THE MT VOID
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
05/20/11 -- Vol. 29, No. 47, Whole Number 1650
Frick: Mark Leeper, mleeper@optonline.net
Frack: Evelyn Leeper, eleeper@optonline.net
All material is copyrighted by author unless otherwise noted.
All comments sent will be assumed authorized for inclusion
unless otherwise noted.
To subscribe, send mail to mtvoid-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To unsubscribe, send mail to mtvoid-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Topics:
SF Authors Pick the Best SF
The True Inventor of a Science Fictional Time Machine?
Riddle (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
One More Day! (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
THOR (film review by Dale Skran, Jr.)
SCHISM by Catherine Asaro (audiobook review by Joe Karpierz)
HELLO LONESOME (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
THOR (letter of comment by Evelyn C. Leeper)
This Week's Reading (FEED and THE NUN'S STORY)
(book and film comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
==================================================================
TOPIC: SF Authors Pick the Best SF
http://tinyurl.com/void-authors-choice
==================================================================
TOPIC: The True Inventor of a Science Fictional Time Machine?
Enrique Gaspar wrote EL ANACRONOPETE (THE TIME SHIP: A
CHRONONAUTICAL JOURNEY) in 1887, seven years before H. G Wells's
THE TIME MACHINE. For details, see:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12900390?print=true
==================================================================
TOPIC: Riddle (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Q: How was Carl Denham like Disney Corporation?
A: Neither bothered to read the story of "Beauty and the Beast."
[-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: One More Day! (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
In case you were unaware of it, you have one more day. That is, if
you are reading this issue the day it comes out, you have only
until May 21. Tomorrow the balloon goes up. Tomorrow is the end
of it all. Tomorrow, May 21, 2011, is the Rapture.
It is the current custom to consider all religions equally valid
and one is saying that May 21 is The Rapture. Some group calling
themselves Family Radio has sent me a religious tract telling me
that the End is nigh. In fact, it is nigher than anyone thought.
It is tomorrow. I have been given privileged information by a
religious group from Oakland, California. Where did they get my
name? Apparently out of the phone book. The address had the same
typo that the phone book entry has for my name. (I've got to fix
that some time. But for now it gives me useful information when
someone writes or calls me looking for the name as it is in the
phone book.) Actually I kind of like the idea that if they know
the world is coming to an end they just pick people out of the
phonebook to tell. If you had incontrovertible proof that the
world was coming to an end, whom would you tell? Even if Family
Radio is a bunch of howling loonies, at least they are thoughtful
howling loonies.
Anyway the title of this tract is "GOD GIVES *ANOTHER INFALLIBLE
PROOF* THAT ASSURES THE RAPTURE WILL OCCUR MAY 21, 2011." The
tract starts out "God in His great mercy has given a marvelous
proof that the year 2011 is the year of the Rapture which coincides
with Judgment Day and the end of the world." I immediately start
wondering why it is so merciful to give a proof that the end of the
world is coming? Nobody is in pain for not knowing, and some
people probably would be in pain to know that it is true. But I
guess if for years you wanted bop your boss in the snoot, it is
useful to know that the window of time you could take such an
action is soon slamming shut.
Of course I have to admit that I would be inclined to be skeptical
about such claims, but they do say the predictions comes with an
"INFALLIBLE PROOF." Well the mathematician in me is intrigued by
what non-mathematicians consider "infallible" proofs.
If I may quote (and there is no sign of copyright on the tract),
"Years ago we learned from the Bible that the flood occurred in the
year 4990 B.C." [Hmmmm. That can't be the inclusive "we."] "More
recently we learned that Judgment Day is to occur in the year 2011
A.D. The year 2011 A.D. is exactly 7000 years after the year 4990
B.C. Just before the flood Noah was instructed by God that in
seven days the flood would begin." But the tract also points out
that in Peter it says, "one day with the Lord is as a thousand
years, and a thousand years is as one day." So apparently God did
not mean the flood was coming in a week, but in 7000 years. That
little cataclysm that came in a week was not what He was talking
about. God just forgot to adjust for the time differential. He
supposedly was off by a factor of about 365242. Of course, if one
day with the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years is
as one day He might actually have been saying the flood is actually
coming in 1.656 seconds. Boy, how can one argue with an
"infallible" proof like that? Somewhere they forgot about the May
21 part, but they hold that part off for a later proof. I will not
quote all the proofs for lack of space, but they have the same high
degree of logic.
The tract concludes, "Indeed, in the face of all this incredible
information [and I have to agree it is incredible], how can anyone
dare to dispute with the Bible concerning the absolute truth that
the beginning of the Day of Judgment together with the Rapture will
occur on May 21, 2011." Well, we will all know by Sunday, May 22.
Incidentally the same tract, which came to my house less than two
weeks before the Rapture date has a list of radio stations on which
Family Radio has regular broadcasts. Which leads me to wonder how
long that list could be useful if the balloon goes up tomorrow.
Apparently Harold Camping of the same Family Radio Christian
Network (mentioned above) made the prediction. Whatever else you
can say about him, he seems to believe strongly enough to face the
public derision he will face on May 22 if his prediction is wrong.
Wikipedia covers it at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_end_times_prediction
Anyway, good luck.
Post Script: This whole prediction of the Rapture on May 21 has
gone further than I had thought. There appear to be a least three
businesses set up like insurance. You can pay for someone to take
care of your pets after the Rapture. It works like insurance so
that there will be someone to take care of your pets when you have
been taken up to heaven. In the event that God cannot get it
together enough to hold a Rapture on May 21, or that you are not
one of the chosen ones, you would forfeit the expense, but then
again how likely is that? We are talking about God, aren't we?
See: http://tinyurl.com/void-post-rapture-pet-care
[-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: THOR (film review by Dale Skran, Jr.)
I just got back from THOR and decided there was more to it than met
the eye. I'm not going to try to do a general summation of the
film--others have gotten there first. Instead, I'll hit a few
highlights, some of which are counterpoint to Mark's review.
Mark expressed confusion about just exactly what powers Thor is
supposed to have, at one point saying that he seemed to have the
strength of ten men. I'm not sure where this idea came from, but
Thor is one of the Marvel Universe's most powerful heroes, and I
thought the movie did a good job of showing off Thor whupping on
the bad guys. It is possible Mark confused Thor's strength *when
he has no powers at all* which he exhibits fighting a few dozen
SHIELD agents with his actual strength. As the SHIELD lead agent
says, he throws them around like they were mall rent-a-cops, but
this is not in any way a demonstration of Thor's actual strength.
In the Marvel Universe Thor has "Class 100" strength, meaning that
simply by the power of his muscles, without any magic belts,
hammers, or whatever, he can lift 100 tons or 2,000 lbs/ton * 100
tons = 200,000 lbs. An M1 Battle tank weighs 60 tons, so Thor can
easily lift up and throw a battle tank. This strength is well
exhibited in his battle with the Frost Giants in the early part of
the film. Keep in mind that the Frost Giants are themselves both
giant AND super-strong, yet he handles them in large numbers
without much effort. On the other hand, Thor's strength is not
unlimited, so he cannot lift a Boeing 747 (600,000 lbs without
fuel, 900,000 with fuel), something Superman does all the time!
As an Asgardian, Thor has all the characteristics of his people,
i.e., super-strength, a high degree of invulnerability including
dense and strong bones and skin, a super-human ability to heal and
resist disease, and a very long, although not unlimited lifespan.
Thor thus resembles the Phillip Wylie proto-superman in GLADIATOR
more so than DC Comic's Superman.
I do agree with Mark that the powers of the hammer can be
confusing, and there was a tendency in the comic to add in new
powers whenever needed. There certainly isn't any kind of
consistent theory of operation presented for the hammer in the
movie or the comic that I am aware of. It apparently does whatever
Odin wants it to.
I really liked Asgard and the other Norse gods--by and large they
are spot on, and I agree with Mark that the set design was
wonderful. In many cases, i.e. the Rainbow Bridge, the movie
greatly exceeds the comic in portraying Asgard. There are some
significant deviations from the canonical Thor comic origin story,
and Jane Foster is a much different character than in the comic,
but the points made are all the same--Thor needs to learn humility,
and he does. There are a lot of good touches everywhere, and the
scene with people cooking hot dogs while they try their hand at
lifting the hammer is a wonderful set piece of Americana that
creates a feeling of realism missing in the comic.
There is one significant change from the comic to the movie that
greatly alters the meaning of the film, and I think to the better,
although this is ground well trodden by Roger Zelazny in CREATURES
OF LIGHT AND DARKNESS and also in "Stargate" the TV series. In the
comic the Norse gods, including Thor, are presented as god-like
beings from another dimension, of which the Marvel Universe seems
to have great numbers and many types. As near as I can tell, their
powers are fundamentally magical, and it is worth keeping in mind
that magic works in the Marvel Universe, i.e. there are vampires.
Dr. Strange, etc.
The movie takes a different route, and with reference to Arthur
C. Clarke, boldly states that since advanced science seems like
magic, that is all that is afoot here. As Thor says, "In Asgard
magic and science are as one." The rainbow bridge looks and acts
more like a stargate than a magical gizmo. This creates a much
better fit with the other Marvel characters like Iron Man, who are
clearly creatures of science, albeit magical science.
I found parallels between THOR and Dan Simmon's OLYMPOS series
where post-humans have taken on the roles of the Greek gods and
transformed the Earth into something beyond comprehension. THOR's
Asgardians can be viewed as very advanced post-humans, what we
might become after thousands of years of technological advance--
long-lived, healthy, super-humanly strong, and possessed of many of
extremely powerful devices. The Asgardians age, but slowly, and
can be wounded--Odin loses an eye--and they can die--someday, but
most likely not this century. The devil-may-care lust for life
exhibited by Thor and his friends is consistent with the behavior
of powerful post-humans seeking distraction in a fully mature
culture.
The net result is a big fun, big screen movie that looks good in
3D. THOR is a treat for eyes, and quite pleasing as it retells the
timeless story of the man who learned better/the boy who grows
up/the man who falls in love. I rate this one a solid +2 on the
Leeper scale, and would place it among the better of the Marvel
superhero movies. The casting is good to excellent, and the
Australian hunk plays Thor perhaps not canonically (he seems a bit
too fluent in the idioms of Midgard for my taste) but very well
indeed. Without going too much into the details, THOR has a lot of
appeal to women, and neatly reverses traditional Hollywood
cheesecake scenes to good effect, or at least so I am told.
You can bring the kids to this one, but adults will enjoy the sheer
wonder of the world created on the screen. The summer is off to a
great start!! [-dls]
Mark responds:
I just wanted to give some comments on your review, which is in
some respects a comment on my review.
You and I see THOR in very different contexts. You see it as an
episode in the comic book series. I see it (and should see it) as
a standalone film. How the film serves the comic book series is
not something I can judge. I am writing for the viewer who knows
nothing of the Marvel comic universe and just wants to know if the
film is worth the price of a ticket. Even if I wanted to present
the film in your context I would not be able to, since I have not
followed the comic book as I explained in my review. I perhaps
do know a bit more about whether the film is consistent with Norse
myth. But that is in everybody's common heritage.
You ask about the estimate that Thor has the strength of ten men.
OK, I am talking about in the main body of the film. Perhaps at
the beginning and end he had more strength. I was seeing him
mostly after he had been divested of his super powers. My
estimate, that he had the strength of ten men was really based on
the hospital scene. Thor fights off some orderlies and rather
handily beats them. His strength is greater than that of five
orderlies, so he has some powers. But if he were as strong as
Superman he would not have to fight them off at all. Superman
would have the strength to ignore the orderlies like they were no
more than gnats. Thor had to fight but easily won. He had the
strength of more than five men and less than, well, a real deity.
I estimated it might be about ten. It was just a guess and it was
about Thor during the New Mexico sojourn that is the main body of
the film.
I am not sure that I would say the gods of Asgard were spot on. As
I said in my review they just did not look Scandinavian. Also I
find out afterward that Heimdallr in the myths--called "the whitest
god of them all--lost the "r" at the end of his name and was played
by a black actor. But, yes, Asgard visually was a knockout.
I kind of like the idea that the Norse gods are given a science
fiction explanation. I guess I like the idea that there is a
scientific explanation for what appears to be magical. That is the
premise behind QUATERMASS AND THE PIT, a favorite film of mine.
But in popular series, fantasy magic and science are often mixed
indiscriminately. For most of the old Universal horror films
Dracula was essentially a supernatural being while the Frankenstein
monster has a scientific origin. (There was an attempt to say the
Wolf Man and Dracula had a scientific basis in HOUSE OF DRACULA.)
The Toho universe mixes the science-based Godzilla with the
supernatural Mothra.
The Io9 site, incidentally, lists some works that seem like fantasy
but are at base science fiction:
http://tinyurl.com/void-fantasy-sf
In any case I appreciate that you can say something about the film
as seen from the viewpoint of the comic book series. [-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: SCHISM by Catherine Asaro (copyright 2005; audiobook
copyright 2009; 13 hours, 57 minutes, narrated by Suzanne
Weintraub) (audiobook review by Joe Karpierz)
Catherine Asaro's "Skolian Empire" novels are starting to grow on
me. There are a lot of them, and like Bujold's "Vorkosigan" series
the books aren't written in internal chronological order. There
doesn't seem to be a lot of information regarding that issue, but
according to everyone's favorite accurate source (Wikipedia), the
next book for me to read (or in this case, listen to) is SCHISM,
the first book in a duology called "Triad".
The time is twenty-plus years after the events of SKYFALL. Roca
Skolia and Eldrinson Valdoria have a boatload of kids from a long
and happy marriage. The novel spends most of its time following
three of those children: Althor, Sauscony, and Shannon. The novel
does not give short shrift to Roca and Eldrinson; indeed, their
parts in the story are important, especially Eldrinson.
Eldrinson is still old-fashioned and somewhat sexist. He wants all
of his children to stay on Lyshriol, with the men becoming farmers
or warriors, and the women staying home to, well, do "traditional"
women things, not the least of which is settling down and raising a
large family of happy children. Things aren't going his way,
however. Many of his children have left the planet; some are going
to get an education at an off-world university, while others,
Althor in particular, go off to DMA, a military academy, to become
specialized fighters in an upcoming war against the Aristos.
Eldrinson is not happy about this, but he accepts it.
Things begin to unravel when Althor comes home with an accompanying
admissions officer from DMA. It seems that Sauscony, or Soz (not
only easier to say, but easier to type), has been training without
her father's permission and has studied for and taken preliminary
exams for entry into DMA. The officer is here to inform her that
the standard procedure for entering the academy is being waived for
her--her scores are way off the charts--and she wants Soz to come
to the academy immediately. This is, of course, against her
father's wishes, and he forbids it. As these things go, of course,
Soz goes anyway. This causes a tremendous rift, er, schism,
between Eldrinson and both Soz and Althor.
Meanwhile, Shannon is overhearing the departing lecture from his
father, and believes what he hears was caused by him. Shannon
really doesn't fit in--he just doesn't belong. He has Blue Dale
Archer blood in him (think elves and you'll be fine), so he leaves
to go in search of the mysterious Archers, who are believed to have
disappeared decades before.
Eldrinson finds himself in a quandary. He regrets what he said to
Althor and Soz, but refuses to take it back. Then, Shannon is
discovered to be missing, and Eldrinson leads a team to go look for
him. As these things go, bad things happen during the search, for
which once again Shannon blames himself. I spend a lot of time
thinking that Shannon needed a good smack upside the head for
blaming himself for everything--it's no wonder he didn't fit in.
The rest of the novel deals with Soz's life at DMA, Shannon's
adventure, and the ordeal that Eldrinson goes through when one of
the worst things imaginable happens while he's looking for Shannon.
What it's really dealing with is change and people maturing,
growing up, and changing.
The more I think about this novel, the more I come to find that I'm
liking what I hear (read, whatever). It's a space opera, with
spaceships, battles, wars. But it's got plenty of great characters
who change for the better. It's got adventure, drama, and emotion.
It's well-written--clear, concise, and fast moving. I highly
recommend SCHISM.
However, as with Skyfall, the reading is atrocious. The number of
mispronounced words is appalling. Two that come to mind are
behemoth and neutrino. There are others as well, but these two
really got on my nerves. It was also clear that the editor was
asleep at the wheel on this one in another way. At one point,
later in the story, Weintraub stumbles on what she's reading and
restarts the sentence. That should have been edited out, but
wasn't for some reason. The reading does detract from the story.
So, score one for the story, and take one away from the narrator.
Still, SCHISM is good stuff. [-jak]
==================================================================
TOPIC: HELLO LONESOME (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: With HELLO LONESOME writer, director, producer, and
cinematographer Adam Reid tells three stories of love, dependence,
and tragedy. In each story two people meet and form an
unpredictable relationship. Reid wears a lot of hats in making his
first feature film and can wear them proudly to see the result. He
gives us a broad range of emotion in a small film. Rating: +2 (-4
to +4) or 7/10
Adam Reid writes, directs, produces, and even films this movie with
three stories of relationships (two romantic, one just friendship).
The three stories are nearly but not entirely unconnected, and in
the fashion of INTOLERANCE the stories are told in parallel with
the climaxes all at about the same time.
Bill (played by Harry Chase) is a voiceover artist who is recently
separated from his wife and now lives by himself. He is barely
connected with anyone. What hurts him the most is that he cannot
connect any more with his daughter. He verbally jousts with his
courier, Omar (Kamel Boutros) but eventually tries to build a
friendship.
Gary (James Urbaniak) is a copy editor who lends a helping hand to
a neighbor, two years a widow, old enough to be his grandmother
Eleanor (Lynn Cohen). Eleanor has faltering vision and now has to
give up her last love, her car and with it her freedom. Gary
offers to help her get around and becomes friends with her in spite
of his communication problems. Slow-speaking and awkward, he is
embarrassed to talk to her and it is not improved by his penchant
for saying the wrong thing, an ironic fault for someone who edits
words for a living. But for Eleanor he may be the last bond she
will form with anyone, and she needs to hold fast to him.
Meanwhile young love is represented by Gordon and Debbie (Nate
Smith and Sabrina Lloyd) who meet on the Internet and get together
for what they expect to be a quick, casual sexual relationship. As
with the other stories, this one will take the two someplace they
really do not expect to go.
Reid's concept of the film is, I would guess by the title, to give
us portraits of six lonely people. He gave us three engrossing
stories, but if his aim was to show us six lonely people that part
is open to interpretation. Gary and Eleanor do seem to be lonely,
though Eleanor seems to miss her car as much as any human contact.
Omar, Gordon, and Debbie may not even be solitary. Debbie has an
active social life. Omar is frustrated that he cannot use his
talents, but we know little of his personal life. It is hardest to
feel much sympathy for Bill, who likes playing the bad boy. He is
boorish and likes to embarrass Omar by coming to the door naked but
for gaudy briefs. Bill is newly solitary, but not necessarily
lonely. In the end Bill's relationship to Omar matters the least.
It will be more practical than emotional and Bill may be very
little different at the end of his story than at the beginning.
While Reid gives the most attention to Bill, in the end it is the
story of Gordon and Debbie that is the most affecting.
As an unusual reversal though the film is a United States
production shot in the United States, but the stories seem set in
Canada. I rate HELLO LONESOME a +2 on the -4 to +4 scale or 7/10.
HELLO LONESOME opens May 27, 2011 at Cinema Village, New York.
Film Credits: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1258201/
[-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: THOR (letter of comment by Evelyn C. Leeper)
In response to Mark's review of THOR in the 05/13/11 issue of the
MT VOID, Evelyn writes, "The set design was great, but the CGI was
annoying. I realize it's hard to assemble thousands of real Frost
Giants, but there's something about the fact that when Richard
Attenborough filmed 300,000 extras at Gandhi's funeral, he actually
filmed 300,000 extras." [-ecl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Okay, I know I said I usually leave the Hugo reviews to Joe
Karprierz, but I have just a few things to say about FEED by Mira
Grant (ISBN 978-0-316-08105-4), none of which address the actual
plot, characterization, or style of the book.
First, it's one of those "premium" mass-market paperbacks: taller
(7.5" tall) than the traditional size (6.75" tall), and more
expensive ($9.99 rather than $7.99, which I think is the current
standard price). I'm sure that in 1967 when Ace Books paperbacks
jumped from the old smaller size (6.375" tall) to the size of the
last fifty years there was as much complaining about how they no
longer fit on the shelves. That doesn't mean I'm happy about this
time.
Ace books made the jump in size in 1967, between the M-
series and H-series of their Ace Doubles line, but actually a lot
of companies had the larger format well before then. For example,
Ballantine never had the smaller format so far as I can tell. And
some companies kept it even longer, particularly for dictionaries--
I have Spanish-English, Hebrew-English, and other language-English
dictionaries of later provenance than are the shorter size. But
the size I really wish would make a come-back is the Armed Services
Edition! The Penguin 60s are a stab in the right direction, but
not quite as good.
But to return to FEED:
Nor am I happy about the copy-editing, nor rather the lack thereof.
The narrator talks about "the highest viewer numbers since Cruise
versus Gore in 2018" (page 120), which contextually must be a
Presidential race, but of course there would not be one in 2018.
(The Presidential campaign in the novel is in 2040 so it is not as
if somehow it made a shift because of the Rising.)
There are references to RadioShack (page 183) and Starbucks (page
192). Will both these last another thirty years? In particular,
the much more "agoraphobic" society depicted in the book seems
unlikely to support places like Starbucks. RadioShack, I will
grant, could transition to more of an on-line store, though given
the rate at which retailers are failing these days, it still seems
questionable whether even that will survive that long. The same is
true of "Microsoft Windows VirtuParty" (page 315)--as strong as
Microsoft is now, thirty years and a zombie apocalypse can affect a
lot of things.
One character talks about "someone who thinks Edgar Allen Poe is
socially relevant" (page 238). This is just plain sloppy--it's
Edgar *Allan* Poe. But more than sloppy, it seems to indicate that
no one in the whole line of writer and editors knows this.
Oh, and if you'd like the "club-you-over-the-head-with-the message"
paragraph, here it is, from the first person narrator talking to
the reader (page 186):
"Fear makes people stupid, and Kellis-Amberlee has had people
scared for the last twenty years. There comes a point when you
need to get over the fear and get on with your life, and a lot of
people don't seem to be capable of that anymore. From Blood tests
to gated communities, we have embraced the cult of fear, and we
don't seem to know how to put it back where it belongs."
Well, gee, you could be a little *less* subtle than that, but it
would involve 42-pt Bold Algerian font to do it. However, just to
sure you got the message, Grant has it re-iterated in blog quotes
on pages 346 and 428.
And just in passing, it really helps you understand one constant
reference if you know who Steve Irwin is. (The name Irwin rang no
bells with me.)
We just watched THE NUN'S STORY, which is so full of details about
the Catholic Church and nuns that it practically cries out for a
commentary track. Alas, there is none, nor can I find any article
discussing the Catholicism in the film in detail. [-ecl]
==================================================================
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
Idealism is what precedes experience;
cynicism is what follows.
--David T. Wolf