Cian Beirdd's Blog, page 3

A List: ��Knights of the Round Table

 

 Now I won’t for a moment entertain the idea that there was a Round Table, or that Arthur’s knights followed the rules of a twelfth-century feminist instead of a fifth-century code of honor.  On the other hand, Arthur did exist and he had to have warriors.  In that spirit, I thought I would list off the list as some of the major writers knew it.  I’ll do them without commentary and see what you find interesting:

 

 Culhwch ac Olwen                                     Chr��tien de Troyes             Sir Thomas Malory

*Kei                                                                 Lancelot du Lac                    Accolon

*Bedwyr                                                         Bedivere                                Andred

*Greidawl Galldofyd                                    Calogrenant                          Balin

*Gwythyr son of Greiddawl                        Edern ap Nudd                    Balan

*Greid son of Eri                                           Erec                                      Calogrenant

*Cynddelig the Guide                                  Esclados                               Claudin

*Tathal Twyll Goleu                                     Gauvain                                Dinadin

*Mailwys son of Baeddan                          Gonemans                           Gaheris

*Cnychwr son of Nes                                  Keu                                       Galahad

*Cubert son of Daere                                 Meleagant                           Galehault

*Fercos son of Poch                                    Yvain                                    Galeschin

*Lluber Beuthach                                        Perceval                               Gareth

*Conul Bernach                                           Tristan                                  Gawain

*Gwyn son of Esni                                                                                     Gornemant

*Gwyn son of Nwyfre                                                                               Hector de Maris

*Gwyn son of Nudd                                                                                  Kay

*Edern son of Nudd                                                                                 Kahedin

*Cadwy son of Gereint                                                                            Lamorak

*Fflewdwr Fflam Wledig                                                                          Lancelot of the Lake

*Ruawn Pebyr son of Dorath                                                                 Lionel

*Bradwen son of Moren Mynawg                                                         Loholt

*Moren Mynawg                                                                                      Lucan

*Dalldaf son of Cunin Cof                                                                      Meleagant

*the son of Alun Dyfed                                                                           Mordred

*the son of Saidi                                                                                      Ywain

*the son of Gwryon                                                                                Palamedes

*Uchdryd Host-sustainer                                                                       Pellinore

*Cynwas Cwrfagl                                                                                     Percival

*Gwrhyr Gwarthegfras                                                                          Sagramore

*Ysperir Ewingath                                                                                  Segwarides

*Gallcoid Gofyniad                                                                                 Tristram

*Duach son of Gwawrdur the Hunchback                                         Ywain the Bastard

*Brathach son of Gwawrdur the Hunchback                                    Bors

*Nerthach son of Gwawrdur the Hunchback

*Cilydd Hundred-holds

*Canastyr Hundred-hands

*Cors Hundred-claws

*Esgeir Gulhwch Gofyn Cawn

*Drust Iron-Fist

*Glewlwyd Gafaelfawr

*Lloch of the Striking Hand

*Anwas the Winged

*Sinnoch son of Seithfedd

*Wadu son of Seithfedd

*Naw son of Seithfedd

*Gwenwynwyn son of Naw son of Seithfedd

*Bedyw son of Seithfedd

*Gobrwy son of Echel Mighty-Thigh

*Echel Mighty-Thigh

*Mael son of Roigol

*Dadweir Blind-Head

*Garwyli son of Gwythawg Gwyr

*Gwythawg Gwyr

*Gormand son of Ricca

*Menw son of Teirgwaed

*Digon son of Alar

*Selyf son of Sinoid

*Gusc son of Achen

*Nerth son of Cadarn

*Drudwas son of Tryffin

*Twrch son of Perif

*Twrch son of Anwas

*Iona king of France

*Sel son of Selgi

*Teregud son of Iaen

*Sulien son of Iaen

*Bradwen son of Iaen

*Moren son of Iaen

*Siawn son of Iaen

*Cradawg son of Iaen

*Dirmyg son of Caw

*Iustig son of Caw

*Edmig son of Caw

*Angawdd son of Caw

*Gofan son of Caw

*Celin son of Caw

*Connyn son of Caw

*Mabsant son of Caw

*Gwyngad son of Caw

*Llwybyr son of Caw

*Coch son of Caw

*Meilig son of Caw

*Cynwal son of Caw

*Ardwyad son of Caw

*Ergyriad son of Caw

*Neb son of Caw

*Gildas son of Caw

*Calcas son of Caw

*Hueil son of Caw

*Samson Dry-lip

*Taliesin Chief of Bards

*Manawydan son of Llyr

*Llary son of Casnar Wledig

*Brian son of Fergant king of Brittany

*Saranhon son of Glythwyr

*Llawr son of Erw

*Anynnawg son of Menw son of Teirgwaed

*Gwyn son of Nwyfre

*Fflam son of Nwyfre

*Gereint son of Erbin

*Ermid son of Erbin

*Dyfel son of Erbin

*Gwyn son of Ermid

*Cyndrwyn son of Ermid

*Hyfeid One-mantle

*Eiddon the Magnanimous

*Reidwn Arwy

*Gormand son of Ricca

*Llawfrodedd the Bearded

*Noddawl Cut-beard

*Berth son of Cado

*Reidwn son of Beli

*Iscofan the Generous

*Yscawin son of Panon

*Morfran son of Tegid

*Sandde Angel���s Form

*Cynwyl the Saint

*Uchdryd son of Erim

*Eus son of Erim

*Henwas the Winged son of Erim

*Henbeddestyr son of Erim

*Scilti Yscafntroed son of Erim

*Teithi the Old son of Gwynhan

*Carneddyr son of Gofynion the Old

*Gwenwynwyn son of Naf

*Llygadrudd Emys

*Gwrfoddw the Old

*Culfanawyd son of Goryon

*Llenlleawg the Irishman

*Dyfynwal the Bald

*Dunart king of the North

*Teyrnon Twrf Liant

*Tegfan the Lame

*Tegyr Talgellawg

*Gwrddyfal son of Ebrei

*Morgant the Generous

*Gwystyl son of Nwython

*Rhun son of Nwython

*Llwydeu son of Nwython

*Gwyddre son of Llwydeu

*Drem son of Dremidydd

*Eiddoel son of Ynyr

*Glwyddyn the Craftsman

*Cynyr the Fair-bearded

*Henwas

*Hen Wyneb

*Hen Cydymdaith

*Gallgoig

*Berwyn son of Cyrenyr

*Paris king of France

*Osla Big-Knife

*Gwyddawg son of Menester

*Garanwyn son of Kei

*Amren son of Bedwyr

*Eli

*Trachmyr, chief huntsmen of Arthur

*Llwydau son of Cilcoed

*Hunabwy son of Gwryon

*Gwyn Godyfron

*Gweir Dathar Wenidawg

*Gweir son of Kadellin Silver Brow

*Gweir Gwrhyd Enwir

*Gweir White Spear

*the sons of Llwch Llawynnyawg

*Llenlleawg the Irishman

*Cas son of Saidi

*Gwrfan Golden Hair

*Gwilenhen King of France

*Gwittard son of Aedd king of Ireland

*Garselid the Irishman

*Panawr Head of the Host

*Atleudor son of Naf

*Gwyn the Irascible

*Celli

*Cuel

*Gilla Stag-leg

*Sol

*Gwaddyn Ossol

*Gwaddyn Oddeith

*Long Erwm

*Long Atrwm

*Huarwar son of Halwyn

*Gwyddrud

*Gwydden Astrus

*Sugyn son of Sugneddyd

*Llwng

*Dygyflwng

*Anoeth the Bold

*Gwefyl son of Gwastad

*Uchdryd Cross-Beard

*Elidir the Guide

*Brys son of Brysethach

*Gruddlwyn the Dwarf; 

Bwlch son of Cleddyf Cyfwlch, grandson of Cleddyf Difwlch

Cyfwlch son of Cleddyf Cyfwlch, grandson of Cleddyf Difwlch

Sefwlch, son of Cleddyf Cyfwlch, grandson of Cleddyf Difwlch

*Eheubryd son of Cyfwlch

*Gorasgwrn son of Nerth

*Gwaeddan son of Cynfelyn Ceudawg

*Pwyll Half-Man

*Dwn the Vigorous Chieftain

*Eiladar son of Pen Llarcan

*Cyneddyr the Wild son of Hetwn Silver Brow

*Sawyl High-Head

*Gwalchmei son of Gwyar

*Gwalhafed son of Gwyar

*Gwrhyr

*Cethtrwm the Priest

*Clust son of Clustfeinad

*Medyr son of Methredydd

*Gwiawn Cat Eyes

*Ol son of Olwydd

*Bitwini the Bishop

BSG III?

In my blogs I have mentioned the new Battlestar Galactica series a few times, with its beautifully drawn characters, the varied and engrossing plot that was everything that Sci Fi should be, and the unexpected twists.  Honestly, if I could ever create anything that clever and real in my writing I would happily retire knowing I would never be able to top it.

So when I bring up this next topic, please keep in mind where I am coming from – a place of deep respect and awe for the universe.  A few days ago I learned that the same person who created the original series will come out with a reboot movie next year.  I admit, I’m starved for BSG.  I devoured the soap opera Caprica series, I saw some potential in the prequel movie Blood and Chrome, and I have been waiting for someone to say they have managed a script that lives up to the series for a movie or even a miniseries.  I would love to see the surviving players back for another hurrah!

But to go from the gold that was the BSG cast and backdrop to anything less will be torture.  I have seen the best Sci Fi t.v. show ever.  I suppose it’s possible that something better will come along (alright inevitable), but I very much doubt that this show will ever be topped, and I am confident that it will be awhile before anyone does a better series.  Besides, I don’t want to see another cast.  BSG II came out hardly a decade ago.  The cast are all still active and healthy.  It feels like it would have if someone had tried to recast Star Trek in 1976 with a movie.  It was another decade after that before that crew made their last movie, and only the start of a sequel t.v. show finally allowed the public to move on.  That gives us another decade at least before we could be ready for another version of BSG.

And to be honest, Wagon Train to the Stars doesn’t hold a candle to the second version of Battlestar Galactica.  Nor do any of the Star Trek shows.

I Have a Question

As a student of history with a curiosity about the future I have noticed a definite trend about cleanliness.  When the first apes were forced out of the dense forests they ate meat raw.  In fact, they took what they could of a carcass lying on the ground.  Only later, after the discovery of fire, did we think to cook it and kill off all the potential bacteria in the meat.

Pottery, first used after we became agrarian, provided another level of cleanliness.  So did the sanitation system offered by Roman aqueducts.  Europeans slipped backward during the Middle Ages, when it was thought that a person’s oils were sacred and should only rarely be washed off, but we did improve again once science got moving forward.  Soap, refrigerators, better cooking methods – lots of things have provided mankind with the tools to keep ourselves and our food cleaner in the intervening centuries.

Parallel to that has been a trend toward keeping our homes cleaner.  During the ice age we lived in caves.  No one would have thought of sweeping let alone vacuuming them.  Nowadays to have a dirty floor is downright embarrassing.

 

 So my question is simple.  Do you see that trend continuing?  Are we going to have droids in the twenty-second century that continually pick up every piece of lint and dust that touches the ground?  Are people going to pass through some sort of force field that sterilizes microscopic organisms before we come into a house?  Each night will we be scanned for any infectious agents?  Will we have methods that flash freeze all foods at the push of a button, or dehydrate them?  Maybe we will be like it is in Star Trek too, where all food is materialized on request.

 

 I personally think that cleanly beyond a certain point is unhealthy.  Maybe I just can’t get an OCD person out of my mind, but to need an environment to be too clean can be just as unpleasant mentally as a mess can be physically.  Don’t get me wrong, it would be great not to worry about cooking or cleaning (my two least favorite things to do), but maybe it wouldn’t be worth the price.  Somehow, the idea of living Han Solo’s universe where everything is five minutes away from falling apart seems better than living in Star Trek’s, where everything is always perfect.

Like Mulder and Scully …

Geek Alert!  Yesterday I found out that the X-Files is going back on the air next year with a limited amount of shows.  That’s right, the International Movie Data Base says that both lead characters from the original and the two movies will be back in action when the show starts up again.  I can’t even express how happy that makes me.  After nine years of bizarre cases, crazy monsters, and a plot so twisted you had to see the finale to get it all, we might actually get to see a finale that satisfies.  And no, that pathetic movie that got both agents back in the FBI was no ending.  With the 2012 invasion date looming over the show at the time, that was a tease.

 

 So, what are they going to do?  I would love for them to deal with the alien invasion.  They had a couple of tools already – the alien rebels, several government officials who might have some intelligence on the subject, clones of abducted humans, and of course Scully’s baby.  The show might also bring back some interesting characters from previous seasons to help; the computer genius and the guy with the shadows comes to mind.

It’s possible that the shows will simply be a helpless attempt by the pair to stop the invasion.  The show was always dark, so that it isn’t as crazy as it might sound.  It might actually be fun to see the inner workings of the alien ships, or even how they interact.  And if our last shot of the duo is them being mutated, what a beautiful parting shot on governments, human weakness, and our own failings in general

Duchovny (Mulder) and Anderson (Scully) have repeatedly said that they don’t want to do anything more involving the aliens, though.  So the show might try going back to business as usual.  But can we really go backwards?  That would feel a lot like watching a football season up to the Superbowl and then watching preseason games.  I pray that doesn’t happen.  I pray that X-Files doesn’t embarass itself.  But I am going to watch.

Kids and the End of the World

Does anyone else remember growing up with The Goonies?  How about the Rat Pack movies?  You know teen angst, a little danger, a little romance.  Or more recently how about the Harry Potter series, or even Twilight (hack-hack)?

Hunger Games, Divergent, Maze Runner, Ender’s Game!  What is it lately with kids having to save the world?  It isn’t enough that they are still trying to figure out who they are and what their place is in society, they have to help everyone else, too.

Or maybe someone is more brilliant than we give them credit for.  We have all seen our share of conspiracy shows/movies.  I think we have all seen and heard enough to realize that it isn’t in the government’s best interests to tell its people everything.  That naturally makes its citizens less trusting; how much should we trust, how corrupt is the government?  When do the people in power start hiding things for their own benefit instead of just to protect the people they are supposed to serve?

And it does get overdone.  Sure, I think that the U.S. government is probably doing things that could effect our future but hasn’t told the citizens about it.  It could be something as crazy as a stargate program, as dramatic as a threat of invasion, first contact with a species that would panic the population (remember Childhood’s End?), or something that connects all those crazy tidbits of information on Ancient Aliens together.  I don’t know.  Maybe there are Vampires and the governments of the world have been negotiating with them ever since the Black Plague!

���

���But by making kids go through the danger, it makes us more sensitive to it.  An 18 year-old should not have to lead a revolution.  A 12 year-old should not be responsible for Earth’s survival.  It’s unfair to say the least, but it’s also stupid from a practical standpoint.  Kids aren’t put in those situations for the simple reason not that it is too much of a burden for them, but because they don’t yet have the life experiences to succeed at them.  That dynamic makes for a great story and highlights the themes that recent juvenile fiction has focused on.  Maybe that’s why we’re seeing so much of it lately.  I hope so.

I also hope that hitting those themes on such an emotional level will help the public focus on some of the problems brought up in these movies.  Are we pawns of our own government?  Are we being directed in our daily activities or in our pasttimes?  I keep coming back to a plotline of Supernatural for one season.  Leviathons had appeared on Earth and were preparing to make the human population their cattle.  Using the right advertisment and getting the right scientific knowledge together, they were going to sell foods that immediately made people fat and stupid – ripe for harvesting.  I doubt anyone is being quite that blatant, but it would make me feel a little better if I knew what was going on.

Side Kicks!

���

���I hope you will forgive my absence last week.  A literary agent took an interest in my Arthurian novel but told me I had still made some fundamental mistakes with it, so I spent the week correcting.  The novel is off for another look, wish me luck.

I was thinking about side-kicks the other day, and how they’ve really evolved in the last few years.  I can remember Superman’s supporting cast consisted of Lois Lane and that photographer.  Most of the adventures revolved around rescuing one of them (mainly Lois), while back at the newsroom Clark Kent was the flunky that Lois had to teach.  At least Clark wasn’t always the hero but still – boring.

DC and Marvel both exploited the idea of having teens as the side kick.  Robin, Batgirl, and Bucky Barnes all started off as the lesser partners who weren’t quite mature enough to be on their own and needed a little paternal help.  It always felt like Leave it to Beaver with action sequences.

���

���Ugh the stereotypes right?  At least Bruce Lee’s actions for The Green Hornet switched things up a little bit, making the rich guy the side kick to his manservant.  Not that that was planned.  Can you imagine anyone setting up a t.v. series with an Asian lead in the sixties.  Ooh, I’ll leave that one alone Bruce.

But that just brings up another stereotype – the comic relief.  I always thought Porky Pig and Daffy Duck did it best, but heroes were so heroic that it was believed their stories needed a little comedy to lighten things up.  Buck Rogers and Tweeky anyone?

���

���What’s happened in the last few years?  How about the recent Spider-Man series, when the “side-kick” was just as smart as the hero and just as brave.  How about Batman, where Lucius Fox is every bit as heroic and intelligent as the hero, and wiser.  He just doesn’t have the same toys.  He’s also older.  Or Superman, where Lois saves him about as much as he saves her.  Or when Trinity went on a mission knowing that her blind lover (Neo) needed a driver but that he was the only one who had a chance of surviving.

The list goes on and on, but what we’re seeing is that the spotlight is no longer entirely on the hero, it’s being shared.  And because of that, the heroes are being given a little more depth.  They have real relationships with these people, and they hurt when their allies die.  I think it’s a great maturity in the comics and I can’t wait to see how it continues to develop.  After all, with Ant-Man, Doctor Strange, and a plethora of independent DC movies promised out in the next few years there will be plenty of opportunity.  Who knows, Star Wars might even try its hand.  The imitation of Akira Kurosawa with R2-D2 and C-3PO played out nicely and the introduction worked well in Episodes 1-3, but seeing more depth with Chewbacca, or something unexpected with Skywalkers heroes or the villain’s minions would be great fun.

Chronologies in the Comics

���

���Everyone kind of knows the story of Batman.  His parents were killed in The Depression outside of a theater.  When Bruce grew up, he focused all that rage into battling crime so that no other child would have to suffer through what he had.  But the key element is that he was a boy during The Depression.  Do a little math, that makes him eighty this year, at the very youngest.  Since he first appeared in 1939 though, he’s more like 94.  The comics have his son as a young man now and he only stopped being an active hero a decade or so ago.  Hmm.

Magneto and Professor X have the same problem, they are inextricably linked to World War II, which makes them around 90 now.  Together, they are connected to a large portion of the Marvel universe, similarly confusing the chronology of those heroes and villains.

The official explanation is that these characters are in an alternate universe and the comics have given them what is called an “extended chronology”.  The reality is that DC and Marvel recognize what valuable commodities these and other characters are and don’t want to lose them.  Apart from the recent X-Men movies, they’ve also been reticent to actually date them, either.

���

���But really, don’t these characters lose some of their power by living on, and on?  I would love to see storylines about how Bruce’s son struggles with the legacy, about how he has a family and they fight about how to or if they even should continue the Batman persona.  There would be a beautiful irony in a half-dozen Waynes working together.

It would be great to see Xavier die and watch the other, individualistic X-Men decide how to go on and whether it would be together or separate.  The children and grandchildren of superheroes could be lots of fun.  Watching the old-timers come back or be somehow rejuvenated once in a great while would be refreshing, and a developing fraternity of retired superheroes might be more interesting than all their original stories put together.

If the guys in comics just weren’t so stuck on the same heroes we’ve had for seventy or more years.

Sometimes Older is Better

Let your mind go blank for a minute (for some of us, that is a perpetual state of mind). ��O.K., now I am going to throw a few pairs at you – Predator/Jotun, Silicon Entity/Unicorn, Slivine/Gorgon, Borg/Sea Creature. ��Forget for a moment that the Sci Fi creatures are scarier, and more deadly. ��Which seems more real to you? ��Remember, they are all equally fictitious. ��When we do start meeting other species, they might just as well look like reptiles and hunt as they might be really tall and prefer the cold.

Yet the beings from mythology do seem more real, somehow. ��When the Egyptians started forming their religion, they would take the animal associated with that quality, say intelligence, and mesh it with a human. ��That is why the Egyptian gods all look so weird. ��When the Greeks��were overrun by mounted warriors, they didn’t realize that man and horse were separate – which is why centaurs became a part of their belief system. ��The point is that these figures of mythology aren’t just beings��of religions we no longer believe in, they are a part of our collective psyches.

I have an admission to make. ��I’ve always thought that stories that employed minotaurs, pegasii, or werewolves were made by authors who had not been creative with that aspect of their stories. ��That connection that stories like Narnia and Tolkien make, or better yet the explanations to be found in the really good science fiction are deeper and more profound than anything a cool looking new species could manage.

Technology

Ever notice that no matter what major universe you are in everyone seems to have the same technology?  There are of course exceptions – Dr. Who has people who can travel through time on one end and the earliest episodes were made before we had left Earth’s orbit on the other.  But with Star Wars and Star Trek, every race seems to be within a few decades of each other.

You might point out that in Matrix, any Asimov work, the Riddick series, and Dune there are only divisions within the human race and therefore it makes a little more sense that there wouldn’t be much variation.  Of course the flaw there is that there are 15-30 billion planets in the universe that might support life we would recognize.  It seems ridiculous to assume any galaxy wouldn’t have dozens of planets with life.

Back to the Roddenberry/Lucas universes.  Guesses now are that our universe is right around 14 billion years old and that our galaxy was born about a billion years after that.  Let those numbers sink in – billions!  It took our planet 14 billion years to find a sun, be created itself, develop life, and for some of that life to ponder the universe.  14 billion!  It’s safe to say not only that there are other sentient species out there, but that most if not all of them are technologically millennia ahead or behind us.  Look at our own planet, where the West had been trading with the East for centuries and when we finally sent ships to India we realized that they were at least a century behind us.  We were building massive structures and they hadn’t developed the architecture to yet.

The Native Americans were further behind, from a military standpoint, because of their philosophies.  The Aztecs were conquered by a few hundred conquistadores.  Further north and south the natives were at the mercy of bad weather because they were largely hunter/gatherers.  You could make the argument that many Americans hadn’t even entered the Neolithic period in 1492, that puts them 10,000 years behind the Europeans, and they were on the same planet!

I fully grasp that stories are more interesting when equals are competing so I can empathize with Lucas and Roddenberry in that respect.  On the other hand, a universe with such broad technological differences could be great fun to explore.  If anyone has seen the Stargate series you can understand.  Watching the original group run into aliens who could revive a dead person one weak and another that had barely entered the bronze age the next gave the show a flavor that is often missing in space operas.

Of course the one important exception to my complaint is Arthur C. Clarke, who wrote of life forms that had lost their physical form and who could create life on other planets.  He wrote about god as a being who experimented on a universal scale.  He offered dozens of methods to travel the universe, all perfectly scientific and different enough that one often reads his work purely to see what kind of inventions he might have conjured up for his latest version of humanity’s, or some other race’s future.

Science Fiction has grown by leaps and bounds over the last twenty years.  The storie look better, the acting, plots, characters, and species are all done with more depth than ever before.  But we should not forget the aliens, or their technological disparity with us.  In the time of Dune and Asimov, aliens could only be painted as inferiors and so they were often avoided, but we’ve gotten over that.  There is no excuse any more.

http://exoplanets.newscientistapps.com

Superhero Superpowers

One of the reasons I’ve never been able to place comic book heroes in the science fiction or the fantasy genres has been common sense.  Science fiction might take the idea of faster-than-light travel and run with it, but there is usually some explanation as to why they use it (Star Trek says you are traveling through subspace, Stargate has gates all over the galaxy that create artificial wormholes, Andromeda makes use of string theory and the gravity wells of stars to navigate).  They might use alternate dimensions, or alternate realities, but always there is some reason.

The same goes in fantasy.  There are certain types of people who can use magic, and there are always specific rules within the universe that cannot be diverted from; in Middle Earth, dwarfs cannot use Elven magic for instance.  In Narnia, even Aslan cannot break the laws he has set down.

But not with comic heroes.  The one that first bothered me was Superman.  If comic heroes are living in the same universe we are in, but just with superheroes, then they should follow the same rules as we have to.  So, when we learn that Superman’s body is so dense that a single strand of his hair can lift a ton it should seem a little odd that his body is also so light that he can fly.  Not jump, like the Hulk for instance, he can fly.  Alien physiology or no, that just doesn’t make sense in our universe.

Wonder Woman can be dead, but if you bury her in the earth she will completely heal.  How?  If you follow the matriarchal thinking or the New Age magic she might be reborn, but not healed.

Marvel is no better.  If Spider-Man’s DNA was mixed with a spider, why was his brain unaffected.  It would have been a simple storyline to say he got a little dumber, but the multiple eyes and the different approach to life could have been very interesting.

Don’t get me wrong, I like the heroes and I love what Marvel has been doing over the last few years, but sometimes their stuff has some serious holes in it.

So if Batman was raised during the Great Depression (1929-1939), why is he still being put in the latest cars?  I wouldn’t expect that of any fantasy or science fiction character.  There you accept that people age and die.  In the case of the distant future or a magical past they may live longer than us (the Dune universe has people’s life-spans doubled by Melange), but they do age and die.  Not Batman, Namor, Iron-Man, or any of the dozens of major heroes that have been around forever.  Instead, comics use what’s called a sliding chronology.  It allows the comic companies to keep modernizing their most popular characters.

That’s not science fiction or fantasy.  I like the genre.  I see its potential.  It just frustrates me that it can’t be internally consistent.

It’s also frustrating when they add things, but I can live with that.  When Wolverine was introduced in the 1970s he was paired with Captain America on occasion.  Obviously he had never been in the World War II Captain America comics, so he had to be added retroactively.  I’ll not get upset with anyone for not seeing ahead 25 or 30 years.  Nor will I be upset if science one day concludes that all the extra dimensions (there are probably 11 you know) are too small for interstellar travel.  They could never have known that when Star Trek first came out in 1966, and though things are going that way now we still aren’t sure.