Nicola Griffith's Blog, page 116
July 9, 2012
The Hunger Games, the movie
On my way back from the UK last week I ate lunch and watched a film. The lunch, despite one's palate being really different at seven or eight miles up, wasn't entirely bad. Sadly the film, The Hunger Games, was.
Lunch started well enough. The amuse-bouche was luscious slivers of cold, very lightly smoked salmon. I couldn't decide on a starter, so I ordered two: mackerel and asparagus. Both were, to be blunt, vile. I ate them anyway. The main course, the Guinea fowl, was damn good--though the stuff that came with it (some slithery cucumber, ugh) wasn't. I didn't fancy any of the desserts (too much wheat and cream) so ended up scoffing a handful of specially-made-for-British Airways chocolates (which were most fine; I wish I could remember the brand). The wine was a nifty Champagne, Laurent-Perrier Grand Siècle, followed by a Chassagne-Montrachet, not as good as the stunning Meursault I had on the plane on my February trip, but still pretty tasty. The green tea with jasmine pearls afterwards was more than acceptable.
But, oh dear me, the film: thin and utterly unconvincing. The acting was poor, which was a horrible surprise--I've seen most of these actors do great work. They didn't make me feel anything. And with this premise, I should. These are children killing children. It should have been shocking, awful. But it felt like...nothing. Not vicious. Not morally repugnant. Not tense. Not involving. Not full of the dopamine rush of reversals. Just empty. What's the point of a great premise but if neither book nor film are willing to really Go There. Take, for example, the scene in which Katniss saws through a branch to dump a humming nest of deadly tracker-jackers (super-toxic wasps) on her rivals. You would think (at least I did) that Katniss would have understood the consequences of her actions and wrestled with it. But she didn't hesitate; as she sawed away she seemed utterly unbothered by what might happen next. It's hard to say whether this is the fault of the writing, the acting, or the directing, but Katniss in that moment comes across as either unfeeling or stupid. Not the best way to induce sympathy. Also, I remember when reading the book how annoyed I was that Collins didn't really examine what it meant/how it felt when Katniss killed a rival with an arrow. The film (probably the book, too, but I read it once, very quickly, long ago and wouldn't swear to it) elides Katniss's grief over Rue (which was possibly the least convincing moment of the film) with Katniss's killing of, well, whoever it was she killed. (Yep, it was that moving.)
The editing felt off kilter, too. Though perhaps the trouble lay with the original footage. I don't know enough about these things to tell. Wherever the fault lies, the action sequences were definitely wrong. It went wrong right at the beginning--Katniss's bow hunt in the woods--and never recovered.
Even the sets were unbelievable. Both District 12 and the Capitol felt like Disney theme parks.
As for the ending, it doesn't work. Halfway through the film I found myself trying to remember how the book went, and couldn't--because I hadn't believed it when I read it. The rule changes are too convenient. They let Katniss off the hook of every moral dilemma. She never has to make hard decisions. She never has to choose. I end up not caring, not believing. I end up not making the story mine; I forget what happens because it doesn't matter to me.
There isn't one moment of this film that I liked. An emphatic Thumbs Down for this one.
Lunch started well enough. The amuse-bouche was luscious slivers of cold, very lightly smoked salmon. I couldn't decide on a starter, so I ordered two: mackerel and asparagus. Both were, to be blunt, vile. I ate them anyway. The main course, the Guinea fowl, was damn good--though the stuff that came with it (some slithery cucumber, ugh) wasn't. I didn't fancy any of the desserts (too much wheat and cream) so ended up scoffing a handful of specially-made-for-British Airways chocolates (which were most fine; I wish I could remember the brand). The wine was a nifty Champagne, Laurent-Perrier Grand Siècle, followed by a Chassagne-Montrachet, not as good as the stunning Meursault I had on the plane on my February trip, but still pretty tasty. The green tea with jasmine pearls afterwards was more than acceptable.
But, oh dear me, the film: thin and utterly unconvincing. The acting was poor, which was a horrible surprise--I've seen most of these actors do great work. They didn't make me feel anything. And with this premise, I should. These are children killing children. It should have been shocking, awful. But it felt like...nothing. Not vicious. Not morally repugnant. Not tense. Not involving. Not full of the dopamine rush of reversals. Just empty. What's the point of a great premise but if neither book nor film are willing to really Go There. Take, for example, the scene in which Katniss saws through a branch to dump a humming nest of deadly tracker-jackers (super-toxic wasps) on her rivals. You would think (at least I did) that Katniss would have understood the consequences of her actions and wrestled with it. But she didn't hesitate; as she sawed away she seemed utterly unbothered by what might happen next. It's hard to say whether this is the fault of the writing, the acting, or the directing, but Katniss in that moment comes across as either unfeeling or stupid. Not the best way to induce sympathy. Also, I remember when reading the book how annoyed I was that Collins didn't really examine what it meant/how it felt when Katniss killed a rival with an arrow. The film (probably the book, too, but I read it once, very quickly, long ago and wouldn't swear to it) elides Katniss's grief over Rue (which was possibly the least convincing moment of the film) with Katniss's killing of, well, whoever it was she killed. (Yep, it was that moving.)
The editing felt off kilter, too. Though perhaps the trouble lay with the original footage. I don't know enough about these things to tell. Wherever the fault lies, the action sequences were definitely wrong. It went wrong right at the beginning--Katniss's bow hunt in the woods--and never recovered.
Even the sets were unbelievable. Both District 12 and the Capitol felt like Disney theme parks.
As for the ending, it doesn't work. Halfway through the film I found myself trying to remember how the book went, and couldn't--because I hadn't believed it when I read it. The rule changes are too convenient. They let Katniss off the hook of every moral dilemma. She never has to make hard decisions. She never has to choose. I end up not caring, not believing. I end up not making the story mine; I forget what happens because it doesn't matter to me.
There isn't one moment of this film that I liked. An emphatic Thumbs Down for this one.
July 8, 2012
Our evening with GRRM and Connie Willis
Last night I was one of about ninety people who gathered for drinks and delicious food--lamb kebab, grilled salmon, a variety of tasty salads and pastries, and luscious fruit (the strawberries were particularly fine)--and conversation with George R.R. Martin.
I was/am extremely jet-lagged* and so not as much in the room as I would have liked. But while Kelley had to do Chair-of-Clarion-West things (being affable, enthusiastic, and magisterial by turns) I had no official role, so it was okay for me to let my mind shrink to dot and just zone out occasionally.
Connie Willis has known GRRM for decades, and got him talking about all kinds of things: his Song of Ice and Fire series (the books and HBO's show), his stint in Hollywood (he wrote thirteen episodes of Beauty and the Beast), his thoughts on for-boys romance (no happy endings), and how he has over-committed to personal appearances involving travel--which is why he's not writing as fast as almost everyone wants him to.
The good news, for Song of Ice and Fire/Game of Thrones fans is that he's learning to saying No to such requests. The bad news is that, like many writers, he fills his calendar up to three years in advance, so it will take a while to work through his commitments. So for now, readers will have to content themselves with The Lands of Ice and Fire , a book of maps (Bantam, Oct 2012). There will also, at some point, be a concordance, a lush coffee-table book. One or both (sorry, told you I was tired) will include all kinds of new information on the history and backstory of countries and characters. Apparently there will actually be two competing map books but sadly I was fuzzing out at this point and can't remember who is responsible for the second. Perhaps this man?)
Despite my woolly head I had a good time chatting to friends old and new. Apologies to all those I didn't get to, and, ah, to some of those I did: non-sequiturs are a by-product of this kind of fatigue. Food helps. I lost track of how many meals I ate yesterday. Five maybe? Most of them small, but not all...
Anyway, thanks to all those who just blinked when I blurted odd things, and brought me beer and wine and tasty nibbles. I hope to return the favour soon. And thank you to the excellent board, staff, and volunteers of Clarion West who conjured up a very smooth, expertly run, and deliciously catered event.
*For those who have never been through an 8-hour time change--or, rather, two of them in eight days--it is thoroughly disorientating and utterly exhausting. I tend to adjust at a rate of one hour a day, so won't really be back on track until the end of next week. I have no doubt that other people are better at it than me, but I've done this many, many times now and this is just how I work. The only way through it is, well, through it.
July 7, 2012
Alzheimer's disease linked to cholesterol metabolism
Just published in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences*, "The link between altered cholesterol metabolism and Alzheimer's disease," by Paola Gamba, Gabriella Testa, Barbara Sottero, Simona Gargiulo, Giuseppe Poli, and Gabriella Leonarduzzi:
* DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2012.06513.x, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1259 (2012) 54-64** Emphasis on probably: I'm not qualified to give medical advice. Talk to your physician.
Alzheimer’s disease (AD), the most common form of dementia, is characterized by the progressive loss of neurons and synapses, and by extracellular deposits of amyloid-β (Aβ) as senile plaques, Aβ deposits in the cerebral blood vessels, and intracellular inclusions of hyperphosphorylated tau in the form of neurofibrillary tangles. Several mechanisms contribute to AD development and progression, and increasing epidemiological and molecular evidence suggests a key role of cholesterol in its initiation and progression. Altered cholesterol metabolism and hypercholesterolemia appear to play fundamental roles in amyloid plaque formation and tau hyperphosphorylation. Over the last decade, growing evidence supports the idea that cholesterol oxidation products, known as oxysterols, may be the missing link between altered brain cholesterol metabolism and AD pathogenesis, as their involvement in neurotoxicity, mainly by interacting with Aβ peptides, is reported. [Emphasis mine.]Given the new hypothesis, proposed last year by Dr Angelique Corthals, that multiple sclerosis is caused by faulty lipid metabolism--it is not, as was believed, an autoimmune disorder--this is not wholly surprising to me. It's my guess that a decade or so from now lipid metabolism will prove to be at the heart of many chronic illnesses. So watch your fat and carbohydrate intake, people: consume lots of omega-3 and -9 oils (fish, flax, olive oil) and reduce your empty starches (all grains, potatoes, and vile things such as high-fructose corn syrup). If your insulin cycle is okay it probably** can't hurt you and might help. Plus, it tastes good.
* DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2012.06513.x, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1259 (2012) 54-64** Emphasis on probably: I'm not qualified to give medical advice. Talk to your physician.
July 6, 2012
Supreme justice
Fish is brain food. At least that's my sincere hope. Jet lag shrink my brain to a dot. Fish and fruit are my remedy. So here's this morning's breakfast--a huge, huge piece of trout (Wall Street Journal for scale). Off-screen is the grapefruit awaiting dismemberment.
I read the entire newspaper today, cover to cover, all sections. I'm trying to reorient myself to this side of the Atlantic. Except, of course, lots of the news was about the side of the Atlantic I've just left: Wimbledon, Barclay's and the LIBOR-manipulation scandal, Assange trying to take refuge in the UK Ecuadorian embassy to avoid deportation, and so on.
One thing I had hoped to read about, but of course is old news already, is the Supreme Court's decision regarding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), that is, the health-care law.
I am thrilled about this. Not just with the 5-4 result--which I'd hoped for*--but with Chief Justice Roberts' decision.
The story I tell myself about the ACA decision--because I'm not a legal expert, not even that competent, really, when it comes to discussing the US political system, but I am a storyteller--is that Chief Justice John G. Roberts could no longer bear to watch the people's trust in one of the most important branches of the US government fail. That, as Chief Justice, he felt obliged to do something. For the people's trust was failing--in no small part because of the decision in January 2010 that the government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections. That decision, which ushered in the era of super-PACs and overruled two precendents, was widely regarded as sharply doctrinaire--the opposite of the Court's supposed impartiality.
The Supreme Court has no money and no armies. The only reason it has any kind of power at all is that we all believe it does. The minute we stop believing in its essential impartiality is the minute the system breaks. Roberts is smart enough and responsible enough to know this. He stepped in with a clever decision to uphold the perception of the Court as being above the political fray.
And now I'm very, very curious about what decision the court will make regarding the constitutionality of DOMA. I had hoped for a 5-4 decision in favour of throwing DOMA on the scrap heap. Now I've got my fingers crossed for 6-3, which would be a magnificent result.
Stay tuned.
* Though I'd imagined it would be Kennedy who'd be the swing voter--which in retrospect makes me feel like an idiot. Oh, well. Told you I'm not exactly an expert on this stuff.
I read the entire newspaper today, cover to cover, all sections. I'm trying to reorient myself to this side of the Atlantic. Except, of course, lots of the news was about the side of the Atlantic I've just left: Wimbledon, Barclay's and the LIBOR-manipulation scandal, Assange trying to take refuge in the UK Ecuadorian embassy to avoid deportation, and so on.
One thing I had hoped to read about, but of course is old news already, is the Supreme Court's decision regarding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), that is, the health-care law.
I am thrilled about this. Not just with the 5-4 result--which I'd hoped for*--but with Chief Justice Roberts' decision.
The story I tell myself about the ACA decision--because I'm not a legal expert, not even that competent, really, when it comes to discussing the US political system, but I am a storyteller--is that Chief Justice John G. Roberts could no longer bear to watch the people's trust in one of the most important branches of the US government fail. That, as Chief Justice, he felt obliged to do something. For the people's trust was failing--in no small part because of the decision in January 2010 that the government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections. That decision, which ushered in the era of super-PACs and overruled two precendents, was widely regarded as sharply doctrinaire--the opposite of the Court's supposed impartiality.
The Supreme Court has no money and no armies. The only reason it has any kind of power at all is that we all believe it does. The minute we stop believing in its essential impartiality is the minute the system breaks. Roberts is smart enough and responsible enough to know this. He stepped in with a clever decision to uphold the perception of the Court as being above the political fray.
"Those decisions are entrusted to our nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them," Roberts said. "It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices." (from The Washington Post)I admire him for this.
And now I'm very, very curious about what decision the court will make regarding the constitutionality of DOMA. I had hoped for a 5-4 decision in favour of throwing DOMA on the scrap heap. Now I've got my fingers crossed for 6-3, which would be a magnificent result.
Stay tuned.
* Though I'd imagined it would be Kennedy who'd be the swing voter--which in retrospect makes me feel like an idiot. Oh, well. Told you I'm not exactly an expert on this stuff.
July 5, 2012
Back in the US
So last week was mad--we got a last-minute flight to the UK to see my family. It was a special occasion, a big family party with four generations, from my aunts to my great nephew (or grand nephew as he would probably be called in the US) who is, shockingly, old enough now to drink legally (in the UK, anyway).
And when I say last-minute, I mean it. We found the ticket on Friday and on Monday afternoon we were sitting in the BA lounge looking at our plane:
The next day we were here (a pub that academic medievalists--at least those who travel to conferences--will no doubt recognise):
The weather was very unsummery: rain, humidity, fifties and sixties. But so much better than the biting February cold of my last visit.
I spent an inordinate amount of time wandering about various English parks with my father. Here's one of his favourites, the Canal Garden at Roundhay Park:
Note the ominous clouds. But it didn't worry us. We just tootled off to that building at the end which, handily, is a old pub called The Roundhay Fox (but which used to be called The Stables--and that's a broad clue for those still trying to guess about the second photo).
So, anyway, today I'm back, jet-lagged out of my mind, but still planning to attend the George R.R. Martin event (a fundraiser for Clarion West) on Saturday. And the weather for the next few days looks glorious:
Life is good.
And when I say last-minute, I mean it. We found the ticket on Friday and on Monday afternoon we were sitting in the BA lounge looking at our plane:
The next day we were here (a pub that academic medievalists--at least those who travel to conferences--will no doubt recognise):
The weather was very unsummery: rain, humidity, fifties and sixties. But so much better than the biting February cold of my last visit.
I spent an inordinate amount of time wandering about various English parks with my father. Here's one of his favourites, the Canal Garden at Roundhay Park:
Note the ominous clouds. But it didn't worry us. We just tootled off to that building at the end which, handily, is a old pub called The Roundhay Fox (but which used to be called The Stables--and that's a broad clue for those still trying to guess about the second photo).
So, anyway, today I'm back, jet-lagged out of my mind, but still planning to attend the George R.R. Martin event (a fundraiser for Clarion West) on Saturday. And the weather for the next few days looks glorious:
Life is good.
June 25, 2012
Busy
For the next week or ten days you won't see much of me around here. Perhaps the occasional photo.
It also means I'm no longer speaking with the magisterial 'We' of Clarion West. Back to being private writer citizen. I will, of course, be banging the Write-a-thon drum on Kelley's behalf--but not for a week or two.
Have fun.
It also means I'm no longer speaking with the magisterial 'We' of Clarion West. Back to being private writer citizen. I will, of course, be banging the Write-a-thon drum on Kelley's behalf--but not for a week or two.
Have fun.
June 24, 2012
Me interviewing Kelley for a Tweet Chat this morning
Do you write? Are you on Twitter? Then you might want to join me and Kelley Eskridge today for the first ever Clarion West Tweet Chat (hashtag #writeathon): Sunday June 24, at 11 a.m. Seattle time (which is 2 p.m. on the East Coast and 7 p.m. for those in the UK; sadly, I don't know what time that is in other parts of the world, but you're all welcome).
I recommend that you download TweetChat, which will then insert the #writeathon hashtag for you and keep all the tweets in the conversation in one place. (It also refreshes quickly--more time for talking!)
Everyone is welcome. I'll be asking Kelley questions about her Write-a-thon experience, from both the perspective of How to keep writing everyday and How to ask sponsors for money. But Kelley will no doubt be happy to answer anything you want to know (and CW staff and volunteers will be standing by to answer CW-related queries). So don't be shy, come hang out for an hour!
I recommend that you download TweetChat, which will then insert the #writeathon hashtag for you and keep all the tweets in the conversation in one place. (It also refreshes quickly--more time for talking!)
Everyone is welcome. I'll be asking Kelley questions about her Write-a-thon experience, from both the perspective of How to keep writing everyday and How to ask sponsors for money. But Kelley will no doubt be happy to answer anything you want to know (and CW staff and volunteers will be standing by to answer CW-related queries). So don't be shy, come hang out for an hour!
June 23, 2012
Some women can see a hundred million colours
.JPG)
We saw this cloud right around noon on Wednesday. Those amazing colours lasted only a few minutes. It was basically a cloud-shaped rainbow. This photo doesn't do it justice. (I was in the car.)
The most interesting thing about it, though, was that I didn't notice it at first. Kelley pointed it out. "Wow," she said. "Look at that cloud!" I looked. It looked like...a cloud. Utterly unremarkable. "Can't you see it?" she said. I said I could see the cloud, but it was, well, just a cloud. And put my polarised sunglasses on and prepared to get in the car...and, Whap! the prismatic colours leapt out at me--not as bright as they are here (the cloud, and the colours, were moving fast; this was the tail-end of the light show, a pale shadow of its main glory) but clear. But Kelley wasn't wearing sunglasses; she could see the colours anyway.
Eventually I could see them, too, even without the sunglasses. But I didn't to begin with. And today I read this article, positing the existence of women who have super vision:
Living among us are people with four cones, who might experience a range of colors invisible to the rest. It’s possible these so-called tetrachromats see a hundred million colors, with each familiar hue fracturing into a hundred more subtle shades for which there are no names, no paint swatches. And because perceiving color is a personal experience, they would have no way of knowing they see far beyond what we consider the limits of human vision.I sorta like the notion that my sweetie has superpowers...
June 22, 2012
An evening with George R.R. Martin: you and just 99 others
Love Game of Thrones? Can't get enough of Wildcards? Think Clarion West is the best thing since sliced bread?
I have just the thing for you: two and a half hours of wine, food, and conversation with George R.R. Martin, in the company of only 99 other guests. Right here in Seattle. The tickets are only $75 and all the proceeds go to benefit Clarion West.
Here are the details:
Saturday July 7, 2012 • 7–9:30 p.m.
The evening will feature a light dinner buffet reception with wine.
Program: 8–9 p.m. George R.R. Martin will be interviewed by award-winning author Connie Willis, followed by Q & A.
Uptown Hideaway
819 5th Ave North, Seattle
Note: Entrance on Aloha St above Crow RestaurantIf that sounds like a good deal, then email Davis Fox and come hang out. I'll be there, and Kelley--and, y'know, wine and food and top-flight conversation with exciting writers. All for $75. Plus the priceless satisfaction that, no, it's not about having a fabulous time in incredible company, of course not, it's about helping the future writers of f/sf. The writers who will one day feed your reading habit...
Attendance at this event is limited to 100 people. $75 per person
To reserve your ticket email davis_fox@clarionwest.org For more information please call Clarion West Executive Director Davis B. Fox at 206 322 7282.
June 21, 2012
Queering the landscape
Over at Tor.com, Brit Mandelo ponders the place of Bending the Landscape in the queer speculative fiction firmament:
I've talked before about putting these books together. They were an enormous amount of work but I'm proud of them. They broke new ground. For some of the writers, it was their first published work; for others, it was their first published f/sf; for yet others, it was their first queer fiction. As Mandelo points out, I was trying to do several things at once.
However, I think the Horror volume was less than a perfect success. This is partly because horror combined with queer leads to some unhappy story confluences: a lot of shame about being different. Not a great message to send, but I had to trust readers, after two pervious volumes, to see the characters as human, not types. Also, to be frank, I'm just not a big fan of horror--for some of the same reasons I don't much care for noir (which I think is the horror fiction of the crime genre). The tropes lead the protagonist and therefore reader into a descending spiral, and removes the possibility of hope. And I like hope, in life and in story.
So the volume as whole wasn't perfect, but there were some truly superb stories. In my opinion the strongest was L. Timmel Duchamp's "Explanations Are Clear." In an alternate universe we lead with that story, and it gets the attention it deserved. But the book is what it is, and, on the whole, it's worth reading.
One day I'll have to see about getting them all back into print. I think they'd make nifty ebooks.
In the late nineties, Nicola Griffith and Stephen Pagel produced a landmark series of anthologies collecting gay and lesbian speculative fiction: the Bending the Landscape books, published by Overlook Press. These books have become, in a real sense, classics of queer speculative fiction, and so I’d like to talk a little about them—honor their contribution to the conversation, and introduce them to new readers, too.
The series is made up of three books, each featuring a different genre: science fiction, fantasy, and horror. They were published from 1996-2001. Between them, they won a World Fantasy Award, two Lambda Literary Awards, and two Spectrum Awards—as well as being finalists for an ALA Stonewall Award and a Locus Award. “Time Gypsy” by Ellen Klages, from Bending the Landscape: Science Fiction, was a nominee for the Hugo for Best Novelette in 1999, and for the Nebula in 1998.It's an interesting piece. I'll look forward to reading more.
I've talked before about putting these books together. They were an enormous amount of work but I'm proud of them. They broke new ground. For some of the writers, it was their first published work; for others, it was their first published f/sf; for yet others, it was their first queer fiction. As Mandelo points out, I was trying to do several things at once.
However, I think the Horror volume was less than a perfect success. This is partly because horror combined with queer leads to some unhappy story confluences: a lot of shame about being different. Not a great message to send, but I had to trust readers, after two pervious volumes, to see the characters as human, not types. Also, to be frank, I'm just not a big fan of horror--for some of the same reasons I don't much care for noir (which I think is the horror fiction of the crime genre). The tropes lead the protagonist and therefore reader into a descending spiral, and removes the possibility of hope. And I like hope, in life and in story.
So the volume as whole wasn't perfect, but there were some truly superb stories. In my opinion the strongest was L. Timmel Duchamp's "Explanations Are Clear." In an alternate universe we lead with that story, and it gets the attention it deserved. But the book is what it is, and, on the whole, it's worth reading.
One day I'll have to see about getting them all back into print. I think they'd make nifty ebooks.
