Friday, August 10, 2012

I'm hosting a screening of IRON SKY in Austin on Aug. 28! Come Join Me!

Don't miss this @Tugginc screening of Iron Sky

Iron Sky

Tuesday, August 28, 7:30pm - 9:23pm
in Austin, TX 
@

Alamo Drafthouse Lake Creek 

Tickets $10.00

I need 44 people in the Austin Metro area to  agree to go and reserve their tickets at this link for this screening to happen.  I'll be your host for this evening of total Geekauchery as we sit back and watch Nazis from the Moon attack Earth in all their modern B-Movie Glory!

Rated R for language and bloody violence!

Be57e82ab4325730380aa370b9efb539

Monday, July 16, 2012

New Book Announcement: WORLDS OF PJF 3: PORTRAITS OF A TRICKSTER

Just completed work on designing the cover for THE WORLDS OF PHILIP JOSÉ FARMER VOL. 3: PORTRAITS OF A TRICKSTER.  The book is a grand collection of works exploring and expanding upon Phil's many playful pseudonymous identities as author.  



Look below to see the recent web announcement by the guys at Meteor House Press (publishers of the book). The next FARMERCON is in Columbus, Ohio in August and is the perfect place for fans of Phil to get their copies of this (and earlier) volumes signed by many of the contributors.  

Get The Worlds of Philip José Farmer 3 Signed!
Great news Farmer fans and book collectors!Since there will be at least four contributors toThe Worlds of Philip José Farmer 3 in Columbus OH, on August 9 -12 for FarmerCon VII, we are having a mass book signing. We did this with volume 1 back in 2010. While it was a bit of a logistical nightmare hauling the books cross country to get four people to sign about one hundred copies, so many people have asked if we are doing this for volume 3, we have decided it is worth the effort. Looking back now, we’re certainly glad we did it with volume 1.
As of today editor Michael Croteau, along with writers Win Scott Eckert, Rick Lai, and Heidi Ruby Miller will be on hand to sign as many copies as needed. Other contributors have been contacted to see if they can make the trip to FarmerCon and join the fun, so there could be more than four signatures.
There is no charge to get your book signed. If you want your copy signed, simply place a note saying “please have my book signed” when you order through paypal. However, you must order no later than August 6th.
If you have already ordered, simply email sales @ meteorhousepress.com and ask for your copy to be signed.

Saturday, July 14, 2012

Should Christians Vote for a Mormon President?

I don't want to bog down my fun little blog here with a dissertation on politics, but some of my readers might be interested in what I have to say on this issue.  If so, then click below to take you to my other blog where I tackle the complicated issue of Whether Christians Should Vote for a Mormon President by responding to a recent article by Christian apologetics expert Dr. Norman Geisler.

When the World Screamed
SATURDAY, JULY 14, 2012

Should A "Christian" Vote for a "Mormon" President? (A Response to Dr. Norman Geisler)
Recently, Christian author and apologetics expert Norman Geisler published an opinion piece entitled "Should An Evangelical Vote For a Mormon President?".  You can read the full text here.
As a Christian, I feel the need to respond to Geisler's article in depth and this is as good a place as any to do so.
Before I get to Geisler's writing and my responses, let me set forth a few principles that guide me in my analysis and opinion regarding the upcoming presidential elections.  First and foremost, religious beliefs of the candidate are just one of many considerations that I use in determining who to vote for.  The most important thing to me is a demonstrated commitment to principles of limited government, free enterprise, individual free will, freedom of speech, press, and religion.  After that, I want to see whether the candidate demonstrates a proven ability to lead and a commitment to a morality base that I can generally agree with.  Finally, do I trust and respect the candidate -- an entirely subjective and intuitive rationale...TO READ MORE CLICK HERE


Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Review: LoEG CENTURY: 2009




LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN

CENTURY: 2009 #1

Writer: Alan Moore
Artist: Kevin O'Neill
Publishers: Top Shelf Productions & Knockabout

“I rocked the fretful baby gods to sleep before time started...and I am companion to the women who paste up the stars. The quarters of the world are bound unto my compass. I have taken tea with earthquakes. I know what the bee knows...and you really are a dreadful little boy.” -- Mary Poppins/Prospero/God to Harry Potter/Anti-Christ

For those of you who thought the previous CENTURY volumes were confusing or meandering, well...there was purpose to the madness. CENTURY is brilliantly wrapped up with the 2009 volume which brings the literary world of fiction into the Apocalypse -- the final battle between the Anti-Christ and God (as embodied by Harry Potter and Mary Poppins).

The genius of Alan Moore's insanity is how such a complicated story can gestate within his mind and be perfectly executed when visualized by Kevin O'Neill, whose art simply sings on this project. The game of spotting the literary and entertainment cameos and references is still there and can make rereading the series more fun as you dig in and try to track down the various things you didn't spot before. However, now that the series has concluded, I went back and reread the whole thing (including THE BLACK DOSSIER) and realized just how well-planned and executed this project has been. There are so many foreshadowed thematic and plot elements in 1910 that it took reading the conclusion to realize -- and not the least of these is the blistering satirical criticism of the advent of literature as franchising. James Bond and Harry Potter come under the most wicked commentaries here; most especially by Moore's indulgent incarnation of the Anti-Christ as that wretched, unlikeable, little boy from the Harry Potter series.
 
Moore's patented use of symbolism is strongly in place here as he takes the strong phallic elements that permeate J.K. Rowling's popular series – most notably in terms of the “wand” as phallic symbol – and he actually literalizes it. His use of the Blazing World and the whole 3D glasses visual established in THE BLACK DOSSIER sets such an interesting visual for me in reading it. How do you identify “God” as a character when he/she can take any form? Look for the tell-tale green/red 3D glasses. It's so simple. I wonder if Moore is even aware of all the various ways this can be used as a symbol like that. I'm thinking about the “magic sunglasses” that Joseph Smith claimed to use to be able to read the golden plates containing the Book of Mormon for an example.  



As recognized by writer Tom Jordan on the 2009 Annotations website, this story is about Orlando's symbolic redemption. And, by the way, Orlando wields Excalibur – yet another great phallic symbol of literature and representation of both the life and death of Camelot, itself a Heaven analog like The Blazing World.

 I've tried to figure out why so many have been increasingly critical of Moore's LoEG series basically starting with THE BLACK DOSSIER and I don't want to kneejerk it as claiming people aren't smart enough to “get” it. That's not the case. There are plenty of genius works out there that find an audience and near universal acclaim. I am going to go out on a limb and say that LoEG is a perfect reflection of Moore's emotional state at the point that he is writing them. As such, the first two LoEG series are grand adventures that are an intellectual and literary playground. Beginning with THE BLACK DOSSIER and now fully realized in CENTURY, is Moore the jaded and grumpy critic. 


Moore is still playing in the playground of fictionality but now he is filtering his storytelling through an increasingly dark and angry prism. He is angry at the business of literature in all its forms. He is angry about the business of mass media – the business of franchising – the business of literature merely as licensing and lowest common denominator appeal. CENTURY is Moore's lament on what has been lost because of the business of literature. We have lost that sense of joy and freedom, that sense of individual vision, that unified knowledge of our past, present, and future through literature that glorifies the human spirit and presents mankind as good and not depraved. The destruction of civilization in the world of the LoEG has followed the same path as literature itself as modernism and post-modernism and deconstructionism and dystopian post-apocalyptian themes have supplanted what came before. This is the world ripe for the Apocalypse of The Book of Revelation and personified by Harry Potter as Anti-Christ.

I think this negative spiral  and its accompanying angry tone and spirit have weighted down his approach in this series and caused Moore's audience to disconnect from him. Comic book readers by-and-large are looking for escapism, and Moore's CENTURY series requires one to see through the darkeness and anger to recognize both the sharp-witted humorous criticism in the satire but also that spark of hope. Moore is taking his readers to the precipice in 2009 just so he can offer redemption to all.

Moore is saying to his readers with 2009 that the future does not have to be bleak. It can be bright. It's okay to be angry but just grousing about it does no good. 2009 is a challenge to all creators of fiction to recapture literature back from the arms of the lawyers and the corporations.

CENTURY 2009 is a triumph of individualism in creation and in literature and I found it brilliant.



Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Ray Bradbury 1920-2012

In Memoriam of Ray Bradbury who passed away this morning, I'm reblogging my own blog from last year that posted a 1963 video profile of a young Bradbury.

It is so good and is a great reminder of his impact as a writer in our lifetimes. Intelligent Designs: Ray Bradbury: Story of a Writer: RAY BRADBURY: STORY OF A WRITER This 1/2 hour film is from 1963 and was originally aired on television.

Saturday, June 2, 2012

So What's All THIS About Green Lantern Being Gay? Not That There's Anything Wrong With That...

Alan scott-ross.jpg

Well, this whole thing was a big hullabaloo about nuthin'.  I made a prediction in my last blog entry, based on the words coming from the DC Comics publicity machine that a "male" character who is a "major icon" was going to be reinvented as "gay" for the New 52-verse wherein DC rebooted their entire comics universe of comic books in September 2011.  Where my guess was "The Atom" as the closest thing to a "male" who's a "major icon" who had not been already established in the New 52-verse as straight.  Even then I felt I was stretching the "major" aspect of those clues with the Atom, but he has been a member of the Justice League since issue #14 of the series way back to the '60s.  He also appeared in the SUPER FRIENDS  a few times in the 70s and on the more recent JUSTICE LEAGUE cartoon series.  As the premiere size-changing super-hero of the Justice League, he's pretty iconic.  Major?  Well....I was giving DC grace on that.  As a secondary guess, if DC had a different concept of "major icon" than I, then I found myself gravitating towards Capt. Atom -- although, a much bigger stretch, I kind of thought DC might see the archetypal inspiration for WATCHMEN'S Dr. Manhattan as "iconic."

I was wrong on all counts.  DC comics editorial and publicity machine have an entirely different concept of what constitutes a "major icon."  I'm tempted to just laugh because it's really kind of ridiculous.  Get ready....in case you haven't seen the network news coverage from CNN (owned by the same company that owns DC Comics, natch) -- it is......GREEN LANTERN!
Oh my god! Green Lantern? Really?

No.


Not really.


Well....not who you think they mean.

What only serious comic books geeks already knew (until last summer probably), the Green Lantern isn't just one character, he is a bunch of characters.  The recent Green Lantern movie starring Ryan Reynolds introduced to the masses the concept of the Green Lantern Corps, plus a couple of fully-animated DVD features, and currently airing cartoon series.  These all feature the character of test pilot, Hal Jordan, as the iconic Green Lantern and the various other Green Lanterns as supporting characters.

Ryan Reynolds In Green Lantern Wallpaper Wallpaper

Within the comics world, since 1958 when the Hal Jordan version of Green Lantern appeared, there have been quite a few human beings who have joined the Green Lantern Corps.  There is John Stewart, Guy Gardner, and Kyle Rayner.  For racial diversity, the African-American John Stewart version of Green Lantern was the only version featured in the JUSTICE LEAGUE/UNLIMITED cartoon series, and the Kyle Rayner version appeared as the only Green Lantern in a single episode of SUPERMAN: THE ANIMATED SERIES.  Other than that, Hal Jordan has been the only version of the character really marketed to the masses and is easily the face that most people associate with the Green Lantern persona.

Lesser known in this history of the character is the character of Alan Scott, the original Green Lantern, as created by cartoonist Mart Nodell, was the wielder of a magic green ring and who first appeared on newsstands in ALL-AMERICAN COMICS #16 (1940).  His last "golden age" appearance was in ALL-STAR COMICS #52 (1951).  This character disappeared out of the collective consciousness of the public and 7 years later, the Hal Jordan version of Green Lantern (reimagined completely) appeared with his science-fiction based ring and has been the iconic version of the Green Lantern ever since.  Alan Scott reappeared in comics again in the 60s and off-and-on throughout the last 4 decades, but always as either the Green Lantern of a parallel Earth (called Earth 2) or later, after a major continuity jumble, as a redundant and past-retirement-age elderly Green Lantern who has no direct ties to the Green Lantern Corps.

So, does this mean that DC Comics was progressive enough to have a "gay" super-hero all the way back to 1940.  No, it does not.

As most readers of this blog will know, DC Comics did another massive continuity jumble back in September 2011 resulting in a rebooted universe of characters they now market as "The New 52."  And within the New 52, there is a new ongoing comic book called EARTH 2 in which writer James Robinson has reimagined the entire concept of the Earth 2 parallel world for the New 52.  In the New 52, the world called Earth 2 is not a world in which the comics of the 1940s actually happened, it is a modern parallel to our own Earth but where a battle 5 years ago ended with the deaths of Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman.  That power vacuum leads to the rise of a whole new and different generation of young heroes and this new 20-something Alan Scott, who will become the Green Lantern of Earth 2 this month, is gay.   I really never even considered any characters on "Earth 2" (DC's alternate universe of same-named heroes) to be iconic.  They are redundancies.  You can tell good stories about them, but they really only exist as redundancies.

Most importantly, this is not the Alan Scott who first appeared in 1940.

I am not quite sure by what leaps of logic the DC editorial and publicity machine can, with a straight face, identify a brand-new version of a character with absolutely none of the previous version's history beyond a name and a hair color as a "major icon."  At best, the original character from the '40s is the inspiration for the iconic version of the character (Hal Jordan), but even in the '40s he was in the realm of the lesser-knowns.  In the '40s, Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman,  and Capt. Marvel would be the major icons.

So, the new Alan Scott, Green Lantern turns out to be gay in the reimagined Earth 2 of the New 52.  That's fine.  They want to diversify the line.  That's fine.  Don't bullshit me with the major icon thing and don't try to drum up media coverage under the misleading header of "Green Lantern is Gay" and that sort of thing.  It's all just silly and DC never surprises me by actions like this that have no real impact.  Making a major character gay would be somewhat dramatic.  Making an alternate version of a character in a parallel world gay is essentially meaningless.



Writer, James Robinson, gave some insight on his thinking process in a recent interview where he pointed out that in the old continuity, the elderly (and straight) Alan Scott had previously fathered a daughter (Jade) and a son (Obsidian).  In that old continuity, Obsidian was gay.  Since Robinson was going to make these new versions of the characters much younger and at the start of their super-hero careers; there was no place for Jade and Obsidian, so he decided to let Scott himself fill that role.  Robinson has a pattern in his comic book writing of nearly always including an "out" gay character, so it makes sense that he would look for who might fit that bill in this new EARTH 2 series.  And, in truth, since he of any of the writers at DC seems to understand the latitude available when reimagining a world from the ground up, he is probably the best suited for handling this type of characterization with respect and without exploitation.  However, he is doing it under the guiding hand of the editorial direction of Dan Didio who approaches the world of comic book marketing like a carnival barker, so it is no real surprise that Robinson's characterization choice became a media circus.

All that being said (and this is what will likely piss off friends and enemies both)....I have a conceptual problem purely from an intellectual standpoint.  From my own research and reading and observation of the human condition, I take the position that human sexuality is a continuum and not a bright line.  I don't believe anyone is actually born straight or gay outright....although I admit there is likely a genetic propensity that makes it more likely one or the other.  Sexuality is a convoluted mix of genetics, environment, and sexual imprinting.  And even more than that, sexuality involves choice and not just attraction.  We aren't just animals with a determinative direction that we can't control.  It's why there is such a thing as situational homosexuality -- most notably within prisons by otherwise heterosexual men and women who become exlusively homosexual until out of prison and then revert back.  There are experimenters who toy with one side or the other, but eventually settle exclusively on  one.  There are people who simply don't have a sex life of any kind and choose to dive into the gay experience because they want the intimacy of sex and that lifestyle is more open to accept them.  There are people who find themselves with no real interest in sex at all -- hetero or homo.  There are some who are simply addicted to sex and don't care who or what gender so long as they are gratified.  It's not always easy to mark the dividing line.  The whole debate over what is "normal" and "abnormal" is obfuscatory.  No form of sexuality is objectively "normal", however heterosexuality is objectively  "normative".  They are different words and connote different things.  "Normal" carries with it a judgment based on one's moral values.  "Normative" is just an objective recognition of the way the vast majority function. If homosexuality had been "normative" then the human race would have died out millennia ago.  Homosexuality, by necessity, will always be nonnormative.  But that itself is not a moral declaration and shouldn't be taken as one.


Sexuality is complicated and it's a lot more than just simply "I was born this way", regardless of the efforts by various political and activist groups who vociferously demand validation for their nonnormative lifestyle choices (which is nobody else's business so why demand it?).  My point of view is very simply that I am not going to impose my own morality on anyone else when it comes to something as personal and intimate as their sexuality.  That is between themselves, their own consciences, and their philosophical/religious values.

Now that I've said that, my only problem with the choice to make the new version of Alan Scott into a homosexual is simply that I think it smacks of tokenism at this point -- "Let's see....who can I make gay????" -- that sort of thing.  By using the name "Alan Scott" there is an intention to evoke some sense of history to the character that ties him back to the version from the previous continuity.  For some reason, that to me, almost belittles his sexuality choice a bit to think it can be changed so matter-of-factly.  I guess that more than anything bothers me from an intellectual standpoint.  I can separate the 2 characters well enough in my own mind to have no problem at all enjoying EARTH 2 and Robinson's excellent storytelling abilities.  But I also know that this whole thing is going to get muddled and confused in the public's mind and give off a wrong-headed message that something as intensely personal as our own sexual identity can be switched around as easily as a couple of keystrokes.

Worst of all, whenever James Robinson leaves the EARTH 2 series and stops writing the character, I have absolutely zero confidence in whoever succeeds him that they won't turn the new Alan Scott character into an embarrassing gay caricature.  The best we comic readers can do is hope Robinson stays in the writing seat for a good long time.