Kevin and the Pursuit of Entertainment

Accessed from http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7d/Hector_and_the_Search_for_Happiness_poster.jpg

Hector and the Search for Happiness belongs to Koch films, Egoli Tossel Films and its associated peoples.

“You hold all the cards, Hector” grins the Tibetan monk. It’s a shame that he’s not playing poker.

It’s Thanksgiving up in somewherepostcultureland and that means that we are dragged back to the quaint little hamlet of our births in order to massacre turkeys in the name of some hungry god of year-end feasts and despondent familial gatherings.

It also means that Derek has no excuse to not spend time with me since he’s in the area. To celebrate this coming together of such intellectual forces, we felt it prudent to strive out and experience something that had not been done in quite some time. We wanted to see a movie.

Unfortunately, Derek already saw Gone Girl which left us with woefully nothing else to watch. When your options are Dracula Untold and Hector and the Search for Happiness, you have to wonder if you’re really left with a choice at all. Neither Derek nor I knew anything about Hector and his happiness but we certainly knew enough about Dracula and his untelling to choose the former. Course, that Hector was featuring only once a day at the late hour and in the small theatre should have been hint enough but we both enjoyed ‘That Guy from Hot Fuzz” enough to give the movie a shot. We arrived just as it was starting to a theatre that must have literally held six other people. Well, at the very least it would give me something to talk about on the blog.

I think Hector’s greatest failing is in it being so… safe. It’s generic. It’s a movie. I don’t really know how else to describe the experience. It was fine, both Derek and I intoned as we left the theatre. The biggest problem was that it wasn’t made for us. It’s a rom-com, likely the one genre least likely to spur our interest. Had we taken dates and not been each other’s date, I’m sure we would have gotten something by the end to warrant the ten dollar admission. Overall, the movie is light on the comedy, light on the romance and heavy on the sentimentality.

But I’m getting ahead of myself. Those that want to skip having to look up the wikipedia article to learn the movie’s narrative can read on! Those that are already bored with this movie, well, congratulations I just saved you two hours.

Hector opens with probably its best scene. Simon Pegg (see, I do know his name after all) is flying a little yellow biplane with a great French flag on its ass, dressed in clothing reminiscent of a nineteen-twenties silent pilot film. In his passenger seat is a black and white pug with goggles and scarf with both passengers grinning from ear to ear as they soar amongst the clouds. Hector, getting wrapped up in the whole adventure, decides to do a barrel roll. My first thought as the plane starts to tilt is “There is no way that dog could be strapped in” and, sure enough, as the plane flips upside down, the little black and white pug falls out like a stone to plummet through the bottom of the screen. Well, now I’m grinning ear to ear as Hector slowly realizes the horror of his actions.

Then some cartoon villain pops out from the seat and tries to strangle Hector.

Needless to say the protagonist wakes up. We’re then greeted to Hector’s day to day life, narrated in a children’s storybook style with a grandfatherly narrator that details how Simon Pegg lives a structured, orderly life with toast properly squared each morning and his dutiful girlfriend happily settled into a mothering role of caring to Hector’s near OCD needs. We discover that Hector is a therapist who has a seemingly complex door arrangement in order to keep his patients from ever seeing one another. Of course, the film is quick to point out that, much like his morning routine, Hector is disconnected from the routine of his job and simply returns stock replies to his patients all the while doodling pointless pictures on his notepad and arranging a follow up session the next week. Hector’s girlfriend, Miss Frost from Die Another Day, is some marketing member of a large pharmaceutical company and during a celebration for their latest successful ad campaign she is teased for still being unmarried while Hector sits silently at the table.

And by now it is absolutely clear the entire plotline of the story. Hector is going to realize that his job is a sham and is going to go on some grand journey vaguely reminiscent of the Grand Tour in order to discover that true happiness is in his heart and putting a ring on his girlfriend’s finger.

And that’s exactly what happens.

It’s a story filled with cliches and empty moralities in order to give the audience “the feels” of thinking they’re watching something touching, sweet or profound. It’s none of those. Hector is safe, standard and espouses traditional ideals. Presumably that’s what its audience is there to see.

Personally, I find it boring. For what it was, I can’t say whether it was any better or worse than any other movie with the same aspirations. As I’ve said, I have no interest in the genre or the story-telling. Ostensibly, the biggest conflict in the movie is that Hector is longing for some old girlfriend Agnes and his whole trip to “research what makes people happy to help his patients” is simply an excuse to check up on Agnes to see if she wants to hook up again.

What I personally found, however, was beneath all the generic sentimentality was a rather hilariously morally bereft story. The very first day Hector is on this journey of “self-discovery” he invites a prostitute back to his room in Shanghai and tries to bed her while listing some rubbish about “Happiness is the ability to love two women simultaneously.” Of course, Hector has no idea that the young Chinese girl is a prostitute and when he discovers this, he is absolutely devastated. The movie then moves on as if something of value was learned.

Except, not once is Hector’s lack of fidelity truly addressed. Presumably his disconnect with Miss Frost for these last five years stems from his emotional affair he’s having with the photograph of him, Michael and Agnes on a beach during college. And the first thing he does on his trip is physically fool around behind his girlfriend’s back (which he never discloses to her). Hector supports this unpleasant prostitution by indulging and endorsing his banker friend’s lifestyle. When in Africa, he assists a well known drug lord which, presumably, we’re suppose to believe is led to reform his wicked ways because Hector showed him a spot of kindness.

Of course he doesn’t. Not to mention his continual habit of stealing people’s property and never returning it. Though, I suppose we’re meant to take his pen thefts as a charming quirk. Clearly whoever wrote this story was not on the receiving end of a perpetual pen thief. It becomes less charming when it’s your only pen they nab.

And what movie would it be if there weren’t some awful, convoluted and ultimately empty science thrown in as a cheap mechanic to try and justify the sappy tale. When Hector does meet up with Agnes he discovers that she’s happily married with children and not pining after Hector and his gallant return in the august years of her life. When learning of his “Happiness Search” she instructs him to visit with some crackpot scientist who is researching happiness. The audience is then introduced to the narrator and, thankfully, the initial impression is that this man is off his rocker than an honest to god scientist doing serious science. I mean, he walks around spouting nonsense like “It is not the pursuit of happiness which is important but the happiness of pursuit” while wearing some ratty toque and looking slightly deranged and possibly high. His “experiment” is to shove someone into an isolated box which looks suspiciously like a soundproof booth and have his participants think of three random memories which invoke either sadness, happiness or fear. He then guesses the order of the conjured memories based on neuronal activation monitored on his end.

Oddly enough, his booth doesn’t block cell phone signals which makes you wonder why he’s shoving them into an isolation booth in the first place if it doesn’t isolate anything. This is the moment when Hector gets a call from his girlfriend and after his sad thought (her marrying someone else) and his fear thought (being killed by African warlords) he confesses his trip and… does something? Possibly says he loves her, it’s kind of vague and the scientist exclaims with triumph as if he’s witnessing something profound “It’s all three!”

This, of course, is transposed over images of the Tibetan monastery with its stupid little coloured flags whipping in the wind with the scientist’s stupid coloured brain flashing the same colours. The music swells as actors hemorrhage emotion from their eyes and we all feel better about ourselves even though nothing is being said or learned. Hector’s problem was ultimately solved by having a telephone conversation with his girlfriend which could have easily been held back at London and didn’t necessitate him promoting destructive behaviours like the excess of Shanghai investment banking and Africa drug trading. He then returns to London to continue conning his patients out of their money with his weekly sessions but this time everyone is doing it with a big grin so presumably that makes it all better.

No, ultimately what I wanted to see would be an investigation of happiness. What makes people happy and is happiness ultimately something worthwhile to pursue? This movie seeps with Western standard armchair philosophy that happiness is the be all and end all of our life goals. And yet, we get some glimpses of things otherwise. The investment banker is incredibly rich and has traded traditional happiness with the accumulation of money and the fake reality which he is able to buy with it. He builds his happiness in the illusion that hookers are young college students who fall enormously in love with these old, out of shape white men who come and are just the hippest thing at their little dance clubs.

Then there’s the African drug lord who sells a very different kind of happiness. People who partake of his drugs are getting euphoria just as fake as the bankers and, presumably, just as destructive. There’s a parallel between the drug lord and banker which goes completely ignored. Not to mention there’s the unspoken association of wealth and happiness. Hector and his girlfriend joke a couple of times about Hector’s experience in Shanghai being “so that’s how the rich live” and yet both of them have lucrative work and live extraordinarily well in London (their flat has its own, private elevator!).  Even married Agnes is living quite well with her mathematician husband in a grand house with its own pool.

Ultimately, Hector’s search for happiness is the well-to-do, white upper class westerner’s search for happiness. It’s peering through the tiny Skype box at a world of lavish bathrooms trying to find that one item or object that will bring meaning and joy to their life. I can’t be the only one that finds it incredibly shallow that the best Hector can scrape from his experiences is that happiness is some girl and getting married. It’s about as meaningful as his little book filled with those delightful phrases, “Happiness is not know the full story.”

Plumbing the Well

Accessed from http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/r/rembrand/26group/05group.html

The Nightwatch by Harmenszoon van Rijn Rembrandt (1642).

Last week I wrote about how ideas come to pass. This week, I’m going to examine a current short story which I am working on. Its tentative title is The Affairs of Catherine Hill, Incorporated. Mostly because I like titles that are more than one word in length.

The source of this story actually came from my desire to write something in the near future that isn’t a cop drama. Cop dramas are pretty ubiquitous in modern media. If it’s not superheroes cleaning up streets, then it’s the rugged and persistent police force in such wonderful things as CSI, Criminal Minds, Law and Order, Castle, Almost Human, Skorpion, Bones, Rizzoli and Isles, Blacklist, Person of Interest, Dexter, Foyle’s War, Midsomer Murders, Hawaii Five-O, NCIS, The Mentalist, Murdoch Mysteries, New Tricks, Republic of Doyle, Rookie Blue, Sherlock, Elementary, The Listener, True Detective, White Collar, Death in Paradise…

Needless to say, it’s a lot. I understand the appeal. It’s an easy format, very monster of the week that doesn’t require a lot of memory on the part of the viewer. Relationships aren’t particularly complex and you can really jump in at any point you want in the series because the status quo is necessary to maintain for both the format and the setting. Police departments don’t undergo rigorous changes and upholding the rules is their job. You watch one cop drama and you’ve essentially seen them all. There’s comfort in the familiar. There really isn’t a lot of variation in their presentation.

It’s also the easiest, most convenient way to work in action for a modern setting. Unlike fantasy, modern society is known for being safe and stable. You don’t really have bandits striking in the night to burn down villages and create heroic orphans. You also don’t have dragons who inherently need slaying. If you’re going to get the violence and action of a fantasy flick, you’re going to have to explore crime. And the people who would lead lives that interact in a relate-able way is the police officer. Every day, according to the TV universe, is an action packed struggle with the elements that are undermining the very structure and safety which allows the viewer to watch from the comfort of their home after a long day at work.

So, yeah, I understand the police procedural. I even wrote a short story with a police officer since it was the easiest way to work in a protagonist to explore the mystery I’d developed. But I’ve always argued that the strength of speculative fiction is its ability to take us on journeys beyond the ordinary. Science fiction and fantasy are great at taking old concepts and looking at them in different ways. Or simply jumping off into entirely different ideas.

Thus, I wanted a future story that wasn’t following a police officer. Ok, I thought, what else is fun? Well, I’ve always enjoyed espionage. It’s a genre that’s sort of been on the decline. So, I have a natural interest in that subject and it’s something that could use a fresh look. Alright, I’ll write a futuristic spy story.

Then I asked myself the niggling problem. How does the future change the face of espionage?

Therein lies the rub. And the fun. The future. What sort of future would we be seeing? I ruminated on the various directions I could take. I decided I wanted to have a future very different from our own. I mean, society has changed dramatically over the last hundred years it is silly to think that it would stay the same for the next hundred. What society driving factors would I take to change the face of society? Well, a current issue we face today is the economy. There were elements I could take from there.

Accessed from http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/r/rembrand/26group/13group.html

Sampling Officials of the Drapers’ Guild by Harmenszoon van Rijn Rembrandt (1662).

Corporatism is a pretty omnipresent factor in the modern economy. We’re getting large companies that control greater and greater shares of the market. Consequently, they exert more and more political influence in the public sphere as they’re able to turn their massive profits into lobbying for laws and changes that benefit them. What were to happen if we took this to its extreme?

I began to envision a corporatocracy. Instead of individuals electing representatives to a national body, it would be corporations electing their spokesmen in order to negotiate for more favourable laws for their interests. I had this thought that, given in America corporations are recognized as individuals, what if Monsanto decided they wanted to run for office? If they were large enough, they could “convince” their employees to vote for them and insure they get the position. Surely, if one corporation did it, others would follow suit. And the cost for elections is so enormous in the United States that corporate sponsorship is mandatory for anyone with aspirations for Washington. So what if the corporations simply cut out the middle man?

Well, public office would simply disappear. What could civil servants truly hope to do in the face of these huge economic powerhouses? But what would this mean for the little guy? How would people be handled by this shift? This isn’t big government we’re looking at but big corporation.

I then remembered my time in Japan and how the face of business was changing over there. At one time, it was socially expected that a young man would get hired on with a company and that company would, essentially, take care of him for the rest of his life. Unlike in the United States, there was extremely little job changing. Perhaps this would become the new normal. Companies still need people at some level to keep them running. And if the government isn’t going to provide the basic necessities (because it doesn’t exist) then companies could offer them as incentives to keep their workers.

I was beginning to broach upon medieval serfdom. In my research for my novel we hunt dragons. I came across the surprising information that the relationship between liege and serf wasn’t entirely as one directional as I had believed. There was a defacto contract between ruler and ruled. The ruler was expected to provide safety and sustenance (in the face of poor crops and droughts) to their farmers and in return the farmers provided a (hefty) tax to their protectors. Should a ruler fail in his duty to his farmers, there were in many places recourses that the serfs could take to protect their livelihood. This often manifested as taking the lord to court with the greatest threat the farmer could leverage was the freedom to remove their self from their lord’s protectorate and seek out a neighbouring realm which he could work and live.

This structure would work incredibly well in the case of my rising corporations. The company a person worked for would be their entire structure. It would set their laws and protections as well as the rewards and compensation for their efforts. As long as I was a member of a company, I was safe. I would essentially sign my life to these corporations for their benefits. Had I no affiliation, I would have nothing. Someone commits a crime against me and I would be forced to shoulder the financial burden of paying the police to track them down and prosecute them. I would have to be the one to pay for that criminal’s prison sentence. I would ultimately have to cover the damages that were done. But if I were an employee, all of that would be taken care of by my company.

It was medieval servitude and I liked this association that the future of our current business practices was ultimately our past.

There was a further wrinkle, however. I felt that public interest wouldn’t ultimately die to the Cokes and IBMs of the world. I could see professions living on if they incorporated themselves. It was the rebirth of the guild system. Once again, the parallel with medieval economic structure was perfect. And its explanation for its recurrence was simple and elegant. Instead of being gobbled up by the burgeoning medical fields, the doctors and surgeons would unite and form their own corporation. They would hold exclusive right to practice, train and sanction official doctors. If companies wanted their service, they would have to pay for them. In this manner, the doctors could insure that healthcare didn’t fall to the rich. If they were in charge of their own services they could have humane scales of payment depending on an individual’s income. Company members would have to pay out the nose because they could. Unemployed people could pay in service if they had no credit to their name.

Accessed from http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/r/rembrand/26group/01group.html

The Anatomy Lecture of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp by Harmenszoon van Rijn Rembrandt (1632).

Thus, the labour force wouldn’t entirely disappear but would play the same game as the corporations.

But how would this be enforced? What would stop the big business from gobbling up the smaller?

I knew I wanted some national body to draw parallels with our current democratic governance to highlight how different the world had become. With everything revolving around the almighty dollar, I realized that the principle organization would have to be a bank. Only that institute would hold the interest of all the various companies and fields that would arise. Every company would want to be able to influence loan rates and inflation. Most importantly, the bank would have the power to settle inter-company disputes.

For the one niggling problem I had with my set-up was I couldn’t explain how the justice system would work if two different company employees did harm to each other. They, after all, lived by different laws set by their employer. Thus, the solution had to be an independent voice who held the ability to punish severely any group that did not co-operate. The bank then became more than just a place every company could deposit their money at the lowest possible risk. It was a place that held the power to remove a company from the economic structure and deny them the unified currency which every company would trade. It also had the ability to allow the Guilds to thrive. For the bank would recognize any account it approved as a valid company. If every company had a vote, then the Guilds could certainly insure their persistence through sheer solidarity and numbers. They could vote for the bank to give loans to labour start-ups in order to dilute the power base of the big business. But it’s a double edged sword. Should those companies fail to pay back their loans, then the bank would take shares from their company. Once the bank owned all a company’s shares, they would be dissolved and belong to the bank. Of course, there is nothing that would stop those people from trying to open a new account… save the bank and its voting base itself. And on a council that would be very willing to buy and sell votes, spending on an already failed venture seemed a losing proposal.

Needless to say, this world is starting to come together.

TV Review – Scorpion

It is fall and that means there is a new crop of TV shows assaulting the airways. One of the shows that caught my eye (for reasons I cannot entirely explain), is called Scorpion. It is supposedly about a group of geniuses who form a special unit in the US government to solve crimes and right wrongs and hunt bad-guys. The standard sort of fare.

Not my image. Title image of TV series on CBS.

Not my image. Title image of TV series on CBS.

I was not expecting much, though the first episode proved splendidly awful. It was tripe, clichéd and illogical. It was Flash Gordon bad – so bad it was kind of good. It was funny, when it was trying to be serious – or at least intense. All the emotional, concluding moments were far too contrived to take seriously and the plot was over the top to say the least.

Bored, I watched the second episode. I was expecting another ridiculous romp. Unfortunately it was so glaringly bad that I could not loose myself in the outrageous plot line. In fact, it was almost offensively stupid and illogical.

Where to start my actual complaints?

While I would rewrite everything, I don’t think it is so entirely without potential. However, the main character makes zero sense. He cannot be emotional disconnected and the leader of a team of misfits that all need special handling. No person is that conveniently inept. He also cannot be a genius at everything if he still needs a team of secondary characters. So, one of the first things I would do (besides recasting the flat and poorly acted parts) is to redefine the group members, their roles and more importantly their limitations.

The ‘Human calculator’ and ‘Mechanical superstar’ should be rolled into one character; ‘the Engineer’. The lead should be brilliant at computers and software and average at other things. The amazing psychologist should be the team leader – he has the skills for this position. This is the character who should be responsible for interacting between the group of misfits and the rest of society. I would then add someone with a different expertise, something in either physics or biological sciences.

The main caste of the Team of Misfits - missing only the surly Government Official that put the team together.

The main caste of the Team of Misfits – missing only the surly Government Official that put the team together.

Further, when faced with a problem the characters should play to their strengths, fall apart with their weakness. Their dialogue should also reflect their roles in the group. This would help with character development and consistency. For problems completely outside their purview, they should fail. Or at the very least call in guest characters to help/lead them threw that challenge.

Finally, we need to address the idea of genius. What is a genius? According to this show, those who are good with math and incompetent at social interactions are geniuses. I am not certain that you have exhibit characteristics of autism to be classified as super-duper brilliant – but then I didn’t spend a lot of time studying this concept. Also, everyone understands that the IQ test is not the be-all end-all of intelligence testing right? The test is largely based on cultural knowledge. Besides, how do you define intelligence? Everything has to be learned so what are we really measuring? This however is a question best left to other people (like my brother who has actually some background in this area).

Anyway, I just want to say that while I don’t hate everything, Scorpion is a terrible show. Atrocious writing, terrible acting, zero chemistry and absurd plots make for poor TV – except for the numerous viewers who have no discerning taste.

The Wellspring of Ideas

“Where do you get your ideas” no one ever asked me. But I have read a number of interviews with successful authors and that is a frequently recurring inquiry. Some day, I would like someone to ask me it. But until that day comes, I’ll just pose it to myself and pretend it was someone else that was interesting.

Accessed from http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/m/memling/2middle3/15allego.html.

Allegory with a Virgin by Hans Memling (1479-1480).

The fun thing about ideas is that they sort of spring from nowhere. The process of writing and creating is an exciting adventure which I’m never one hundred percent sure where it will go. There may be some writers who know exactly every detail of their story, development of their character and exacting quirk of their locations before ever putting word to processor or pen to paper. I am not one of those people. I very much fly by the seat of my pants. That first draft is much like the first read. It’s thrilling and mysterious. There are twists and turns and unexpected surprises. Characters say and do things I would not have predicted. Betrayals are committed and more questions than answers arise.

However, I don’t want to paint a picture of absolute chaos and anarchy. It would be completely misleading to say that I didn’t have some grasp of the narratives that I create. Generally speaking, there is a core idea or theme which I want to explore. Often, this means I know how the story is going to end and much of the journey is dragging my characters, kicking and screaming, to that final point. But this final destination isn’t the seed of my idea. Usually it’s the result of preliminary research, rumination and organization. I’m thinking of my stories well before I’m actually working on them.

So that’s three paragraphs of skirting the question, “Where do you get your ideas?” My most recently completed short story is thematically exploring the concepts of self and the existential question of what makes us individuals. Course, when you read it, it’s not likely to come across as some heavy handed philosophical musing. For the most part, it’s presented as a silly cop drama. The theme was the plant which germinated from the seed. And the seed itself which I planted for Buddha, was I wanted a person to discuss his host’s umbrella stand made from a human leg.

That’s it. That’s really the starting point for that short story. The idea for it was drawn when perusing the contents of Ingrid Newkirk’s will. She’s the president of P.E.T.A and desires to have her body, upon expiration, to be chopped up and dispensed in a manner that continues to bring awareness to her viewed cruelty and exploitation of animals. In particular, she wanted to send India an umbrella stand made from her foot. When reading that, I got the thought “What would it be like for someone to walk into an office and see a foot just lying there on the ground, ready for an umbrella.” It was this absurd picture of a person faced with a seemingly atrocious display of human cruelty that was treated so nonchalantly that got my wheels turning. My mind, honed on lateral and logical explanations for inexplicable situations that arose from improvisation, began churning through a long chain of events that could make this stupid conversation about a token foot possible.

And a story was born.

Accessed from http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/bio/b/bosch/biograph.html.

Triptych of Garden of Earthly Delights by Hieronymous Bosch (1500).

Thus, ideas for stories come from unexpected places. If anyone had passed my Ingrid’s will and said, “Read this! It will give you a great idea!” I would have laughed at them. Likewise, the idea for the Clockwork Caterpillar came from a rather unassuming angle. While Derek was living in Ottawa and on my many visits, he had a tradition of taking me to one of the many museums located in the nation’s capital. One time we went to the science and transportation museum with Felicia in tow. She had never been before, you see, and was excited to cross off the last of the major museums from her to-do list. It was cold and wintery and I was mostly happy to be inside though this museum was no R.O.M or Science Centre. They had some rather maudlin exhibits covering dry topics like the creation of morse codes or telegraphy or the Canada-arm but nothing that really grabbed my interest.

That was until we headed up the old transportation wing. We entered a rather large warehouse which was basically a storage room for old trains. I thought nothing of them, I’ve seen trains before. My brother even had a toy train set when he was little that I’d play with when he wasn’t around. But Felicia, she just lit up at the sight of the enormous engines. She was laughing and crawling all over them like a child in a candy store. I laughed at her: not for her exuberance but because my sister also has a silly thing for trains. I’m sure Kait’s appreciation of them is partly based on a long running joke but to see two unrelated women overjoyed for an outmoded vehicle amused me. It got me thinking and wondering what it was about trains that they appreciated that I didn’t. I thought perhaps it was a sense of freedom and exploration coupled with an older time full of charm and simplicity.

Suddenly, the gears were working again. I could see a woman back in colonial times looking up at the enormous machines and pondering the direction of the future which they would chart. I imagined the allure of such a machine and the power and wonder that she who lived on it would experience. Slowly, the Red Sabre was taking shape.

It’s a similar kind of story for some of my other creations. Some of them were more theme focussed. I knew with Eternal September and Pasithea Reassembled that there were two sorts of phenomenon I wished to criticize. With Pasithea, it was the hollowness of the club scene which strives for some emotional connection on shallow and superficial levels with individuals. I wondered how that institute would change as our technology and cultures changed. On some level, I felt they wouldn’t. No matter our progress, we’d still have judgmental opinions and biases against strangers. We’d still show insensitivity and cruelty. And thus, I envisioned a scene between two women in a dank and grungy bathroom where one was going to steal the dress right off the other.

Accessed from http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/e/eyck_van/jan/02page/26barbar.html.

St. Barbara by Jan van Eyck (1437).

As for Eternal September, it originally brewed up from my disappointment with the world building of another work. There was a video game that was designing a space exploration experience filled with various alien races. Unfortunately, one of those races I found really lack luster. Their design seemed mostly to be “Let’s take Japanese culture and make the people fish!” It frustrated me because science-fiction is so good at exploring different ideas and for an organism so vastly different from our own to develop to our technological level would have a very different perspective to society than we would. These aliens did not. And so my mind began to wonder “What would they look like? How would this impact their vision of the world and the development of their culture.” Eternal September was the product of those musings. Course, as I was writing a short story, I dropped the alien physiology and so that change alone necessitated a whole slew of other changes to the story structure. However, the initial ideal–that these people worshiped Essentialism–was maintained and the consequences of a society based around those views was formed.

There’s really a story behind all my stories as I’m sure there is for every other writer. It’s a curious process of spontaneous happenstance and self-reflective musing that culminates in these exacting pieces of work. I love the process, I wouldn’t trade it for anything else. And though no one else is really interested, I always enjoy the journey it took for ideas to come to life.

First Impressions

Accessed from http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/d/durer/1/01/04self22.html

Self Portrait at 22 by Albrecht Dürer (1493).

My posting is a bit erratic and for that I apologize. It’s been a busy month of writing and editing as I try to make this deadline which is an issue that sort of crops up every other month. Alas. In theory, somewherepostculture has two other contributors to pick up the slack when someone gets bogged down with work. Derek, however, continues his unending quest of dying and with the start of the new school year, both he and Kait are busy with those duties as well.

In positive news, I’ve seen Kait reading a batch of new books so there should be some reviews on the horizon. Also, next month is rather dead for me (right before the incredibly busy November) so hopefully I can be a bit more consistent in my posts then too. Also, I came across a short little topic I wanted to discuss while I was editing.

Specifically, I want to spend some time on first sentences.

Pretty much every writing advice source will say that the initial sentence is very important. It’s the first impression you, as an author, get to make to your fans. Its your one chance to hook them into your book and keeping them going from line to line until the very last pages.

And it’s a bit of a lie.

I’m not saying that first sentences aren’t important for they really are. But it’s not truly the first impression you make on your reader. Common knowledge teaches that first impressions are important as they form the lasting associations a person has for that work (or individual or whatever). Anecdotal evidence abounds to collaborate this position and there are even psychological studies which delve into it. I won’t dwell on this fact further but I do want to say that, as a writer, you are making an impression even before someone opens up and reads that line.

In this day and age, book covers are the first window into your work. Unfortunately, for the vast majority of writers, what makes that book cover is well out of your hands. But there is one component of the cover which you have some control over. Well before we had lavish artistic pieces adorning the protective sheafs, we had first line of contact between creator and audience: the title.

I hate coming up with titles. Unless I have an idea for a title before the work, I can almost never come up with anything I like. They are really hard to make and it’s for the same reason that writers struggle for that first line on the page. The title is supremely important. It sets expectations in your reader as well as being your largest chance to get a potential reader to pause in the bookstore and pick up your book. It needs to be eye-catching. It needs to be inviting and entice the fantasies of idle passer-bys. It’s a lot riding on what amounts to, on average, three to six words.

Accessed from http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/d/durer/1/03/1self28.html

Self Portrait at 26 by Albrecht Dürer (1498).

I make this comment because I’m going to call out my sister. She is finishing a short story tentatively called Sacrifice. I understand what she was going for but the issue with that title is that it’s too generic. It tells the reader nothing. I’m certain there are droves of stories through history all called Sacrifice. There’s nothing in the word itself which entices me to look into the story. It’s the equivalent of Sister Marjorie Brushes her Teeth.

Writing is a strange little art. It’s less like sculpture and more like performance. With a painting, it takes seconds for the audience to really consume the piece. I don’t have to truly sell the idea of the painting, I can sell the painting itself. Show it off and people can decide whether they like it or not. The first impression is almost the only impression it gives. Obviously, there is more complexity to paintings and sculpture and longer viewings can reveal more about the piece but what you see is really what you get.

A novel, however, is not the same. A writer is more of a showman. You need to entice your audience to step through the curtain and purview the wonders you’ve locked away in the dark and behind curtains. Each step needs to be teased. At any point, your reader can simply duck out the tent’s flap and never return. You may have the most wonderful scenes, poignant character development and thrilling action but if you can get them to take that first leap into your arms the reader is never going to see it. You need to dress up, throw on some glitter and mystery if you ever want to compete with all the authors doing the same.

There are, essentially, three important teases: the title, the first sentence and the first chapter. The title gets the reader to open the book. The first sentence locks them to your page and the first chapter should insure that they’ll never put it down.

Of course, there are plenty of examples where poor titles or lackluster opening sentences have not held a book back. ‘Twilight’ is not a particularly inspiring title. ‘My name is Kvothe, pronounced nearly the same as “quothe.”‘ is about as dry as they come. But both Twilight and Name of the Wind managed to be hugely successful despite these flaws. So, there is some silver lining to all this unnecessary drama I’m wrapping around this first impression spiel. But why give your work that risk–that handicap–of a weak appearance? You wouldn’t let your child head out to his first formal dance with his fly undone or shoes untied. Sure, he may still impress his date and she may even find a certain charm in his inept demeanor. Ultimately, however, it’ll be his personality that wins her heart so you want that to be the first thing she sees when he arrives on her door.

I will end on a positive note. The reason I wrote this post wasn’t because of my sister’s bland title but because I absolutely love the first sentence of my new short story. I didn’t even write it: Kait did. It’s important to learn from our weaknesses, I think, but to also celebrate our successes. My favourite kind of first impression is one that leaves me immediately unbalanced. It intrigues me to be left a puzzle that can only be solved by continuing on. I’ll always step through that curtain if there’s a sense that what lies beyond will make some sense of the bizarre and strange greeting you give me.

So here we go:

“With stooped shoulders, gangly walk and a morose disposition, you would not think Ed was the Buddha.”

Accessed from http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/d/durer/1/03/1self28.html

Self Portrait in a Fur-Collared Robe by Albrecht Dürer (1500).

Silver Mirrors

So it has been a while since I reviewed a book. It has been a while since I have read a book. So, here I am with a very short book review.

Silver Mirrors is A. A. Aguirre’s sequel to Bronze Gods. It is described as a steampunk noir by the author. While I don’t get the noir part, it is clearly steampunk set in a magical world.

The land of Hy Breasil is a series of Islands; including the Summer and Winter Isles. There are allusions to some distant land, the original source of Humans in Hy Breasil. The original peoples were the Ferishers who had magical abilities. With mention of the Iron War and a great barrier separating the islands from elsewhere, it seems to me these books are set in a parallel world; the mysterious Fey land often mentioned in British mythology.

Janus Mikani and Celeste Ritsuko are two members of the Criminal Investigation Division of the Dorstaad police. In Bronze Gods they stop a conspiracy to tear down the veil separating the islands from elsewhere. Silver Mirrors follows directly after those events and looks at some of the consequences.

Book cover - image from the internet.

Book cover – image from the internet.

I liked the way the book did not spend one chapter summarizing the first book in the series. It doled out the information in bits and pieces throughout the novel and provided just enough mention of Bronze Gods to remind me of the key points (even though I had forgotten most of the plot).

My biggest complaint with the story was the lack of investigation. It seemed a bit of a stretch to send two CID from the capital city of Dorstaad to the distant Winter Islands to figure out why weird things are happening (weird things including: screaming mirrors and wailing trains). That aside, the two leads are moved from one location to the next in sequence. Things happen. Information is fed to them, but there is no real sense of mystery or investigation. It never felt they were in charge of their actions. It very much felt like they when from one place to the next because that was what had to happen for the plot to progress.

Over all, the book was fine. It will not make my top ten list (still working on that one), but it is not terrible either. I will happily read the next in the series – something I am guessing will happen.

No Free Will For You!

Apparently, I’m a compatibilist. I wasn’t aware of this fact myself but Sam Harris has informed me as such so it must be true. I, certainly, didn’t consider myself as such but that is irrelevant because I am not the author of my own words. Or, truly, the author of anything at all. Thus, I should preface all my work with, “I would like to thank the universe for writing all my stories for me. I would further like to blame the universe for not unloading a helluva lot more success upon me for this work that it did on my behalf.”

For those who aren’t in on the minutia of my life, I’ve been spending the last week in a heated debate about Free Will. Mostly, this has revolved around my inexplicable compulsion to engage in Derek’s annual year moving when he likes to box all his worldly possessions and shuffle them a few feet or hundreds of kilometers depending on whether the sun is trying to murder me or not. Why have I felt compelled to consistently assist him with this duty when he has never returned the favour? I could tell you a lengthy tale about how he’s my friend, how I like to help those I’m close with and the dated ideals of social reciprocity and bonding suggest that this is advantageous to my survival as it enables me to enlist his help at a future date should I so desire.

Sadly, I have discovered all of this is a lie. Thanks a lot Sam Harris.

Accessed from http://americanhumanist.org/system/storage/2/b8/d/2962/fw.jpg

Free Will obviously belongs to Sam Harris and whatever publishing house has claimed its rights. You can find the book here: http://www.samharris.org/free-will

I just finished Free Will but the aforementioned good doctor. It’s, ostensibly, a rejection of free will based on neuroscience and psychology. The book was, considering it’s subject matter, a surprising 65 pages. Needless to say, it wasn’t the most verbose argument I’ve ever read but at least it made for a quick read. For all that I can (and will!) say about Sam Harris, the man does take an approach similar to Derek’s–focus on comprehensibility over a stuffy and impenetrable air of academia.

By Mr. Harris’ admission, it is “difficult to think about law, politics, religion, public policy, intimate relationships, morality…without first imagining that every person is the true source of his or her thoughts and actions.” Of course, Harris wouldn’t have a book if he didn’t propose that all of this is an illusion. The jacket of the book goes on to explain that Harris will enlighten us all on the truth of the human mind while not undermining society’s morals or the importance of political freedom all the while changing our understanding of life’s most importance questions.

At least, that’s what the cover claims. In sixty-five pages, I too would have been impressed if he’d accomplished this. If you hadn’t picked up my tone yet, I am unconvinced. Not that some lowly blogger in some remote part of the Internet must try be impressed by Harris’ work for legitimacy, especially when our only traffic are copyright lawyers hunting down malicious use of intellectual infringement, but here we are anyway. Thankfully, it’s not my fault (the infringement, to be clear, though I’m not to be blamed for the forth coming ramble on psychology and philosophy).

Let’s jump into the meat of things, shall we? Free will has been a hot debate in the course of philosophy for… I don’t know… longer than I was an undergraduate that’s for certain! You would thusly imagine that someone who so definitely claims to put the subject to rest would have some lengthy treatise on his position. Alas, only the first fourteen pages of the book are devoted to actual research–which made the work even quicker for me to finish.

If you haven’t heard of Libet’s experiment then you are not alone. The poor man is already dead and only now does his work seem to be gaining any traction with the wider public. Isn’t that always the case? To be fair to Mr. Libet, we really didn’t have a choice in the matter.

Benjamin Libet’s experiment, however, is somewhat interesting in the discussion of consciousness and decision making. I won’t bog the blog down in details that no one is truly interested in, but he demonstrated through the use of a digital clock that when people “consciously” choose to make a decision via button press on when to pause the clock, neuronal reading of their brains demonstrated that there was a build-up of activation which predicted said behaviour upwards of ten seconds before conscious awareness.

This, Harris hinges upon, is the definitive evidence that free will is an illusion (e.d. – ok, there’s a bit more research but this is essentially the launching point so forgive me the simplification). He puts forth the “controversial” position that our wills are simply the byproduct of background causes of which we are unaware and lie beyond our control. I place controversial in quotations because, ultimately, if you have engaged in a discussion about free will, then you know ho incoherent the concept is.

As Harris puts forward, our thoughts are not spontaneously generated within our conscious thought. This shouldn’t really be that surprising. You don’t determine that you are hungry after long consideration. Likewise, you don’t will yourself into sleepiness but realizing you’re tired or hungry are both realizations of your own body’s feedback. Likewise, Harris purports, we are not the creators of our conscious thoughts and that these very words which I’m typing upon this page sort of congealed from some unspecified void and was enacted by my fingers longer before my consciousness truly became aware of them.

It is this assertion which we can begin to see the problem in Harris’ position. Reading through his book, he seems to be intrinsically motivated to disprove the concept of conservative or religious thought–that we are truly independent beings being held back by either our own laziness (conservatism) or disobedience (theology). Ironically, Harris seems primarily motivated to reject the dualism philosophy of consciousness: we are biological beings being manipulated by a disconnected soul or mind. And yet, Harris argues just as vehemently that there is a dualism nevertheless. He never specifies what the “self” is and thus, when he argues our thoughts are never self-generated, he fails to say where the hell they come from. By Harris’ description, there’s some mystery “thought void” which simply shunts thoughts into our minds which we misconstrue as originating from ourselves like a petulant redditor who has stumbled across a humorous cartoon and wishes to post it under their own name to reap that delicious, delicious reddit karma.

To Harris, the unconscious mind is some masterful machine ultimately directing our bodies. It’s this mysterious black box formed by our genes and shaped by our environment into a highly predictable machine that makes us dance to its invisible puppet strings. His book is nearly sixty pages of repeating this statement again and again, “You do not generate your thoughts. You do not generate your thoughts. You do not generate your thoughts.”

Of course, he can’t say how our thoughts are generated. They’re simply intrusive worms into our mind garden which we are forced to tolerate as they eat through our mulch. He poses this problem without giving an inch on the obvious answer: a person is the combination of their unconscious and conscious processes. This seems, to me, immediately obvious. I would have thought that the global penetration of Freudian theory into the public consciousness had made this concept a clear alternative. It is the interaction between conscious and unconscious thought, motivation and action which gives rise to the entity of individuality. It’s a unique combination influenced and formed by the genes we inherit and the environment we inhabit that structures our heuristics, biases and perspective.

But for Harris, this is not enough. Even Libet didn’t argue that free will was absent but proposed a sort of conscious “veto” which our higher cognitive processes were able to dictate to our unconscious urges. We can “feel” hungry but stop ourselves from eating in a garbage can until we get home for a proper meal. Harris concedes  (and must as there’s an incredible body of research to demonstrate) that our abilities are formed based on our personal reflection and motivation which often leads to overcoming short-term desires to follow better long-term goals. But this isn’t good enough for Harris because the initial drives are produced in the unconscious. The heuristics you utilize are, according him, nothing more than previous reasoning and influence on behaviour which are nothing more than reasoning and prior influences before that. Down and down we go with turtles upon turtles with no end in sight. Somewhere down the line, someone spilled a glass of milk and that’s made you the angry, aggressive driver you are today.

I had, initially, written a lot of words to discuss the theories Harris proposes, but the format which he writes makes a lot of them redundant. Essentially, the crux of his argument is this confusing and contradicting statement:

“Choices, efforts, intentions, and reasoning influence our behaviour–but they are themselves part of a chain of causes that precede conscious awareness and over which we exert no ultimate control. My choices matter–and there are paths toward making wiser ones–but I can not choose what I choose. And if it ever appears that I do–for instance, after going back and forth between two options–I do not choose to choose what I choose. There is a regress here that always ends in darkness. I must take a first step, or a last one, for reasons that are bound to remain inscrutable.”

Harris has, essentially, framed the discourse in such a way that he can never be wrong. Free will, he proposes, can only be demonstrated if you can be the sole and uninfluenced source of your own thoughts. But this is a ludicrous position. We have, by nearly all consensus, evolved from organisms which had no such capabilities. Our consciousness is not the sole attribute of our personhood. We are the culmination of both our conscious directive and unconscious motivations. Think about that for a second. How would you describe yourself? And how many of those attributes did you consciously generate?

Not a lot, I presume. I never choose to be a male. I didn’t ever make the conscious decision to be gay. My self identity is based upon my own introspection, interaction with others and capabilities I have demonstrated. There is no value in thinking I’m a terrific basketball player if I have never picked up a ball in my entire life. I did not separate and exist as my own entity the moment I achieved some sense of consciousness. The two spiders on my wall are not one entity because they have no demonstrable higher cognitive functioning.

Harris puts forth a hard vision of determinism. All things are, essentially, preordained by his estimation. The only component he’s lacking for a truly religious view is a sentient, all-powerful creator to kickstart the process. He tries to argue that there’s a difference between determinism and fatalism but he provides no evidence for this. If we truly are just passengers in this twisted machine of genes and history, then we have no capability for altering its course. All thoughts originate in that unfathom unconscious and we are powerless to stop whichever ones bubble out and we blindly follow. And yet, Free Will is chalk full of the importance of our choices, motivations and intentions. He dislikes fatalism because it’s an unpleasant consequence of his theory but he never disproves it from his position.

This is, ultimately, my dislike of Free Will. It’s philosophy masquerading as psychology. The only evidence he draws upon is incredibly divisive in its interpretation. Many people debate what’s truly being measured and what it ultimately means on our conscious will. There seems intuitively, a difference between pressing a button and choosing your spouse. We have lots of research on unconscious and conscious decisions as well as a good idea of what consciousness can achieve. We, however, have very little information on how unconscious and conscious processes interact or even how decisions are made. We know so little about the brain that it is an understatement to even suggest Harris’ conclusions are grossly premature. His extrapolations are, invariably, well beyond the scope of the conversation we can have based on the research we have.

I do not begrudge him, at the end. From my reading, I ultimately agree with much of his motivations. But his conclusion seems shortsighted and underdeveloped. He provides no good explanation for why a compatibilist (the argument of our self being both unconscious and conscious elements) is wrong or how his vision truly does not change much in our perspectives of the world. In fact, there’s a very brief chapter on research which suggests that abandoning the concept of free will can lead people to acting more aggressive and dishonest. These studies he simply blithely dismisses because he, personally, has not acted that way.

And, finally, his concluding stream of consciousness ramble is incredibly incoherent. James Joyce did it far better.

Sneak Peeks!

Gearing into a big writing blitz so I don’t know if I’ll have lots of time for articling. So here’s something new, a sneak peek on what I’m working!

Accessed from http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/e/ender/thomas/

The Grossglockner with the Pasterze Glacier by Thomas Ender (1830).

At the Gates of Zheng He Ho

 

“I don’t like this captain.”

“I ain’t paying you to.”

“We really shouldn’t be here. They’re a lordless lot with nothing but trouble and hedonism to their name.”

“You announced our arrival?”

“Yes, captain.”

“Then go watch the sides, I ain’t looking for any extra dints on her that I can avoid.”

“Yes, captain.”

S.J’s boots beat his misgivings against the stairs as he climbed down. Felicity didn’t regard his departure, adjusting a few valves to ignite the gas lanterns adorning the front. The flickering lights danced over rough hewed stone. Ancient timbers crossed the uneven roof like elderly arms trying to hold up the heavens. The engine crawled at a snail’s pace through the tight quarters, giving the passengers plenty of time to regard the pock marked walls around them.

It was easy to feel like they were squeezing through the very bones of the earth herself. The passage was crooked and uneven. It followed a madman’s course, banking on hairpin turns and wide corners as if they were looping around upon themselves. Truth of the matter was that they weren’t originally designed for vessels but for miners. The routes were plotted along long emptied seams then a straight trajectory conducive to piloting. And with so many ancient tunnels, stretching out in long forgotten directions, it was easy to think the integrity of the mountain itself was undermined. Any amount of explosion could possibly bring it down upon itself like a paper tower.

“This kind of approach and you’d think they didn’t want visitors,” Schroeder said.

“I reckon that’s the exact impression.”

“Then why build it in the first place?”

“Why we build ours?”

He leaned back on his chair as the engine shrieked like a distempered ghost as it took a rough turn. The entire carriage shook as Felicity reached and applied more brake to control their momentum. But there was a noticeable change in elevation. But instead of rising up, they were descending deeper.

“Heard lots of stories about these mines.”

“Any that don’t involve untamed or spirits of the deceased?”

Schroeder smiled.

“Figure there might be one or two.”

“Then so be it. I don’t be needing a reminder of this place’s other reputation.”

“They say this place was once called Katahmin and that it was the tallest mountain in the entire range. Glorious was its head wreathed in a crown of pure white clouds. At its feet was a beautiful lake full of various fowl, fish and delectable weed. It was fed by the purest spring that flowed from the very head of Katahmin.”

“A savage’s story?”

“You want to hear the rest or not?”

When Felicity’s objections remained silent, Schroeder continued.

“There came a time that a young and beautiful native woman gathered upon the lake’s shore. She was out collecting the grass for her people. For she was the daughter of their chief and only she was to granted sight of the beauty of Katahmin. Her name was Patoma and celebrated was she amongst her people for never had a more radiant girl been seen. But she was still unwed and did languish at the shores of the lake, bemoaning her fate.

“’Oh great Katahmin!’ she cried, staring at its reflection in the crystal pool. ‘If but I could have a man as grand, handsome and charitable as you. For truly do you give of our tribe the bounty of your bosom and glories are you to the eye that there are none greater.’

“And on that day, pretty Patoma did remark at how the waters shook with her words. The reflection distorted and rippled. Within its ebbing folds, she could have sworn she saw a man’s face look back at her. Handsome was it more than any face she had seen. For it was strong like her fathers but full of youth, vigour and a hint of something supernaturally divine. Patoma at once recognized it for the mighty spirit of Katahmin. His voiceless mouth surely called to her and she dropped her reeds and took to the ancient forbidden trails up his side. For it was forbidden for any to set foot on sacred Katahmin as her people did fear spoiling his virgin skin and bringing ruin to the gifts he bestowed.

“Poor Patoma disappeared for three years and her tribe did grieve. Her father assumed she was taken by a neighbouring rival and did war with him. Many were killed in the conflict but no amount of blood or sacrifice could ease the pain of her passing. But then, at the end of the third year of her disappearance, she did return with child in tow. Her people were astonished and the sight of her lifted the heart of her morose father. A feast was thrown in her honour and all came to marvel upon the babe in her arms. It was a handsome child, strong of features like their people but with small eyes that gleamed like none they had seen before.

“They pestered celebrated Patoma, enquiring over the identity of the child’s father but Patoma was reticent to share the information. She claimed the child was a gift from the spirits, bestowed to them so that they may protect themselves from a coming danger. But none would stop marvelling over the curious blend of the child’s features with the round face, small eyes and brows that looked as though they were carved of stone.

“Her father, the chief, did forbade discussion of the matter further seeing how it bothered his sweet daughter. So they feasted and celebrated and made great sacrifices to their ancestor spirits. All was well with the tribe and Patoma went about raising her child amongst her people. But despite her father’s forbiddance, her people pestered her about the identity of the child’s father. Patoma remained tight lipped, saying only that the child was a gift and would protect them as long as Patoma kept her word. Her people asked what threat he would defeat but Patoma didn’t know.

“As the child grew, however, he did display remarkable traits. He was quick to learn their language, speaking eloquently like an adult when most were babbling their parents names. He was eager to learn the ways of his people, following hunters on their hunts and immediately learning their ways. Soon he was bringing home as much venison as the greatest amongst them. He seemed to have a preternatural knowledge of the surrounding area, leading his people to groves of annua nuts previously unknown. Delightful were these, more sumptuous and filling than any other they had discovered. Patoma’s child did show them how to harvest the nuts and to grow the plant closer to their homes.

“But despite these blessings it did not ease Patoma’s people. Many whispered that the child was possessed of the treacherous spirit Coyote and was only here to lure them into danger. They demanded Patoma to divulge the identity of the child’s father. Thus, the chief called all his people to him and did command Patoma before all his people to name her child’s father.

“Patoma looked at the chief. ‘Do you trust my word?’ she asked.

“’Of course, my child.’

“’Do you doubt when I say a trouble will come and destroy our tribe?’

“’I do not, my child.’

“’Do you think I would come and try to bring ruin upon my people?’

“’Most certainly not, my child.’

“’Then I say it is of no importance who fathered the child. Only that he will be a great warrior and will save our tribe so long as we respect his father’s desires.’

“But this did not satisfy the chief.

“’I ask of you, sweet Patoma, am I not both your father and your chief?’

“’You are, my chief.’

“’And do I not look after the safety of my people as if they were my children?’

“’Yes you do, my chief.’

“’Then I ask, if I am chief and I must honour my people what I should do if not quell their fears by demanding the name of your child’s father.’

“Brave Patoma would not give in however and finally her father issued his edict. ‘Either you disclose the patronage of your child or you and he must leave the tribe immediately.

“Patoma, to the surprise of her father gathered up her babe in her arms and turned to her people.

“’Know the decision made was by you. I shall do both so that you may learn the folly of your fear. Great Katahmin did give you this gift and you turned it away. Know that you shall see neither him nor I ever again!’

“Her people did protest and prostrate, crying out apologies and begging forgiveness. But mighty Katahmin did shake and shudder in rage. The river that filled their sacred lake shrank and dried up. The birds took flight and the fish died and rotted upon the salty sands that remained. The clouds about Katahmin turned black with his anger and in the chaos and ruin, Patoma and her babe disappeared forever.”

Felicity regarded the fop.

“That’s it?”

“That’s it.”

“Well what of the threat to the tribe?”

“Oh. I believe they were conquered or something. Yeah, the final ruination was they were conquered a few years later.”

“Then where did the story come from if these people were destroyed?”

“I could call back S.J and you could listen to more of his condemnations if you’d prefer.”

Felicity waved away the suggestion.

“I think wrestling with the details misses the point, anyway,” Schroeder continued. “These people, they pass their history on in story. It’s not like these things are meant to be taken literally. There’s themes and lessons all wrapped in there.”

“Never trust a woman who marries a mountain?”

“I think they were aiming for tolerance and respect.”

“She married a mountain, Schroeder.”

“It’s symbolic.”

“A mountain!”

The train’s wheels screeched against a particularly sharp bend and the engine’s cabin shook. The pair could hear the steel hall clank against the pressing stone walls. Felicity reached for the brakes, slowing the lumbering beast as fast as she could. The very passage seemed to rumble with its deceleration and the patter of loose stone and gravel echoed above them like the gentle rap of an evening downpour.

The Whore of Babylon

While on my travels, I happened to take the entirety of Firefly with me to while away those long hours on planes, trains and automobiles. Ostensibly, Kait and I would watch together and have something to discuss during our eight our explorations of Canada’s back roads but Kait thought it would be more entertaining to get sick and spend her time unconscious or vomiting.

However, I can’t really write a blog post on digestive discomfort… or can I?

Accessed from http://cdn2.nerdapproved.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Firefly.jpg?874fb4

Firefly and all its component parts are belong to Fox and Mutant Enemy Productions in their respective capacities.

I digress. Coming off my month of positivity, I knew I was going to immediately fall into my hyper-critical, cranky and condemning nature. I can not help it–learning from failure is so much easier than from successes. There’s also far more to discuss with things that don’t work than those that do. However, during my month of positivity I mentioned a number of things that I enjoyed. One of those was the aforementioned cancelled television show Firefly from the eponymous Josh Whedon of Avengers fame. And though I like Firefly, that does not make it immune to flaws and critique. Reliving those handful of episodes reminded me of all the wonder and frustration of the series. It was entertaining but it also had its share of issues.

And I’m going to take about one of the biggest ones.

Firefly is interesting as it serves as a retro-futuristic setting much in the enjoyable vein as Fallout. It creates a universe set well beyond our time and far beyond our galaxy but instead of the fantastical dressings of similar setups like Star Wars, Firefly goes to great pains to be both familiar and immediately understandable. It is more a fusion of genres, smashing elements of science fiction and space operas with a traditional cowboy western. It’s a fascinating mix of old and new. Individuals stomp around in combat boots, duster coats and bowler hats while firing bullet-less firearms or playing holographic pool. Taking this unfamiliar smattering of familiar elements to a greater extreme, Firefly also blends western and eastern influences into a peculiar hodge-podge where kanji and Cantonese decorates the sets just as much as horses and saddles.

It’s fun, interesting and somewhat weird. Anytime the audience begins to settle into its separate genre conventions, the show will rapidly upend expectations with its almost incongruent components. Cattle wrangling will be followed by high adrenaline space battles. Hi-tech robbery will shift into frontier firefights upon horseback. It follows its own madness that is so easy to settle in and lose oneself amongst. There is a lot of world building going on in both the show’s fore and background and as a universe it would serve as an excellent example of many elements we discuss on this blog.

Unfortunately, not all of it is seamless. Some elements seem too jarring and break the excellent mix of psychic experimentation and civil fighting. Two of the largest are its subjects of preachers, sin and sex. There is no denying the influence or importance of preachers on the wild frontier but the use of Firefly’s analog leaves much to be desired. The main character to represent this aspect of life-Shepard Book-is rather contradictory and underused in the thirteen episodes. Most of his personal plot even eschews his religious aspect and hints at the dark past which haunts him for the short series. It’s a convenient way to avoid the implications of his role in the galactic society but it leaves lingering questions of what faith appears like in this distant stretch of the cosmos. Ostensibly he is little more than a standard Christian missionary but given its far futuristic setting it is not unreasonable to assume that the face of the pious has changed during times even more bizarre than our own modern technological advances. Consequently, Book’s spiritual discussions rarely say anything of worth nor reveal much on spirituality in the Firefly universe. And outside of the pilot episode, there is no real indication that anyone else is particularly pious as nearly all religious iconography has vanished in this envisioning of what is to come.

Sorry, that’s a lie. Nearly all Christian iconography has vanished. There is tons of religious symbology in Firefly but it is almost solely devoted to Buddhist representations. While Shepard Book is called the “Soul of Serenity” in the crew commentary there is another member of the crew who is just as devout even if she follows a different set of teachings.

And she is perhaps the worst character in the show.

Inara Serra is a Companion and the one character of the show who has no right being on the spaceship Serenity. Which is unfortunate because Morena Baccarin is absolutely lovely and I would totally watch a show that was just about her. The big problem of Inara, however, was that the writers clearly had no god damn idea what to do with her.

Morena Baccarin as Inara Serra.

Morena Baccarin as Inara Serra.

She was a whore. And she did whoring.

But Inara Serra serves as the best example of the advice “show – don’t tell.” From her introduction, we are graced with a woman of elegance and refinement. And the moment immediately following her stepping down the ragged steps of Serenity’s cargo hold the captain-Malcolm Reynolds-introduces her as a joke and a space prostitute. The audience is never shown her as anything else.

Which is concerning given the amount of dialogue devoted to the contrary. As I mentioned, Inara is a Companion which, supposedly, is a position in society that carries much power and sway. Her justification for being on the ship is that she “opens doors otherwise close to the crew.” Given that Mal and his band of misfits are either fringe members of society, fugitives or outlaws, the implication is that Inara represents the upper crust of refinement and social gravitas in the Firefly universe. But why or how she opens these doors is never explained. She is consistently and repeatedly shown as just a space prostitute. No more infuriating is this than in the episodes which are actually devoted to her: Shindig and Heart of Gold. The first is easily the worst episode in the entire series (in my humble opinion) and the second is also quite bad. Shindig was written to obvious explain this inherent separation between Inara and the crew of Serenity and explain exactly what she does. The episode goes to great lengths to talk about “two different worlds” and for the characters of Inara and Mal to struggle with entering each others.

And in Shindig, Inara is called out as a whore at least twice in her polite society to which she reacts with shock and surprise. Which is hilariously confusing because whenever anyone talks about her profession, that’s exactly how they treat her. Heart of Gold, on the other hand, is an episode specifically about a brothel unaffiliated with Companions… except it’s run by an ex-Companion and the crew is brought in on the request of the only Companion the series shows. Once again, Inara is intimately connected with prostitution through association and connection with the Madame. The series consistently shows Inara as a whore while constantly trying to argue she is not.

Which is a shame since the concept of Companions, ostensibly, is meant to represent a completely alien concept to the viewers. To say she is just a whore is to undermine the clear efforts the producers and designers of the show went to in order to suggest otherwise. Companions belong to a guild which requires years of service and devotion in order to obtain their credentials. Their lives are steeped in mysticism and spirituality. When Inara spends her time with a client, nearly every director goes to great pains to frame her service as an emotional and psychological session than just some cheap, throw-away sex. And there is the ever persistent insistence that Companions are not that which Mal continues to jape with perhaps The Train Job being the sole moment where we see Inara spring Mal and his first mate Zoe from constable custody with nothing but a ragtag story and a flash of her credentials. Inara is called the “Heart of Serenity” and her few scenes with Shepard Book suggests quite heavily that Book plays at being a priest but Inara actually serves in that spiritual propensity. He condemns and quotes scripture while she tends to the mending of personal crises and questions of faith. Book is represented as an officer than anything else–patrolling for breaches of scriptural law and morality while Inara serves more as a teacher and healer for the existential needs of her companions.

Fuck you copyright, now no one wins! This picture is mine so nobody can use it because we live in a stupid world.

Geisha are entertainers and hostesses. Their connection to sex is a western construct misconstrued from the American occupation of World War II. Photo credit: me.

Inara is best described as a space geisha with a heavy emphasis on her spiritual training. Unfortunately, Firefly falls into the western trap of misrepresenting the idea of geisha as being nothing more than upscale prostitutes which is far from the truth of the seemingly source of inspiration for the Companions. Consequently, this lack of understanding spirals grossly out of control to that Inara and her sex services are the sole point of representation and discussion with all other functions dismissed and ignored.

I find this infuriating because I enjoy science fiction and fantasy for its fantastical parts. It allows us to conceive, portray and explore ideas and peoples unhinged by the connotations and restrictions of modern times. It’s the speculation of speculative fiction which I believe draws the audience and thus Inara and the Companions should have been a major source of interest and intrigue. What would a highly influential guild of women courtesans mean for a society and its integration into the wider world? Why do these whores supposedly wield such power and how can this influence the way we see modern sex workers and sex itself?

According to Firefly, nothing and thus it is the series greatest misstep. But it need not be that way. As always, criticism without constructive feedback is useless. I have thought about Inara and the Companions and feel that, ultimately, the issue with the character rests on that early episode. Shindig was an unmitigated disaster which, had it been written better, probably could have taken Inara and elevated her to be the most complex and intriguing character on the ship instead of solely existing for cheap sexual tension and the butt of sex jokes.

And how you would do that is completely rewrite the character of Atherton Wing. Atherton is the man who hires Inara for the titled party. He first appears when Inara is browsing through a list of clients–as a Companion always chooses her clients instead of the other way around–and in the middle of her listening to an incredibly awkward proposition from some wide-eyed youth, Atherton bursts on Inara’s screen with a smile and grace. The two laugh and banter, making mention of how long its been since their last exchange and how he would be delighted if Inara would accompany him to the biggest party on the planet. Inara accepts with nary a hesitation.

The next time we see Atherton, he’s grossly belittling her to little more than a sex toy and angrily announcing that he paid for Inara’s service and she is little more than a servant and nothing else. This keeps in line with Inara the Whore but it is wholly inappropriate for Inara the Companion as well as the friendliness which Atherton first expressed when he propositioned her.

No, instead, Atherton should have been nothing but accommodating and gracious. He should have played the perfect “host.” When proposing that Inara give up her galactic trotting days and become his personal Companion, he should have made the focus specifically on what he could offer her and how he could meet her standards. His wealth, connections and prestige should have been presented as though they were an offering that made him worthy of her and not the other way around.

Oddly enough, "Half of the men wish you were on their arm but all of them wish you were in their bed" isn't really the best way to woe a woman. Who knew?

Oddly enough, “Half of the men wish you were on their arm but all of them wish you were in their bed” isn’t really the best way to woe a woman. Who knew?

For, I feel, the Companions should have served an integral part of the Firefly universe. They should have been “ambassadors” as Mal blithely teases in the pilot episode. They should have been the arbitrators of social standings. They should have been the neutral parties trained for years in reclusion in the many ways and protocols of the wide collection of planets in the core and rim. They more than the Alliance represent a unifying force amongst the disparate peoples. The smile of a Companion should bring fortune upon a person. Her dismissal would mean near social ruin. They should be dignitaries of class. For, they are trained to read and judge people, searching for those of pure spirit and to tend to their needs. Sex is but a minute portion of their work-a distinction that should be lost on all the plebeians who lack the refinement of higher society. The moment Inara stepped into the Shindig, she shouldn’t have been the one going around greeting the guests, it should have been the guests tripping over themselves in order to greet Inara.

The Companions, after all, choose their clients and those clients should be scrambling to make a good impression in order for the opportunity be on her arm at the next shindig.

This complete inversion of the power dynamic between woman and man, especially in the case of modern times in relation to client and service worker, would say far more about gender, sex and sexuality in the Firefly universe than any persistence demonstrated in the thirteen episodes which aired. This confounding relationship would also make an easy conflict to show how Malcolm Reynolds truly does not belong in that “world.” When he blithely asks Inara for a dance, his presumptuousness should have been met with gasps of shock from the attendants. When the issue of a duel between Mal and Atherton was raised, it should not have been Mal defending the honour of Inara but Atherton Wing. The series argues, numerous times, how inappropriate it is to refer to a Companion as merely a common “whore” and this episode should have demonstrated just that. Mal should have used this tactless jab at her profession and it should have been the very social casus belli Atherton needed in order to wrangle the captain into a sword duel he was wholly incapable of performing.

Gina Torres has nothing to do with this rant. She's just awesome and I wanted to put her in.

Gina Torres has nothing to do with this rant. She’s just awesome and I wanted to put her in.

Instead, the show was cheap. It was cheap in its portrayal of sex workers who are reduced to being nothing but cheap thrills despite their union and insistence to the contrary. It was cheap in its portrayal of its villains, going for blatant misogyny in order to instill antipathy towards Atherton instead of relying on his cunning and ability to manipulate Mal’s brashness and ignorance in order to create a favourable circumstance for him to remove a potential rival for Inara’s affections. But more than anything else, it was cheap towards Inara herself reducing a character focused on spiritual needs and guidance to just being a good lay for 100 credits.