Steven Lyle Jordan's Blog, page 15

Surprised Blade Runner 2049 opened slow? Don’t be.

As I wrote into Facebook the other day:

I saw Blade Runner 2049 today, with my wife and an audience of about 20. Well, that’s serious science fiction for ya.

[image error]

Which is about as simple a set of two sentences I can weave about something that’s been going on since, well, when science fiction first came to movies, and later, television: the fact that audiences largely don’t enjoy serious science fiction in anything other than literature.

This was, of course, kicked off by Blade Runner 2049, which opened in theaters, did not earn back a quarter of the money spent on it this opening weekend, and—according to articles and media comments—that actually surprised some people. This, despite having been a sequel (which, with reboots, are very popular these days), a sequel of a movie which has achieved cult status over the years, being a very well-constructed and exciting story, having brought some box office leading actors along (including a few from the original movie), and sparing no expense on the inevitable bells and whistles.

[image error]

Based on those points, it’s hard to imagine that it didn’t do as expected in the box office (hey, it made $32 million; that’s nothing to sneeze at). But those points above are all, unfortunately, superseded by the single point right here: Blade Runner 2049 is serious science fiction. And serious science fiction is simply not something that general (American) movie audiences want to see… nor have they ever wanted to see serious science fiction on their movie screens.

By “serious,” what I mean is that it’s the kind of science fiction that seriously examines its story, and has an intelligent approach to storytelling. Its audience is intended to pay attention to the story and trappings, stir their brainpans a bit, and think about what they are experiencing. In so doing, they are expected to take something away from this story that will inform them a bit about themselves and/or the world they live in, maybe alter their lifeview/worldview a bit, and maybe… hopefully… send them in a direction that, with the help of others who have been similarly influenced, makes this world a better place.

And American movie audiences don’t want that. At all.

[image error]American movie audiences see most movies as one of two things. Think of it like food: When you’re hungry, you can go out to a place that serves steaks, or you can go out to a place that serves burgers. The steaks are the serious movies like dramas, introspectives and whatever Woody Allen does. The burgers are action movies, rom-coms and horror. The former is designed for you to go home, pour a glass of wine and discuss with your significant other and your friends: “I found the dichotomy between the sisters’ professions and their domestic lives to be distracting, though possibly it was unduly over-emphasized by the incident at the mall.” The latter is designed for you to go to to a bar, grab a few beers and say: “WHOOOOO!”

Now, science fiction can fall into either of these categories. Movies like Blade Runner 2049 fall into the serious side, along with fairly recent movies like Arrival, Solaris, Ex Machina and Cloud Atlas. The problem is that American audiences don’t see science fiction as “really” serious, due mostly to its preponderance of future times, space settings, evidence of aliens and robots, time travel and bizarre weaponry. To those audiences, a “real” drama, say, Schindler’s List, compares to a science fiction drama like Blade Runner the way a nicely marbled sirloin, asparagus and a baked potato compares to a KFC Real Meal. Result: Audiences stay home, as they did for Arrival, Solaris, Ex Machina and Cloud Atlas.

[image error]And what about the movie audiences who like science fiction? Over the years, it’s been demonstrated at the box office that those audiences may watch serious science fiction on occasion… but they would much prefer more lighthearted sci-fi, tending toward action-adventure, and featuring the aforementioned future times, space settings, evidence of aliens and robots, time travel and bizarre weaponry. Unlike the serious drama fan, who dumps all science fiction into the same tepid pot, science fiction fans can distinguish between serious science fiction and less serious sci-fi… and they overwhelmingly choose the sci-fi over the serious stuff. They demonstrate that they don’t want to think about the movies they watch; they want to watch and go “WHOOOOO!” Result: Audiences bypass Blade Runner and go to War for the Planet of the Apes.

[image error]For the record, this rule applies to science fiction on television as well. In recent years, we’ve had some highly intelligent SF series like Person of Interest, Orphan Black and Humans. But the fans tend to obsess over shows like Star Trek, Galactica, Stargate and Farscape, of which, while all being fine shows, the latter shows are designed to be more exciting and less intellectually challenging than the former shows. (Star Trek fans in particular may bristle at this; but even they can’t deny that the original series’ fondness for thought-provoking stories has largely been replaced in recent years with galactic wars and technobabble-filled melodramas.)

Which leaves movies like Blade Runner 2049, along with Arrival, Solaris, Ex Machina and Cloud Atlas, all well-written and well-produced science fiction movies, left standing at the altar with all their handsomeness, excellent references and finely-tailored suit while the bride runs off with a rugby player with a name like Caesar or Skywalker.

[image error]So what will be the fate of Blade Runner 2049? Well, the ape-lovers may have bypassed it, but it is nonetheless an excellent motion picture and science fiction story, with fantastic performances and deep underlying themes of individuality, identity, humanity and slavery. The funny thing is, there’s actually plenty of action, shoot-em-ups, explosions, sexy characters, blood and death in there. (And a lot more tits than I expected.)

And despite its lackluster opening, over time it may be rediscovered and recognized by science fiction and movie fans as a classic that deserves to be lauded and highlighted as the best of a genre. That, after all, is the way it happened with Blade Runner. And 2001: A Space Odyssey. And Metropolis. This is nothing new. And it shouldn’t be surprising anyone… except those who dump all science fiction into the same tepid pot, of course.

Maybe if marketing had told audiences about all the tits they’d see, things would’ve been different…

[image error]

Advertisements

Filed under: entertainment, media, reviews, science fiction Tagged: 2001: A Space Odyssey, Arrival, Blade Runner 2049, Cloud Atlas, Ex Machina, Metropolis, serious science fiction, Solaris

View more on Steven Lyle Jordan's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on October 10, 2017 08:50

Things are different now.

A colleague recently imparted a discussion he’d had with his young daughter about guns. (It was unclear whether this took place before or after the recent shooting in Las Vegas, now being referred to as the “most deadly mass shooting in American history.)

“She was quite surprised that it was legal for people to carry around guns hidden beneath their cloths.

“Without prompting she asked, ‘Isn’t that kind of dangerous to have people walking around with guns? Why do we have laws allowing that?’

To the best of my ability I unbiasedly explained it’s part of the Texas culture going back a couple hundred years.

“‘Yeah, but things are different now.’

“At least my 10 year old gets it.”

[image error]As another colleague in the discussion pointed out, The US seems to have become a lot more dangerous than it was when we were younger. (In fact, that heightened sense of danger has more to do with the response of improved communications and the media to report more incidents than ever before, and the still-rising population and congestion of American cities and suburbs to concentrate and more easily track said violence.) Gun ownership is not the sole reason for that, but it’s certainly a major reason. Things have changed, and it’s not enough to bury our heads in the sand and pretend that life is the same today as it was in 1776.

One of the most brilliant aspects of our Founding Fathers was this: They recognized that, over time, the needs of the new nation would change beyond their ability to predict; and they made sure they baked laws and methods into the Constitution that would allow such change to be dealt with in the bounds of the law. They are commonly called Amendments… and they can be applied to any aspect of the country’s Constitution and laws, if the need arises. They can be created by our leaders, if they recognize the need for a change even before the rest of the country—the public—has come to the same conclusion. Sometimes, it must be done despite the attitudes of the majority of the country… because it’s right. And we, as a nation, have been derelict in our duty make these changes in one particular area, for far too long.

[image error]Gun ownership and gun control needs to be addressed to take into account the realities of the 21st century. Our government intended for the guns to be, and stay, in the hands of the Militia, which by their definition equated to our Armed Forces. We are no longer a nation that needs to hunt for its food or fend off wild animals, the only other reasons a gun needed to be kept in a household at that time. We have a government that can be charged with handling those duties that individuals are unable to handle safely or effectively. And we’re a nation that, in modern times, has developed non-lethal alternatives to firearms for personal protection.

We’ve been disrespecting our Founding Fathers and their wishes that we would amend our nation’s laws to keep track with the reality of the times. We should be amending the Constitution to remove lethal firearms from the hands of individual citizens, and if desired (or necessary) replacing them with non-lethal options for personal protection.

I understand how upsetting that sounds to many Americans, who’ve grown up with and around firearms, get some enjoyment from using them, and do not feel that firearms are a risk to them or an impediment to their safety. I also understand that many Americans were upset when told they could no longer keep slaves, or prohibit African Americans and women from voting. The 13th, 15th and 19th Amendments happened because America came to realize that things had changed with respect to the rights afforded to citizens, and that the laws had to be changed to accommodate that change.

[image error]

I also understand how upsetting that is to many of the members of the gun lobby, who see this as an attack on their ability to sell a particular product. But like the manufacturers of products like Metrodin HP, lead-based paints, Red Dye No. 40 and Cloflucarban, they need to recognize the hazard their products represent and the need to learn to make other products, like non-lethal defensive weapons, in order to survive. And they need to accept that the weapons they produce should only be in the hands of professionals, not street thugs and pop stars.

And We, the People, need to recognize guns for what they are: Lethal weapons which have no place in American society, which we can replace with safer tools, and which we can no longer afford to keep around, use, misuse, romanticize, glamorize or worship. We are so lucky to have the government system we have, which gives the people influence and latitude to be part of it… but we prefer to shun it and do our own thing, the exact opposite of how this country was intended to be run. If we still need guns, it’s due to our own faults, inconsistencies, impatience, laziness and lack of desire to be part of a working country.

[image error]NOT HELPING.

Even science fiction can help along these lines, in its purported mission to present our society’s faults and suggest possible future solutions. For instance, instead of arming landing parties of your future starship with laser weapons, how about giving them protective shields? For that matter, stop giving us stories about the umpteenth hostile alien species that wants nothing more than to wipe humans out… and maybe tell stories about aliens who love our music and want to show us their collection of historic sculptures.

Advertisements

Filed under: science fiction, social, technology Tagged: gun control amendment, gun control laws, Las Vegas shooting, non-lethal alternatives to guns

View more on Steven Lyle Jordan's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on October 02, 2017 10:41

Editing, covers and SEX

[image error]

I’ve just spent the last week editing the first book in my Kestral Voyages series, part of my new marketing push for all of my books. (No, it’s not back on sale yet.) I thought I’d be doing a fairly simply copy-and-replace of a few elements. Boy, was I wrong.

What I originally wrote under the working title Berserker has gone through 5 revisions over the years, including text, titles and covers. That’s because it was one of my earliest books, and each time I looked at it, I discovered bits of my writing that needed improvement. This time, I decided to make more wholesale replacements for some of the terms in the series, because some of them sounded good to me when I first wrote them, but now they sound dated or just plain stupid (Galarchy, I’m still looking right at you).

Those changes were easy. But I found I couldn’t stop there; as I made an editing pass through it, I found that there were still quite a few writing artifacts from my earlier career that needed excising. It’s often amazing to me how many times I can go through these books, convinced that nothing can be improved when I’m done, only to look at the books later and find even more to edit. For example, I used to like the phrase “long moments.” In my original manuscript, that phrase was everywhere. In my latest edit, I still found remnants of that phrase, sometimes edited to things like “a few moments,” “quick moments,” etc. Clean up, aisle all of ’em.

I also came across a few areas where I could have applied the writing practice of “show, not tell” a bit more liberally, to improve the overall work. So some sections got a good fleshing out, where it wouldn’t bog down the story. And of course, I found plenty of places where a better turn of phrase improved or better clarified the scene.

And finally—the subject you’ve all been waiting for—I found myself addressing sex in the book… something I’ve wrestled with from the very beginning of my writing. Originally, the book had NO sex, and just one buildup scene—not even foreplay, just a “kiss kiss cut to morning” scene like the G-rated stuff I grew up seeing on television. In later revisions, I decided to go all-in (ahem) on sex, taking my cues from George R. R. Martin’s Wild Cards series (which had so much graphic sex in them that I always used to wonder how they got away with not having to put an “adult” label on their covers somewhere… but there they were, in the science fiction aisle, waiting for some impressionable kid to pick up and be scarred for life).

But I was never really happy with that kind of writing for a science fiction adventure novel. It felt gratuitous, overdone, excessive; and I decided I just didn’t want that much grinding going on. So I’ve since scaled things back: The sex is still there, but handled much less graphically; more of the experience, less of the mechanics, so to speak. I’ve finally reached a style of sexual scene that is good with me, still capable of being erotic and exciting, but not so crazy that I’ll disappoint the readers who aren’t bothered by reading a sex scene, nor have to fight off the torch-and-pitchfork-carrying crowds.

[image error]

So, what I thought would be a single evening of find and replace turned out to be the 6th full revision of Kestral 1. Now that I think I’m done editing it, I need to the external features of the book: New cover art, new blurbs, and new titles. I don’t just want these books to read well, I want them to jump off the shelves and into the world’s readers. I still have a long way to go before it’s ready for that.

I’ve tried multiple covers and looks over the years, none of which totally satisfied me (or the audience, apparently). I like the idea of featuring Kestral on the cover, along with the ubiquitous spacecraft that sci-fi fans want to see on covers. Years ago, I found the model at left, and really thought she captured Carolyn Kestral. I’ve never been able to create the freighter Mary to my satisfaction. But I recently came across a spacecraft that, with editing, could be the Mary. (A lot will depend on my Photoshop skills on this one.) I’m hoping I can somehow combine the two into an awesome cover this time around, something exciting and eye-catching, something…

[image error]

…mmmmMaybe not.

Advertisements

Filed under: books, promotion, writing Tagged: marketing, promotion, reboot, rewrite, sci-fi book cover, sex in science fiction, The Kestral Voyages

View more on Steven Lyle Jordan's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on September 23, 2017 09:53

Desperately seeking 21st century SF

People tend to have a fascination with tradition… nostalgia… the things from their childhood. They reminisce about old movies or books, they collect old toys, they maintain that this from the past is better than that in the present… all of that. Makes sense, really: These are among our first memories, and we tend to cherish them.

[image error]I’ve made note of this in numerous posts in the past: The continued popular attachment to Star Trek, created in the 1960s; the rejection of more modern superhero archetypes in favor of those created in the 1960s or earlier; the popularity of movies like Star Wars and its essentially Flash Gordon sensibilities, etc. The trope also makes itself known by the many reboots that we seem to suffer at the hands of Hollywood and television every season. Nostalgia sells television and movies; and as long as it does, we can expect Hollywood and the TV networks to keep giving it to us.

But this effect seems to make less sense in science fiction, in which nostalgia seems to be at odds with a genre that tends to be about the present-day or, more often, the future. SF literature provides a lot more 21st century worldview than movies and TV. So why do we see it so often?

And what do we need to do to change that?

I have nothing against nostalgia; but as we spend so much time looking at yesterday, we’re neglecting to see today’s picture, impacted by the things we’ve discovered more recently. Scientists and laymen had an idea of how the universe worked in the 20th century, and our SF of the 20th century was built around that; but we’ve learned so much more since then, and we’re barely applying those lessons to our 21st century SF.

[image error]

Star Trek is a great example of a series and worldview that seemed to make great sense in the mid-1960s, when it was created by Gene Roddenberry, a World War II veteran who grew up in a world of allies and axis powers, a Cold War, numerous new worlds (islands) and aliens (natives) to discover and guide towards the American Way, and the suggestion that enough positive thoughts could hold off the worst of the bad guys and accomplish anything. Quite a bit of Roddenberry’s TV shows and ideas were takeoffs on the Buck Rogers theme of the early 20th century: A man catapulted into the future, where he must join with the people of the day to save his new world.

Compare that to Firefly, and its more 21st century worldview: That we won’t spread throughout the galaxy, but we’ll find a nice, comfortable star system to occupy when we wear out this planet; that we’ve found no aliens, but that’s okay, because there are a lot of races among us, and a lot of us are still like aliens to each other; that there are haves and have-nots, with blue collar workers of every persuasion in the middle; that we’re smart enough to terraform planets and fly between them, but we still have a lot to learn about human behavior.

[image error]Among the TV shows with a 21st century worldview and approach to SF, there are shows like Firefly, Person of Interest, Orphan Black, Humans, Black Mirror and a few others… compared to those 20th century shows like the many Star Trek iterations, Babylon 5, Battlestar Galactica, Farscape, Stargate and Doctor Who. (I’m still trying to quantify The Expanse… because, despite its excellent treatment of science and the realities of space travel, it still features hordes of people laboring on asteroids, planets at war with each other, and a stray alien life form with nigh-magical powers over physics taking over a planet. A great show, to be sure, but still with many 20th century sensibilities.) There are precious few recent SF movies that have a 21st century worldview… Ex Machina comes to mind, and maybe Arrival (which still comes down to untrusting soldiers blowing the most historic moment in human history all to hell); most of the rest are 20th century sci-fi feel-good flicks.

One thing you notice about the 20th century shows is that they are very free about moving about the galaxy at will, as people thought all we had to do to travel galaxy-wide was to throw big- and powerful-enough engines at the problem, so we could visit the multitudes of Earth-type planets out there, hang with all the friendly aliens and sling energy weapons at the unfriendly ones until they say Uncle. Today we know that it takes more power than we’ll ever be able to muster to travel at will throughout the galaxy, the number of actually Earth-type planets are probably a lot less numerous than we hoped, and the likelihood of finding aliens we can hang with, or shoot at, is infinitesimally small.

[image error]So, okay, maybe knowledge has taken some of the old-fashioned fun out of science fiction… but not all of it, not by a long shot. Cowboy BeBop is a great anime series with a 21st century worldview, about a group of bounty hunters that work within the Solar System (because that’s as far as we’ve gotten) and eke out a living however they can. Firefly largely echoed that 21st century worldview with freight haulers (and part-time thieves and bounty hunters). And though we can’t travel the galaxy freely, we are living in an era where we can travel the planet freely and communicate with other races naturally or with computer help. Technologies like AI, cloning and robotics exist alongside hacking, digital spying, drones, nanotechnology and cyborg body parts.

Anyone who can’t find a way to make a fun story out of those elements, just isn’t trying. And the good news is, those 21st century themes and elements also make for good intelligent SF, not just lighthearted sci-fi.

And it’s well past time we put those elements to work. We’re seventeen years into the 21st century; we should be crafting the modern SF that will make us look forward, as opposed to holding our imaginations back in the 20th century.

[image error]I emphasize this, as we are about to be gifted with another Star Trek series based on a 20th century worldview (and were recently presented with The Orville, a parody of that same worldview), and it seems there’s no end to the Flash Gordon-y Star Wars movies; while, in the past year, two of the greatest series with a 21st century worldview (Orphan Black and Person of Interest) have ended their acclaimed runs, and we have precious few 21st-century-oriented SF shows to look forward to.

And we need to be looking forward. We need to stop daydreaming about humongous space battles and evil aliens, and find ways to deal with our humongous environmental problems and evil corporations. We need to stop viewing people from other nations as if they were people from other planets, and we need to stop thinking that every problem can be solved with a big enough arsenal. We desperately need to be looking towards our future and seeking ways to fix it; not depending on aliens with magic drug and smog vacuums to fix things for us. Science fiction needs to do its proper job, giving us a glimpse into our future by showing us our present, and the things we can try to mitigate our problems in the future. The longer we dwell on the nostalgic SF of our 20th century… the more we’ll damage the world of the 21st century.

Advertisements

Filed under: entertainment, media, science fiction, social Tagged: 20th century science fiction, 21st century science fiction, Babylon 5, Buck Rogers, Cowboy BeBop, Firefly, Flash Gordon, humans, Orphan Black, Person of Interest, Star Trek, Star Wars, The Expanse, The Orville

View more on Steven Lyle Jordan's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on September 17, 2017 07:40

Next project: Jovian Skies!

Consider this my official announcement: I’m working on a new story in the Kestral universe!

I’ve been resisting the urge to start a new book for months now, as I knew I didn’t have a reliable way to promote it; but my renewed plans for a fresh marketing push are giving me the excuse I needed to resume writing long-form fiction. And this new Kestral book will take place between the timeline of the first and second novels, featuring the first meetings between Carolyn Kestral and Coray Gheris, Captain of the freighter Jovian Skies.

So, picture Jon Lovitz, using that nasal huckster’s voice of his, as he explains the latest storyline to the lead characters in The Three Amigos: “You meet Cochise. At first, you fight. But by the end of the picture, you’re friends.”

[image error]Although the story of Carolyn and Coray isn’t nearly that simple, this bit keeps playing in my head, because (thanks to The Lens) we all know this is what’s going to happen between them. And for some of you, that might be enough. But for many of you, that’s why this book needs to be so much more than another Geronimo picture. After all, there must have been something serious going on to cause these two people, who initially didn’t like each other, to become lovers in the end.

Well, you can all relax. Though a love story may be central to this book, this will still be a rousing Kestral adventure, featuring the rest of the crew of the Mary, as well as the crew of the Jovian Skies, and more of the fun details and idocyncracies of living in Kestral’s world that you’ve come to love.

And on that note, I have something else to announce: Concurrent with this new book will be a revision and re-release of the other three Kestral books. The revisions will include new covers on the exteriors, a new title for the first Kestral book, and some renaming of various elements in the very-popular Kestral universe to make the entire series sound better. No, no characters are getting new names… and it’s still set in that part-Star Trek, part-Firefly, more realistic than both universe I crafted years ago… but as long as I’m revising, I have to admit that there are some words that I was okay with initially, but I downright dislike now. (“Galarchy,” I’m looking straight at you.)

I’ve therefore pulled the existing Kestral books from circulation, with the intent of doing the revisions and releasing everything in a relatively short period as a fresh package. The new book will officially be the second of the series, re-numbering The Lens and The House of Jacquarelle to be the third and fourth books, respectively.

The working title of the new book is, appropriately, Jovian Skies.

[image error]I don’t yet know how different the revised books are going to look from the original books, but I’ll make sure the front matter makes clear which book is which, and what they were originally titled. Not that I’d mind everyone buying the books anew, but I don’t want anyone buying a book thinking it’s brand new, if it’s not.

All of this will play a part in my new marketing push, which will include a new series of newsletters, other revised or recovered novels, and enticing special content designed to draw crowds and whet everyone’s appetite. I have no idea how well this will all work out, but hey: At least you’re going to get a new book out of it.

Expect further details on the Kestral novels, and the rest of the marketing push, over the next few months.

View more on Steven Lyle Jordan's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on September 06, 2017 18:39

Once more unto the breach

So… it’s 2017, and there’s nothing much on television or going on in the world; so, after a few years’ hiatus from long-form writing and active marketing, I’ve decided to enter the fray once again… Novels! Tally ho! Have at thee! Excelsior! (‘n stuff.)

How did I come to this decision? Believe it or not, the discovery of (yet) another Facebook page, promising to teach me how to right the wrongs of my past marketing efforts and actually get this books thing to stick, has almost convinced me that I can work it out this time.

[image error]So I’m going to try to take the advice of people I mostly don’t know and have never heard of, most of whom are working in a different genre and/or marketing to a very different crowd than mine, and see if their ideas and guidance can help me out.

You can now surely see why I said almost: I’m still not entirely sure this is going to work, despite the assurances of others. I’m hesitant as hell about devoting copious amounts of my time, energy and money to this, considering how badly my efforts have been received in the past. And I’m not looking forward to another promoting failure. But I’m trying to screw on my game face and commit to getting it done… because I really do hope to turn my novels into a living (or, at least, a subsistence)… and also, because retirement is just starting to peek over my personal horizon, and unless I want to spend my golden years greeting Walmart shoppers, I need to get busy.

For those who are interested, you should know two things: The first is that this will be a slow burn, not a quick change… think of it more like smoking meat as opposed to throwing it in the microwave. There are a lot of tasks I have to work on, including updating my website, creating a new newsletter, compiling email lists, prepping special promotional content, and revising the three Kestral novels… as a start.

[image error]The second thing is this: I’m going to write a new Kestral novel. The working title is Kestral: Jovian Skies, and its focus will be the initial meeting and budding relationship between Carolyn Kestral and Coray Gheris. It will be set between the existing first and second books, renumbering The Lens and The House of Jacquarelle to books 3 and 4, respectively. And the new book will be a big part of the new promotion.

I haven’t worked out the details or the order of things yet, but I am working on all of the elements now, including the new book. Before you start looking, I’ve already taken the other Kestral books off the market, in order to do some revisions, create new covers and re-release all three, fresh and new. I will keep everyone posted, here and on Facebook, as things progress.

And may the Gods have mercy on my soul.

View more on Steven Lyle Jordan's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on August 29, 2017 19:08

It’s called “Evolution!”

“We outlived you! It’s called evolution!!”

Such fitting words to come out of the very last episode of Orphan Black, and especially as they were stated—hell, shouted—by Sarah Manning, the cloned sister who introduced us to this incredible ride from the beginning. (Spoilers ahead, sestras.)

[image error]Over the last five years, the viewers were introduced to a growing family of cloned sisters (all played masterfully by Tatiana Maslany (right), or her clone-doubles, Bailey Corneal and Kathryn Alexandre, on set) that had discovered each other and worked as a network to uncover Dyad’s plans and regain their freedom. But Sarah, the Orphan who started the series off-the-radar (or in-the-Black) of Neolution and the Dyad Institute, was always the viewers’ central POV; and to my mind, any ending to this series that wasn’t also a happy ending for Sarah, more than any of her sisters, would have felt like a cheat.

It was so satisfying, therefore, to see Sarah given the last word and the final blow, single-handedly taking out the con artist masquerading as supposedly 170-year-old P.T. Westmoreland and ending his pseudoscience-based plot to extend his own life by any means possible. It was fitting that Sarah, another con artist, would be the one to end the threat against her, her daughter and her sisters. And it was equally satisfying to see how well Sarah and her close network of sisters, Helena, Cosima and Alison, came out in the end.

Here, let me say that I was surprised to see the typical television trope of giving us a big explosion-filled ending to such a far-reaching saga, then handing us five (or fewer) minutes of the survivors carrying on with their lives, upended so well. When the Big Ending of Sarah killing Westmoreland happened just 30 minutes into the episode, my head rattled. “WHAT?!? Nobody does that!” One more way that Orphan Black has turned TV storytelling on its ear.

[image error]The entire second half of the show was then dedicated to the epilogue of the Orphan Black saga, and instead of a five-minute throwaway scene, it was so much more satisfying to see a full accounting of: Helena’s babies (and I was surprised to see they were both boys); Sarah’s decision to remain close to her sisters; Alison and Donnie… well, continuing to be Alison and Donnie; Arthur’s continuing relationship with the sisters (if Helena didn’t make him a Godfather to her kids, there’s no justice in this world); Rachel’s comeuppance (she ended up poor and alone… but after everything she’d done, she’d better count herself lucky to be alive); and Cosima’s partnership and mission with Delphine to find every Leda clone and deliver Cosima’s cure for the genetic defect they carried.

And the one last surprise that left me as stunned as Alison: The discovery that there were altogether 274 Leda clones out there! Imagine all the stories we might’ve missed over the years. Also, imagine the possibility that other clones might discover each other and build networks of their own. Then, maybe seek out other networks and join forces… the beginning of the Orphan Nation! (Hey, someone go check on Tatiana… I think I heard her faint just now…)

[image error]Over time, we may re-review Orphan Black and shine light on its quirks and flaws; it’s been revealed that the writers were somewhat… organic in developing each season, and as a result, certain logical lapses and story inconsistencies crept in over time. But as far as I’m concerned, this is not that day. To me, Orphan Black has represented that rare beast, serious and exquisitely-produced science fiction television, that this world gets way too damned little of. For now, it should be remembered for its accomplishments: Its unique but down-to-Earth storytelling; its incredible actors and characterizations; its unflinching look at the morals and ethics of medical experimentation, personal identity and corporate vs human rights; its incredible clone-duplicating effects; its many award nominations and wins; and its rabid, unwavering fan base.

Orphan Black now slips into the annals of rare science fiction series that other shows, SF and otherwise, should aspire to be; it will stand proudly on a dais that includes The Prisoner and Person of Interest, among very few others. Thanks for everything, #CloneClub.

[image error]

View more on Steven Lyle Jordan's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on August 14, 2017 04:29

Firefly: Imaginative, modern, beautiful… racist?

[image error]I’m a big fan of the TV show Firefly: Its world building, colorful characters and beautiful effects make it the most interesting of modern space-based SF television show of the past twenty years. I have the TV episodes and the movie, Serenity, and I enjoy them whenever I can.

But the show has been around for a while now (it has been surpassed in realism only by The Expanse on TV, and The Martian in movies); and as I’ve rewatched it recently, I have to admit to finally recognizing the Big Damned Secret about Firefly‘s world; and for an American, it’s hard to notice, because it doesn’t take the usual form that it does in the US; but once you see it, you can’t not see it.

Firefly is racist. Not against Africans, Muslims or Mexicans; instead, the downtrodden race is Asian. And our heroes are as racist as a bunch of Alabama rebels.

Now, it’s true that none of this is depicted blatantly. At no time does an Asian walk into a bar, only to have the bartender shout out, “Hey! We don’t serve your kind here!” Nowhere do we see Asians being singled out for bad treatment above-and-beyond what anyone else is suffering. And there don’t seem to be any Jim-Crow-esque “Chinese entrance to the rear” signs about. What we do see is racism by omission: An entire race being ignored at best, or underrepresented at worst, largely invisible, while the show’s characters have no concern about using elements of that race’s culture when it pleases them.

[image error]Not seeing it? OK, let’s look at this carefully. To begin with, our hero, Captain Mal Reynolds, comes to us by way of being on the losing side of a civil war between the Alliance and the Independents, a clear parallel to the American Civil War between the Union and the Confederacy. The most obvious comparison you can make as to which side is which is the fact that the Alliance won, as did the American Union. The political view central to our Civil War was that Slavery as an institution needed to be abolished; and the one thing we know about Firefly’s Alliance was that it was an effort to bring the Chinese and American political machines together. When the Alliance won, the American “melting pot” and Chinese became one.

The Independents were against this alliance between the US and the Chinese, though we’re not told exactly why; it’s alluded to that the Alliance would adversely impact the freedoms of all people—especially the Independents—but it’s not clear how.

[image error]Is this logo on Serenity’s side the equivalent of a confederate flag on a car door?

We do know that elements of Chinese culture have worked their way into the rest of the Alliance, especially in media, art and cursing. These are cultural elements that the crew of the Serenity, like everyone else, have wholly appropriated into daily use.

But what we also see—and this has already been pointed out by many fans of the show—is an ironically low number of Asians in these worlds. When we do see them, they tend to be living in the fringe areas, the hardscrabble life we see in most of the worlds Serenity visits. But we don’t see many Asians in prominent positions, in command roles on Alliance ships, in well-to-do areas. Though the Alliance is supposed to welcome the Chinese, those selfsame Chinese seem to be out of sight.

[image error]You’ll find more Asians here than you will in Firefly’s shiny cities.

And you’ll notice another prominent place where you don’t see Asians: Anywhere near Serenity or its crew. No Asians serve on or travel on the ship. Throughout the series, Mal never approaches or speaks to an Asian; few of the places he or his crew frequents seem to have many (or, for that matter, any) Asians around. The world of Firefly doesn’t think highly of Asians, nor does it give Asians many opportunities beyond farmer, sex worker or random crowd extra. Yeah, you’ll be hard-pressed to find an Asian on this show that isn’t covered in dirt.

Look at the parallels: A race and culture over which a war has been fought to include in everyday life; after the war, the race/culture is rarely seen, especially in upper or important roles; the main characters have appropriate parts of their culture, as has everybody else, but they do not associate themselves with the race itself, and even act as if they largely and effectively don’t exist. Are you seeing it yet?

Well, one more thing guaranteed to gnaw at the back of your mind is the unfortunate similarity between the words Browncoat and Redneck. Though Mal and his crew don’t apply the word Browncoat to themselves, others apply it to them regularly, and Mal doesn’t argue the appellation or its assumptions. And he demonstrates the same… let’s say, “lack of appreciation” for Asians that rednecks tend to demonstrate towards Africans in the US.

[image error]You see it now, don’t you? In fact, you’ll have a damned hard time not seeing it after reading this, won’t you? Now you know how I felt upon realizing it myself: That the TV series that seemed so realistic, so sensible, so desirable, should also be centered around a main character who is the equivalent of an unapologetic redneck and racist, who resents an American-Asian alliance, walks through life just sort of looking past Asians and acting like they’re not a part of his world at all. It wouldn’t surprise me to find that Mal secretly dislikes Simon and River, not just because of their obvious rich upbringing (or the slightly-dangerous sister), but that even their last name—Tam, a very Asian-sounding name—reminds him of something he quietly hates.

Now, it’s possible that this was intentional on the part of the writers. If maybe the series had lived on beyond its meager part-season of episodes, some of this might have come to a more obvious light and have been addressed. It may be that Joss Whedon fully planned on exploring this racist undercurrent in individuals and society, maybe highlighting this clear flaw in Mal’s (not to mention society’s) character so he could be reformed… or, at least, softened somewhat. Maybe we would’ve eventually seen “Yellow Power” slogans and an NAACP for the Chinese (you don’t even have to change the acronym!). Or heard news reports about an unusual number of Asians that had been killed by Alliance peacekeepers this year. Yellow Lives Matter, and such.

[image error]There’s an Asian! There’s– oh, wait, she’s a prostitute. Never mind.

And is this the only social area that can use development? It could be pointed out that women in general haven’t been presented in the best light on Firefly, one female character on the crew being a prostitute, another being crazy and homicidal, the third being largely emotionless (okay, we caught her smiling in bed once), and the last being immature; likewise, we see few women in rich or command positions, they are largely portrayed as prostitutes, con artists and eye-candy wives.

But the parallels between Asians in Firefly and Africans in post-Civil-War US are the most striking, and unfortunate. Not just because it seems humans can’t function, even in the future, unless they have at least one group to unite themselves against; but because the characters that need that aspect of their personality changed the most… just happen to be the show’s central characters.

View more on Steven Lyle Jordan's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on August 12, 2017 12:02

Firefly: Imaginative, modern, beautiful… racists?

[image error]I’m a big fan of the TV show Firefly: Its world building, colorful characters and beautiful effects make it the most interesting of modern space-based SF television show of the past twenty years. I have the TV episodes and the movie, Serenity, and I enjoy them whenever I can.

But the show has been around for a while now (it has been surpassed in realism only by The Expanse on TV, and The Martian in movies); and as I’ve rewatched it recently, I have to admit to finally recognizing the Big Damned Secret about Firefly‘s world; and for an American, it’s hard to notice, because it doesn’t take the usual form that it does in the US; but once you see it, you can’t not see it.

Firefly is racist. Not against Africans, Muslims or Mexicans; instead, the downtrodden race is Asian. And our heroes are as racist as a bunch of Alabama rebels.

Now, it’s true that none of this is depicted blatantly. At no time does an Asian walk into a bar, only to have the bartender shout out, “Hey! We don’t serve your kind here!” Nowhere do we see Asians being singled out for bad treatment above-and-beyond what anyone else is suffering. And there don’t seem to be any Jim-Crow-esque “Chinese entrance to the rear” signs about. What we do see is racism by omission: An entire race being ignored at best, or underrepresented at worst, largely invisible, while the show’s characters have no concern about using elements of that race’s culture when it pleases them.

[image error]Not seeing it? OK, let’s look at this carefully. To begin with, our hero, Captain Mal Reynolds, comes to us by way of being on the losing side of a civil war between the Alliance and the Independents, a clear parallel to the American Civil War between the Union and the Confederacy. The most obvious comparison you can make as to which side is which is the fact that the Alliance won, as did the American Union. The political view central to our Civil War was that Slavery as an institution needed to be abolished; and the one thing we know about Firefly’s Alliance was that it was an effort to bring the Chinese and American political machines together. When the Alliance won, the American “melting pot” and Chinese became one.

The Independents were against this alliance between the US and the Chinese, though we’re not told exactly why; it’s alluded to that the Alliance would adversely impact the freedoms of all people—especially the Independents—but it’s not clear how.

[image error]