Jlawrence’s Comments (group member since Mar 08, 2010)

Jlawrence’s comments from the The Sword and Laser group.

Dibs on Lucky Wander Boy.

Indie Film.

Sean wrote: "Did you see that Vinge's finally written a sequel? The group really should do AFutD before it comes out."

Oh wow, I did not know that - very exciting! And yes, even more reason to read A Fire Upon the Deep now.

I throw in my eternal vote for Gene Wolfe's Book of the New Sun (Shadow & Claw is the first half) - it's such a great combo of sword & laser-ness, and so richly layered that I've really wanted to do a re-read.

I'd also really like to re-read Vernor Vinge's fascinating A Fire upon the Deep. I got the annotated version that has all his world-building notes, that'd be a real treat.

From the suggestions so far, I'm most intrigued by Usurper of the Sun, Budayeen Nights and Downbelow Station (assuming it can be read standalone even though it's '#3').

Altered Carbon sounds similar in theme to Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom, which the group's already read, though it does seems like a darker take on the theme.

James Tiptree, Jr.: The Double Life of Alice B. Sheldon, pretty fascinating bio on this double-identity (actually triple, she wrote as 'Racoona Sheldon' as well as the male Tiptree) science fiction author.

Reading the James Tiptree (aka Alice Sheldon) collection of sf short stories Her Smoke Rose Up Forever - some really fantastic stuff in there. Then I'll be reading the biography of that author - James Tiptree, Jr.: The Double Life of Alice B. Sheldon.

Also reading The Making of Star Wars: The Definitive Story Behind the Original Film in spurts - it relates some fascinating stuff that distracts me from my ire against Lucas for prequels.

I would answer the call of the Sword and Laser.

I own it. If you're at all interested in the use of narrative in gaming, the early era of personal computer gaming and/or grew up playing any text adventures, you'll find it worthwhile. It's a bit pricey, but it's well put together and there's lots of fascinating info and opinions in the main film and in the extras.

The biggest criticism that it's received from some members of the current interactive fiction community is that it focuses on IF as this lost golden age that had its peak artistically and commercially with the 80's company Infocom. I think that criticism's a little harsh, as the film does cover aspects of the hobbyist community that carried on IF after IF disappeared from the mass market, but it's true that the film's heart belongs to Infocom.

The modern IF community is pretty vibrant, though - for example, in just one day (today) IF author Andrew Plotkin has already surpassed his goal of getting $8000 in Kickstarter donations to fund fulltime work on a new, large IF game for the iPhone.

But anyway, yes, I recommend it. :)

Skip, you got me! lol Or should I say, 'Wikipedia doesn't = truth? InconCEIVable!' ;)

Veronica, agreed. And Goldman makes it even trickier by also playing fast and loose with his personal life - mixing true facts of his screenwriting career with tales of a son he never had, etc.

I wonder if the S&L pick The Windup Girl would be classified steampunk. It's certainly steampunk technology-wise (there's even zeppelins!), though it's set in a thoroughly dystopian future instead of a glorified, if alternate, past.

How much a tale set in an alternate history should reflect the injustices of that actual historical era is an interesting question. The only other semi-steampunkish thing I've read is Alan Moore's graphic novel The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Vol. 1. It is indeed a fun, pulpy romp, but driven more by a 'wouldn't it be great to throw all these fictional Victorian characters together' feel than a 'isn't the Victorian era great!' feel. Alan Moore certainly showed the ugly injustices of the Victorian era *very* thoroughly in From Hell.

Hm, this reminds me that I've been wanting to read some Jules Verne. The original steampunk?

On the "Is any of Florin/Morgenstern real?" issue - that started to drive me crazy enough during reading the Princess Bride introduction that I had to run to Wikipedia to find the shaggy-dog truth. :)

Very cool news! I'd be up for such a thread.

Thought we could have a thread for those who have finished the first book/section, The Sword in the Stone, to discuss what we think so far.

Given the time it was written and its reputation as a classic, when I started the book I was expecting a dramatic, serious (perhaps tediously serious) 'high fantasy' take on the King Arthur mythos. Instead I was pleasantly surprised to find it rambling, funny, winking - a pretty easy-going and eager-to-please tale. I enjoyed White's fearless clanging together of anachronistic elements (see the Anachronisms thread), his vivid imagery, and the many 'sense of childhood wonder' moments he stuffed into the tale. Individual moments of Merlyn's were particularly amusing.

Well for about 120 pages or so, I enjoyed it. But a creeping 'is this all there is?' feeling took over. The experience was missing something - it was always pleasant, fairly well-written, but was failing to grip me. I think it's the lack of drama (almost as if White felt it would be rude to introduce real conflict) combined with the rambling asides about the setting.

Examples of drama: the knight duel and the raid on the fairy castle. The duel succeeds as indulgent slapstick, and the raid has some great imagery in it, but in neither did I get the sense of much being at stake.

For character conflict, there's Wart and Kay's relationship strains, especially when Kay becomes a knight. But as mentioned on the podcast, the characters are pretty 2-dimensional, so I feel like I'm merely watching the story slowly unfold instead of feeling involved with them.

The most exciting moment is the actual sword-in-the-stone portion, but it goes by in a whirl in the last 14 pages of this section, almost as if White was nearing a deadline for this first book and suddenly remembered 'Oh yes, I need to get to the point of this entire section!'

Of course, there's the lessons Arthur learns in his various animal transformations. I liked the satire in the ant lesson and the anti-war commentary in the geese lesson was fairly well-done - all of the animal lessons are clearly meant to teach Arthur things he'll need to consider once he's ruler. But as a reader, I'm *not* sold on finding out what Arthur becomes, I've just failed to be sucked in, despite White's good humor, strong imagery and many individually amusing moments.

What do you think? Do the sense-of-wonder moments capture you thoroughly enough? Are you invested in Arthur's fate at this point? Do you hope there are no more 'here's how jousting works even though the jousting you'll actually see is ridiculously comic' asides? ;)

Just read a very funny passage pertinent to this thread. In the Ace paperback edition it starts at the bottom of pg. 91, with Merlyn trying to summon his lost wizard's hat, and whatever supernatural being he's communicating with (we only hear Merlyn's side of the conversation) mistakenly giving him a 1890's top hat and then (middle of pg. 92):

"Merlyn took off the sailor hat which had just appeared and then held it out to the air for inspection.

'This is an anachronism,' he said severely. 'That is what it is, a beastly anachronism.' "

Love it.

Just finished, and I did enjoy it, but not quite as much as the movie. I think the film did a good job of streamlining and, given that it was aiming to be a charming comedy, wisely ditched the 'jerk-of-a-narrator' aspect. I kind of enjoyed experiencing that extra, cynical aspect as something unique to the book version, though.

The meta-trickery stuff was interesting as a framing device for the story -- when it cropped up within the story, I didn't always like it but felt it was well-balanced with the actual story - too much of it and it would have been unbearable.

I laughed out loud several times, sometimes at things repeated verbatim in the movie (like the whole 'Inconceivable!' trope during the early chase), sometimes at things unique to the book, felt myself rooting for Inigo, etc. - so it won me over in those ways.

I think both did good jobs of poking fun at traditional fairy tales while at the same time actually succeeding as charming fairy tales.

Sean, you're so lucky to have had your hands on the unabridged version! I've heard these days all copies have been squirreled away by greedy Florinese scholars, who won't part with them for love nor money.

From the movie, Inigo all the way. For the book, I shall see...

I'm only a little ways into the book, but so far it's not bothering me greatly, mostly due to the point Sean raised. Since the narrator is upfront about "translating" some words to make them more approachable to a modern audience, it makes me more forgiving of possible anachronisms (and I'm sure there's some that slip by without me knowing).

Moreover, I definitely like that Merlin, because of his mixed-up path through time, sometimes accidentally summons modern objects and mutters about electric utility companies, etc.

Holy black knight, Sean, I designate you as our official 'compare Once and Future's take on Arthurian legend to traditional Arthurian literature' expert. :)

Other than the Sword & Laser pick The Mists of Avalon (which will be very interesting to compare to Once & Future) and slight nods to Arthurian legend in other fiction, my only exposure has been film versions as well. (For a totally over-the-top excursion into late 70's/early 80's oddness, watch the film Excalibur - you get to see Helen Mirren as Morgana, Patrick Stewart, Liam Neeson & Gabriel Byrne all pre-fame, and an astoundingly overacting Merlin -- available streaming on Netflix.)

Reading Douglas Hofstadter's newest book I Am a Strange Loop, the first half of which was too much of a re-tread of his Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, but now it's actually becoming interesting and unexpectedly moving.

Then I want to read Gibson's Mona Lisa Overdrive to finish his 'Sprawl trilogy' and continue with more Gibson (I haven't read any of his newer novels).