 3 nominees, so it's possible, though probably unlikely, that no short story received 5% of the vote this year).  This is apparently not unheard of, especially in the short story category, which is more varied and less talked about than other categories.  Cheryl Morgan has the details on the <a href="http://www.cheryl-morgan.com/?p=16466">5% rule</a> and a <a href="http://www.cheryl-morgan.com/?p=16478">cautionary tale</a> too.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.cheryl-morgan.com/?p=16492">Morgan also notes</a> that this year's Hugo ballot "has been submerged in a terrifying flood of girl cooties." Women took 11 of 18 nominations in the fiction categories, with the aforementioned Seanan McGuire nominated for 4 fiction awards (she's also nominated for the podcast award).</li>
<li>In other awards news, the <a href="http://file770.com/?p=12250">2012 BSFA Award Winners</a> were recently announced, including <em>Jack Glass</em> for Best Novel (been in <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002582.html">the queue</a> a while, but only because it wasn't available in the states!) and the self-published <em>Adrift on the Sea of Rains</em>, by Ian Sales (which <a href="http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002504.html">I did not particularly love</a>, but which was well done for sure).</li>
</ul>
And that's all for now. I should probably get back to reading some SF instead of wanking about it on the internet.]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002609.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002609.html</guid>
<category>Science Fiction</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2013 22:27:06 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>TV Shows I Should Probably Catch Up With</title>
<description><![CDATA[As 2013 progresses, I realize that I'm watching much less in the way of movies lately, and catching up with more television series.  In terms of "appointment television", I still don't watch much, but I do like to catch up with some older seasons of good stuff, and streaming sites like Netflix are a big enabler on some of this stuff.  So what are some things I should probably catch up with?

<ul>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breaking_bad">Breaking Bad</a> - Everyone loves this show so damn much, but I found the first season a bit of a slog.  Some high points mixed in, for sure, but it always seems to slow down and focus on certain conflicts that I find really dumb.  That being said, the beginning of the second season was amazing.  It's bogged down a bit again right now, but I'm sure I'll continue to make slow progress.</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad_men">Mad Men</a> - A show I've never been particularly interested in, but heck, it's on Netflix, so why not give it a shot sometime.</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_who">Doctor Who</a> - Speaking more of the "recent" incarnation of the show, which is all available on Netflix right now.  Boy, that Christopher Eccleston season sure did suck, but it started to find a groove at some point, and the second season really does pick things up.  Looking forward to catching up with the these at some point. I grew up watching the old Doctor Who episodes on PBS... even if I can't remember much of those episodes, I did enjoy them.</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_peaks">Twin Peaks</a> - Many moons ago, a friend loaned me his DVD set for Twin Peaks season one... and I started watching, only to find that... the pilot episode was missing!  It was apparently some sort of legal limbo or somesuch.  Well, that's all settled now, and the whole series is up on Netflix.  Sign me up.</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrested_Development_(TV_series)">Arrested Development</a> - I've seen a bunch of individual episodes of this in isolation, and probably the entire first season, but I've never really finished it off. I seem to go in chunks though, watching about 5-10 episodes in a row, then burning out and moving elsewhere for a while.  But since new episodes are coming, I figure I should probably finish the series off.</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parks_and_Recreation">Parks and Recreation</a> - I watched the first season of this a while back and found it diverting enough, but I'm told that it really doesn't hit its stride until season 2 and 3, so I guess I'm in for some more of this...</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alias_(TV_series)">Alias</a> - For whatever reason, I never watched this J. J. Abrams series.  Well, it's all on Netflix, so why not give it a shot? I mean, I like spy stories as much as the next guy, and Abrams seems pretty good with that sort of thing.</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernatural_(U.S._TV_series)">Supernatural</a> - Last year, I watched a bunch of old X-Files episodes and I got that itch for episodic "creature of the week" type of shows, and this one seems to fit the bill nicely. Honestly, while there does seem to be some sort of overarching continuity to the series, most of these are standalone stories, which is actually kinda fun, especially when you're bogged down with a bunch of other series that are all so involved (and probably not going to pay off)...</li>
</ul>
Well, that should keep me busy for the next five years or so. I should probably go and watch some of these right now.]]></description>
<link>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002608.html</link>
<guid>http://kaedrin.com/weblog/archive/002608.html</guid>
<category>Culture</category>
<pubDate>Sun, 31 Mar 2013 18:30:14 -0500</pubDate>
</item>


</channel>
</rss>
