Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
01/13/17 -- Vol. 35, No. 29, Whole Number 1945

Co-Editor: Mark Leeper,
Co-Editor: Evelyn Leeper,
All material is copyrighted by author unless otherwise noted.
All comments sent or posted will be assumed authorized for
inclusion unless otherwise noted.

To subscribe, send mail to
To unsubscribe, send mail to
The latest issue is at
An index with links to the issues of the MT VOID since 1986 is at

        Six-Foot Submarines (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
        Mini-Reviews (JACKIE, THE BEST DEMOCRACY MONEY CAN BUY,         
                (film reviews by Mark R. Leeper)
        Fast Radio Bursts (comments by Gregory Frederick)
        THE OBELISK GATE by N. K. Jemisin (book review
                by Joe Karpierz)
                by Charles Wohlforth and Amanda R. Hendrix, Ph.D.
                (book review by Gregory Frederick)
        This Week's Reading (COPENHAGEN) (book comments
                by Evelyn C. Leeper)


TOPIC: Six-Foot Submarines (comments by Mark R. Leeper)

The Italian restaurant near us put up a sign that said "Six-Foot
Subs".  What they didn't say was how many of those hexapods did
they put in the sandwich.  [-mrl]


TOPIC: Mini-Reviews of 2016 Films (Part 1) (film reviews by Mark
R. Leeper)

I am a member of the Online Film Critic Society and like most film
societies each year we give out awards for what we think were the
best films we have seen released that previous year.  This requires
a lot of film-watching every November and December.  It is a
terrible price to pay, but, hey, I am retired and I have the time
to set aside.  But I do not have enough time to write one of my
usual film reviews for each film.  That is I do not have time to
write a review for every film I see if those reviews will be of the
usual length.  Films that are not of general interest I write no
review for, but I find that I can write some single paragraph
reviews and at leas make the important points.  So as the New Year
rushes in I can write a paragraph-long review each for several
films rather than just a few longer reviews.

Here then are the first of my mini-reviews for 2016 films.  Each
film is rated on my usual -4 to +4 scale.

The title character is Jackie Kennedy, played by Natalie Portman.
Not long after the events in Dallas Jackie is interviewed at her
palatial home in Hyannis Port, The primary subject of the interview
is the assassination of her husband and her past as First Lady.
Her memories are dramatized in flashbacks.  Kennedy herself was
hard to gage as her emotions remained so repressed and bottled up.
She is dignified, almost regal, but her eyes and her bearing are
dull.  Director Pablo Larrain takes the point of view that there
were quiet storms going on behind here yes.  Her every word is
carefully chosen.  Every question and comment from her interviewer
is taken like a chess move and evokes an immediate defense
response.  Frequently she is intentionally shocking in what she
says.  We get a view of her as being vindictive and cold but
powerful.  Watching the film it is a little hard to keep straight
which actor is playing whom.  The actors make no attempt to copy
the accents of the original people.  Peter Sarsgaard plays Bobby
Kennedy without Kennedy's famous accent.  It is odd to have a film
about an American incident directed by a Chilean director.  But it
is of some interest to see the point of view of someone who is not
from the US.  Rating: Low +1

Greg Palast, the Rolling Stone investigative reporter, investigates
what he believes to be evidence that the GOP party is intentionally
conspiring to disenfranchise seven million minority voters.  Of
course they have a constitutional right to be voters.  To make his
report more entertaining Palast follows Michael Moore's lead by
making the telling comic where possible.  He dons the wardrobe of a
film noir detective and has the movie filmed in noir visual style.
Most of what he finds is horrifying and I personally believe most.
On the other hand my wife took great exception to the comedy
styling that she found extremely off-putting.  It would be a pity
(that is a humongous understatement) if the style gets in the way
of getting the message out.  Palast concentrates on the very super-
rich like (and especially) the Koch brothers.   Rating: +1

Shot in very realistic style, this story takes place in one day,
New Years Day in Iran.  The narrative is the interlocked story of
three couples.  We see love, infidelity and six people it is really
hard to keep straight.  If I knew the Persian language and
recognized the actors a little better I would have gotten a lot
more out of the film but as it is I can neither fairly praise or
criticize the film.  It does give a reasonably informative view of
the Iranian middle class.  Rating: High +1

This is a documentary about actress Kate Lyn Sheil preparing to
play Christine Chubbuck.  In Florida in 1974 Christine was a
television reporter who suffered from depression and killed herself
on-air.  If this sounds like the film NETWORK Christine was the
inspiration for the character Howard "I'm mad as hell" Beale.  The
assumption of the film is that Kate will come to an understanding
about Christine.  Whether that assumption is valid is open to
interpretation.  Kate certainly is successful in finding a
depression, but we can never know if it really is an understanding
of Christine.  The issue is that the station continually chose high
rating, "blood and guts" journalism over serious informational
news. Is the experience unique?  Yes.  Uplifting?  Definitely it
was not. The film takes a long time to get where it is going, but
it boils up to a scalding climax.  Rating: High +2

I will send out more mini-reviews of 2016 films on an irregular
basis in the weeks to come.



TOPIC: Fast Radio Bursts (comments by Gregory Frederick)

Scientists for the first time have determined where a fast radio
burst [FRB] came from.  But they still do not know what causes them
to form.   So-called fast radio bursts (FRBs) picked up in 2016 by
a telescope in New Mexico likely emanated from a dwarf galaxy some
three billion light years from Earth, the scientists reported in
the journal NATURE.  FRBs flash only for an micro-instant, and can
emit as much energy in a millisecond as the Sun does in 10,000


Mark replies:

I heard about this.  This is a dwarf galaxy under-populated with
only a comparatively small number of stars.  Just the sort of
galaxy that would want to pull a stunt like this.  It is just
trying to get attention.  My advice would be to ignore it until it
matures and is ready to join its community of galaxies.  [-mrl]


TOPIC: THE OBELISK GATE by N. K. Jemisin (copyright 2016, Hachette
Book Group, $15.99, 407pp, ISBN 978-0-316-22926-5) (excerpt from
the Duel Fish Codices: a book review by Joe Karpierz)

N. K. Jemisin's THE OBELISK GATE is book two in The Broken Earth
series and the direct sequel to last year's Hugo-winning THE FIFTH
SEASON.  That book was far and away the best book of the year; THE
OBELISK GATE may be close to being the best book I read from 2016.
It suffers from being "the second book in the trilogy syndrome",
but that's not a fair accusation.  That malady is usually given to
second books in a series which exhibit a dramatic drop in quality
from the first book.  The difference between THE OBELISK GATE and
those other second books is that the word "dramatic" can be removed
from the previous statement.

The novel starts out pretty much where the first one left off--
right after that killer last sentence.  In that last sentence, we
discovered that the planet used to have a moon; in fact, it is
referred to as "the" Moon, which leads me to feel (and this is my
deduction) that we are on a far future Earth.  The lack of the Moon
is what is causing all the seismic disturbances that have been
plaguing the planet--or at least contributing to them.  The reader
can then infer (at least I did) that the orogenes, the Guardians,
and the Stone Eaters all developed in response to the planet's

In THE FIFTH SEASON, we followed the story of Damaya, Syenite, and
Essun.  By the end of that book we discovered that the three of
them were in fact the same person at different stages of her life.
Damaya had her Guardian (as does every orogene) in the person of
Schaffa, and Syenite traveled with Alabaster, the ten-ring orogene-
-the most powerful orogene there is--who caused the event that
resulted in the latest Season.  Essun was in search of her daughter
Nassun, who was traveling with her father Jija, who killed their
son Uche.

THE OBELISK GATE brings things more in focus while simultaneously
exploring the complexities and the vast story of the Stillness.
This book focuses on Essun and Nassun.  Essun has been requested by
Alabaster to build the Obelisk Gate to bring the Moon back, which
has apparently been sent into an elongated, elliptical orbit, and
does pass near the planet periodically.  Nassun, while traveling
with her father who clearly hates orogenes but can't bring himself
to hate her, meets up with our old friend Schaffa.  Nassun has
become an extremely powerful orogene at a very young age, probably
more powerful than her mother Essun.  Her power and her decisions
could possibly make the situation brought upon by the Season worse
than it already is.

And there are the Stone Eaters, who play a much more prominent role
in this story.  We learn throughout the course of the book of the
thousands year old war with multiple sides involved, and how the
Stone Eaters, the Guardians, the orogenes, and the Stills (standard
humans) are players in that war.

This is a truly complex book, as Jemisin takes what we know about
the Stillness from THE FIFTH SEASON and expands upon it, reveals
more about its history, and leaves us wanting for more, all the
while teasing us about the origin of all these types of characters,
and how they fit in to the grand scheme of things.  As with THE
FIFTH SEASON, there's a lot going on here, and I can't go much
further into it without giving things away.  Suffice to say that
the both the story and the characters have great depth and
complexity, and they go hand in hand in order to make this book
work beautifully.

As with most second books in trilogies, this one really doesn't
settle much of anything; rather, it opens up more questions and
plot threads that Jemisin will need to follow up on and close off
in the final book, due out this year.  After the first two books, I
firmly believe that Jemisin is up to the task.  I'm eagerly
awaiting the final chapter in this story.  It should be terrific.


Charles Wohlforth and Amanda R. Hendrix, Ph.D. (book review by
Gregory Frederick)

This space science book covers some ideas about colonization of
other planets or moons in the solar system.  It discusses the pros
and cons of living on our Moon, or Mars for example.  The authors
have put their thinking caps on and created original concepts about
why humans should go into space, including a novel idea about going
to and living on an obscure moon of Saturn, Titan.  The authors
divide the book into essentially two sections: the present day and
an extrapolated future.  Eventually the book focuses on Titan.
Titan is the only solar system body with a relatively denser
atmosphere and a solid surface analogous to Earth which has an
environment we could cope with.  Venus's atmosphere for example is
extremely dense and hot and would crush and fry a human in a short
amount of time.  Mars has a very thin atmosphere so radiation plus
micrometeoroids would be a problem when you are on the surface.
Earth's atmosphere is mostly made of 80% nitrogen and 20% oxygen
while Titan has 95% nitrogen and 5% methane.  Titan's atmospheric
pressure is 50% greater than Earth's and the cold of Titan makes
the air four times denser.  Humans could adjust to these conditions
and Titan's atmosphere would provide adequate shielding from
radiation and micrometeoroids even on the surface.  Titan has
ethane and methane lakes that can provide fuel for a power plant.
The oxygen needed to combust the fuel would be obtained from the
frozen water ice on Titan.  Titan is very cold at -290 degrees
Fahrenheit but with thick insulated clothing (or with heating
elements) and an oxygen mask you could walk on the surface without
the need for a bulky pressurized space suit.  You need a pressured
space suit for Mars or our Moon.  The authors combine a visionary
approach to space colonization combined with the realities facing
the project currently.  This is an interesting book with a bit of
science fiction mixed into the non-fiction story which is both
engaging and well worth reading.   [-gf]


TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)

COPENHAGEN by Michael Frayn (ISBN 978-0-413-72490-5) is a play
about the meeting in Copenhagen in 1941 between Niels Bohr and
Werner Heisenberg.  Heisenberg explained many times what was said,
but the accounts were never clear and were inconsistent with each
other.  (One is sorely tempted to say his accounts were uncertain.)
Basically, he claimed he was trying to convince Bohr that both
sides should stall the production of atomic bombs in the hope that
Bohr would convey this to scientists in America.  Bohr wrote his
version of what was said, but at the time of the writing of the
play, his account was scheduled to remain sealed until fifty years
after his death.  However, the success of the play led them to
release the papers, which were many drafts of the same letter, in
2002.  In them, Bohr claimed Heisenberg was boasting about how
Germany would soon have the atomic bomb and would soon win the war.
Heisenberg's son says that Bohr was just unable to detect the
subtext of what Heisenberg was saying, because Heisenberg had to be
very circumspect.

This Frayn knew, of course, and acknowledged it early on, having
Bohr's wife say, "He knows he's being watched, of course. ... He
has to be careful about what he says.  ...  You know you're being
watched yourself."  This is interesting not just to help explain
why the dialogue between Heisenberg and Bohr could not be
straightforward, but also as a reference to the Uncertainty
Principle, at least as it is understood by most people: the act of
observing affects what is being observed.

However, this is not quite an accurate summary.  As Heisenberg says
in the play, "Everyone understands uncertainty.  Or thinks he does.
No one understands my trip to Copenhagen."  One might add that even
people who think they understand his trip to Copenhagen are
mistaken as those who think they understand uncertainty, and vice

Throughout the play, one finds oneself constantly asking if
Heisenberg is amoral, or clueless, or both.  His opening
conversation with the Bohrs about sailing, skiing, and general
conditions seems to indicate that there is at least a certain level
of cluelessness.  But Bohr clearly thinks Heisenberg amoral,
accusing him of ignoring the ethical implications of his actions by
saying, "Your talent is ... for always being in more than one
position at a time, like one of your particles."

Throughout, Frayn uses the language of physics metaphorically.  Not
only are there at least hints that uncertainty applies to people's
interactions as well as particles', but Frayn will have Bohr talk
about the lack of cadmium control rods in Heisenberg's early
reactors, and then admonish Heisenberg about not thinking ahead by
saying, "I should have been there to slow you down a little."

There has been a version of COPENHAGEN filmed for PBS, and another
recorded as a radio play for L.A. Theatre Works.  Both are abridged
from Frayn's original playscript, so even if you have seen/heard a
dramatic version, there is more to be gained by reading the script.


                                           Mark Leeper

           The average dog is a nicer person than the
           average person.
                                           -- Andy Rooney