Kmart Fail (where I bitch about something unrelated to SF/F to get it off my chest)

(Warning:  some explicit language can be found below)

I won't shop at Kmart again.  One little mistake doesn't bother me.  Everyone makes mistakes, after all, and I can't fault a company for the occasional problem.  That is unless you do what Kmart just did to me (i.e. fucked me).

I had my birthday way back in October and my family decided they'd send me money to Kmart/Sears so I could buy a new TV (which I really needed).  I spent four days researching the TVs within my price range on the Kmart/Sears site, picked a TV I thought would be worth the money based on reviews and specs, and then placed my order (I also purchased a Crockpot, but since that's not part of the problem, we'll ignore that).  (The order was paid by credit and gift card, with the credit card portion meeting the amount mentioned at the bottom of this post.)

Initially, I was told my TV would arrive by the 11th of November, which was part of the reason

The Skiffy and Fanty Show #26 is Live!

It's time for another episode, but with a slightly different format.  This week we bring in James Knapp, author of State of Decay and other novels, to talk with us about his books and zombies.  Feel free to tune in and enjoy the discussion.

Thanks for listening!

TSA (Totalitarian Sexual Assault): My Thoughts on the TSA's New Procedures and People in General

(Warning:  explicit language and politics are below; ignore if you're not interested in either)

I'm going to take some flak for this post (at least, I expect to).  This is because I'm not going to say anything particularly kind about the TSA (or Totalitarian Sexual Assault, as I will now call it) or the large portion of my fellow Americans who have decided the new measures aren't that big of a deal.  Of course, if you've been ignoring the Internet, or don't pay attention to politics or the news, you have no idea what I'm talking about.  So, I should probably clear that up first.

The TSA recently changed their search policies for the security lines in U.S. airports (Nov. 1st, I

Harry Potter: Would it still be big if Harry was Harriett?

I can't remember where I got the link to this thread at SFFWorld, but the second I saw it, I knew I had to talk about it here.  The thread was started by a user named Rilzik, who asked a very peculiar, but interesting question about the Harry Potter series.  Specifically, he or she asked:

Would the books and movies be as popular and/or have made as much money if harry was a female and the supporting roles switched to reflect that. Would it have been more, the same or less popular?

Could the story with a female lead have reached that sort of super stardom? Would/are females more willing to watch/read a male lead then males are of female leads?

Is the audience the same as with twilight which does have a female lead? are these comparable?

A lot of folks have said "it would be the same" to the first batch of questions and "no" to the very

Video Found: Neill Blomkamp's Mysterious Teaser

I don't know what the brilliant creator of District 9 is up to, but a recent teaser sent to Wired Magazine seems to point to something more human-oriented than his alien-refugee blockbuster (genetic manipulation a la Splice, perhaps?).  Whatever it is, I'm looking forward to seeing it--in theaters this time.

Here's the teaser (after the fold):

Speculative Horizons to Close For Questionable Reasons

I've nothing against James Long, author of Speculative Horizons--one of the good SF/F blogs out there.  His blog has been in my Google Reader for almost a year now and I've enjoyed many of his thoughtful posts.  But it appears he's decided to close things down.  Why?  Partly because he's going to be an editorial assistant at Orbit Books (congrats!), and partly because of this:

Of course, this means I can't continue with my blogging here. I've always tried to blog with honesty and integrity, and there's just no way I could continue blogging while working for a major genre publisher - it would bring my personal and professional credibility into question.

Wait, what?  Stopping because of new responsibilities makes perfect sense.  Working in publishing

Video Found: Daniel Radcliffe, Played by Harry Potter

I stole this from Tobias Buckell, but I thought all of you should see it, because it's bloody hilarious. It's Daniel Radcliffe...er...I mean Harry Potter explaining who he really is. By that I mean...

Oh screw it. Just watch (after the fold):

Meme: Every Frakking Animated Movie Ever Made (Almost)

I stole this from Andrew Wheeler, who stole it from someone else.  Should be fun!

All the animated movies in the world, sort of:

- X what you saw
- O what you haven't finished/seen or saw sizable portions
- Bold what you loved
- Italicize what you disliked/hated
- Leave unchanged if neutral

(I've added a final thing to these:  a grade--good, average, and sucked.  I might as well, right?)

CLASSIC DISNEY

Things You Should Learn After 27 Episodes and Free Insult Time

Click the record button...

Yeah, that's right.  I'm that guy.  The guy who arranged an interview with an awesome author of an awesome book, who participated in an awesome interview with said author, and then said goodnight.  The problem?  The recorder wasn't on.  Yup.  It would be fair to see that I'm feeling like a bloody moron right now, because that's an awful reason for screwing things up.  It's one thing for software to malfunction, but entirely another when the only malfunctioning thing is the conductor.

So, consider this thread an open invitation to insult me as you see fit.  Pretty much anything goes.

Have at it...

P.S.:  FML.

The Skiffy and Fanty Show #25 is Live!

Another episode is up, folks!  If you like the show, let us know.  Episode 25 is all about the crazy things happening in the world (some of them, anyway).  So tune in and enjoy.

New Poll: What is a good length for a weekly podcast?

I told you I'd have another poll soon enough.  Since this poll is in connection with the poll we will be running tomorrow on the website for The Skiffy and Fanty Show, your answers will actually be both informative and helpful.  And all you have to do is click your mouse a couple of times (or type a short comment).

The poll question is:  what is a good length for a weekly podcast?

You can find the poll on the left sidebar.  There are five options:  20 min., 30 min., 45 min., 1 hr., and other.  If you select other, we'd appreciate it if you'd leave a comment somewhere letting us know the length you'd suggest.

So vote away!

The Production of Canon: A Pointless Argument?

An amusing discussion took place last week in one of my classes (the SF/utopia one).  We were talking about Tom Moylan's Scrapes of Untainted Sky and Luckhurst's Science Fiction and how Luckhurst's one-page claim about the awful practice of canon production in key theoretical texts (Suvin's Metamorphoses of Science Fiction, Carl Freedman's Critical Theory and Science Fiction, and Moylan's book) sets itself up as a contradiction.  For Luckhurst (and this is based on reading one page from his book), the aforementioned authors are participating in political games:  Suvin in a game of the literary elite; Freedman in an equally problematic project; and Moylan in utopian readings of SF.  He views these authors as having agendas that "reflect back the 'reader-critic's cherished political dispositions'" (9) and argues that SF studies needs to be open to examinations and discussions of Pulp Era and Golden Age SF.  Since even Luckhurst is participating in canon production--even though he is attempting to open up the critical framework of SF studies to more texts than Suvin and others have been willing to address--the contradiction should be readily apparent.

Luckhurst's solution is a good one (in my opinion).  Since I've already written about the inside vs. the outside in SF criticism, it seems prudent to point out that political agendas play a crucial role in forming theoretical and critical texts.  It also seems prudent to suggest that one can't escape from political readings.  But can one escape from the project of canon production?

That is the question that I am concerned with here (and one that I was concerned with during

Science Fiction Criticism: Inside vs. Outside

One of my colleagues recently asked me what I thought about the academic texts on science fiction we had been reading over the semester.  Specifically, she was curious about my opinion on the inside and the outside, and who, more or less, has the "right" to comment upon the genre.  Before I get into that, I need to explain what I mean by the inside and the outside.

There are two kinds of science fiction critics (or maybe more than two, but I'm only dealing with two for this post):  the critic who grew up in the "community" and transitioned into academia (the inside) and the non-fan who, by some twist of fate, perhaps, came to the genre having never had much interest in it before (the outside). The latter group might be comprised of fans, or it might not, but the first group most definitely is a fan-based critical circle, since the impetus for shifting to academia as a "science fiction critic" has everything to do with their experience with the genre.

In principle, I have no problem with the outside.  They are just as capable of talking about the

The Skiffy and Fanty Show #24 is Live!

And we're talking about bad genre movies again.  This time we take on the 2004 horror flick, Creep.  You can check out the episode here (stream and download).

Oh, and our question of the week is:  what is your favorite zombie movie and why?  So don't forget to leave your answer over at our podcast site.

Until next week!

Poll Results: Do you stop reading authors whose political beliefs you vehemently disagree with?

Another poll down, and the results are rather interesting:

• 18.75% of you said "yes."
• 43.75% of you said "sometimes."
• 37.5% of you said "no."

What does this tell me?  That I need to ask another question.  If most of you continue reading authors whose politics you disagree with (given that the largest group--the "sometimes" group--still reads some of the authors they disagree with), then the big question is related to how you continue reading them.  That'll be in the new poll.

As to my thoughts on the question (in case you didn't see my response in the comments section many days ago): I have stopped reading a number of authors whose work I can no longer separate from their politics.  In almost all cases where I vehemently disagree with an author, I've simply stopped reading.  To be fair, though, there aren't that many authors who ended up in the "no read" pile.  Most authors I can't stand personally still end up on my reading list, but I have found better ways to avoid giving them my support politically (such as not buying their work).

But I'm going to save that for the next poll (coming soon).

The eBook-haters Meme (SF Signal)

SF Signal recently posted a little meme about eBooks, and I've obviously decided to drag it over here for your entertainment.  Obviously, I'm not much of an eBook hater anymore, since I own a Barnes & Noble Nook, but there are still things I don't like about eBooks, thus giving me some right to actually talk about them here.  Feel free to keep it going by posting it to your blog, leaving a comment on the SF Signal thread, or leaving a comment here.

1. Have you ever tried reading an eBook? If so, on what device?
   Yes, I have.  I've tried reading eBooks on my computer and on a Barnes & Noble Nook.
   
2. What's your single main reason for not reading eBooks?
   I like physical books more than digital ones.  That's a fairly simple reason that doesn't need more of an explanation, I suppose.
   
3. Are there any other reasons you don't usually read eBooks?
   Plenty.  They usually cost more than I'm willing to pay ($6 is my cut-off price, and that's pushing it for me).  They're often formatted poorly, and DRM makes it hard for me to edit the file so it is correct (I only read full justified text, because ragged margins make me feel like I'm reading a paper I need to grade).  That pretty much sums up my apprehension.
   
4. What would it take to get you to read eBooks?
   I'm going to read this question to say "read more eBooks," since I already read some eBooks.  To get me to read more, they would have to be priced better, formatted better, and generally more appealing than regular books.  I would also need software that makes highlighting and making notes easier, which is not something I can do in a Nook.  Right now, I use the Nook for fun reading only.  Lastly, I would need a better search engine for finding books that are released by actual publishers, since I am not willing to spend even $0.99 on a book by a self-publisher (sorry, folks, but I can't do it).
   
5. What do you think is a fair price for an eBook?
   I'm going to answer this by saying what I think is fair in general, rather than to me personally.  I don't think any eBook should be over $7.99 when the hardcover is the only copy out, and it should get progressively cheaper as newer formats are released (sort of like the agency model, I suppose).  So, the prices would drop to $5.99 alongside trade paperback, and $3.99 alongside mass market.  Again, I'm not willing to pay over $6, but I'm even less likely to pay $6 for an eBook that has a mass market edition.  Why?  Because I'd rather run to the store and get the real book for a little extra.  Real books smell nice and fell good on your fingers.

There you go.  To be fair, I really like my Nook, and I do like reading books on there.  I'm less against eBooks than I am against the crappy eBook practices by publishers.  I understand them, but it's a big leap to go from "understanding" to "I'm on your side."

So, what about you?

Science Fiction: It's Not About the Future (Part Two)

Now to continue from where I left off in the post you can find here (based on this post by Joseph Robert Lewis).

II.  Science Fiction and Its Reflection on the Present

Since I have already established that science fiction isn't actually about the future, it seems prudent to now consider how Lewis' own logic on that particular point works against him (and, thus, how understanding science fiction as a generic practice is crucial to not only writing and reading it, but also to even talking about it).  Lewis' second point of contention with science fiction as a written practice is that SF is a killer of drama:

Think about your modern life for a moment. Thanks to the phone in your pocket, you’re never lost, never out of touch, never without access to detailed information. And you can photograph or video anything that happens so you have records or evidence. So you’re not going to have a lot of drama related to being lost, confused, or miscommunicating anything.

He claims that this logic is the foundation for why he perceives SF to be a genre that only functions

Science Fiction: It's Not About the Future (Part One)

I suppose we have to get used to people saying really idiotic things about science fiction.  Whether it's some blogger telling us that science fiction is dead (again) or a non-reader telling us that science fiction isn't literature, there seems to always be someone saying something wrong about the genre.  This, however, is a new kind of wrong.  Blogger and self-published writer Joseph Robert Lewis has written a post about why writing fantasy is better than writing science fiction, a seemingly personal sort of thing, but which bases its claims on an essentially childish understanding of the genre.  And, as we all know, when someone is wrong on the Internet, you have to correct them.  But where to begin?

I.  It's Not About the Future

Lewis opens things up with a fundamental misunderstanding of science fiction.  Namely that

The Skiffy and Fanty Show #23 is live!

Jen is back and the podcast has found itself truncated by a good fifteen minutes!  This week we talk about the upcoming Silent Hill sequel, a really bad movie idea, the military and its love affair with Batman, and possibly one of the stupidest plagiarists in history.

The episode can be streamed or downloaded here (or on iTunes).

The Great Book Shelf Escapade

The great journey began when my floor, the tops of my bookshelves, my bed, and the random nooks and crannies of my apartment became overloaded with books.  Something had to be done.  Something drastic!  Translation:  buy a new bookshelf.

That's exactly what I did.  I ended up buying a cheap bookshelf from evil-mart, because that's all I can afford at this point in my life, and because I'll end up getting rid of most of my furniture at some future date anyway.  Of course, when you buy cheap furniture, you get cheap instructions, and I ended up putting one of the panels on backwards, which made removing it to fix the mistake somewhat difficult.  Eventually, I got things in place and started loading up the new shelf with books, and re-organizing my huge collection (by type and then alphabetically by author).

First, the before images (you can click the images below if you want to see larger versions):

The Haul of Books 2010: Stuff For Me v.26 (Birthday Edition)

I suspect that this edition of the Haul of Books will be less interesting to all of you than previous ones.  Still, in case any of you are getting into cooking or care what I got for my birthday, I thought it would be nice to do a special edition to show what my crazy mother got for me after indicating that I wanted my very own Crockpot.  I haven't purchased a Crockpot yet, but you can bet that I will be soon enough!

Here's the image (one book is not a cookbook, but something silly and special):

The Election: My Late Thoughts (In Case You Care)

My original intention was to do a long post about what exactly went wrong for Democrats, with bullet points and the like laid out and organized appropriately.  But then I realized that doing that would mean this post would be extraordinarily long, and unnecessarily so.  Besides, if you want to see some interesting opinions on the election, Scalzi has fairly detailed ones here.

But I do want to throw out my two cents, in contracted form, for those that actually care about my political opinions.  Considering the outcome, I am not surprised.  Democrats got exactly what they deserved.  I hate saying it, but it's true.  That's not to say that they haven't done anything good since taking control of the Presidency, the House, and the Senate.  They have, albeit not to the extent many of us had hoped, but they've also taken an extraordinary amount of power and squandered it by trying to appease an opposition who publicly declared that they were essentially going to be the party of obstruction (anything Obama was pretty much not a-ok with them).  Democrats allowed Republicans and Tea Baggers to control the dialogue and turn public opinion around based on false information and half-truths, and the result was exactly what I thought would happen:  Democrats would lose power.

At the same time, though, the election didn't go as poorly as I had thought it would.  Democrats

Movie Review: 2081

When I first heard about 2081, an independent film adaptation of Kurt Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron," earlier in the year, I had high hopes that something good would come of it.  I am always skeptical of adaptations of science fiction works largely because they have been periodically butchered by Hollywood producers for decades.  But after seeing the trailer, I had a feeling that this would be a film to see, and when I was offered the chance to review the DVD, I jumped on it.

And?  I'm happy to say that I am not disappointed.  2081 is both an excellent adaptation of Vonnegut's short story and a visually arresting, emotionally-charged film that makes the most of its modest runtime (25 minutes).  It succeeds where, sadly, most full-length science fiction films have not by presenting a self-contained, complicated (but not convoluted) plot in a developed and fully-realized future.

2081 is set in a world where true equality is mandated by law.  The strong must wear weights so that they aren't stronger than anyone else; the intelligent wear transmitters that send loud, distracting sounds into their heads to keep them from being more intelligent; and the beautiful must wear masks, lest their beauty afford them an advantage over others.  Vonnegut's vision of the future conjoins equality politics and government intervention, pushing them both to their limit.