Books I’ve read recently
Ines of my Soul, by Isabel Allende. I don’t usually read historical fiction – at least, not such recent historical fiction! My mum raves about Allende; most of her other work is contemporary literature, so I’m unlikely to read it. This one, though, is about Ines Suarez, a real Spanish woman who heads off to South America in the 1500s, following her husband. She ends up going to Chile with the conquistadors, when they conquer and settle there. It’s written as though it’s a memoir – old Ines interrupts the story of young Ines at various points, and she speaks directly to her daughter at a number of points. It’s a really fascinating story on a number of levels. There is, apparently, very little info about Ines, so this is very definitely a fiction, but I understand that Allende did a huge amount of research beforehand, so the conditions she describes (at the very least) will be based on fact. Then, old Ines reflects a lot on the whole idea of memory and writing autobiographies, throwing doubt on her own memories at various points, so that’s an intriguing philosophical line. And the writing – well, I read this in a couple of days, which I often do, but her prose is simple delightful to read.
Flood, by Stephen Baxter. Not my favourite Baxter, but still pretty good. The world is flooding… and no, it’s not a global warming polemic. Time span is 2016 to 1052. Some good characters, and interesting social and political reflections.
Chaos Space, by Marianne de Pierres. The sequel to Dark Space, this follows a number of characters – some of whom have finally met up, so their stories start meshing, which makes it all a bit easier to keep straight. There is a lot of weird stuff going on in this universe, and a lot in the background which is only just being revealed in this, the second book. It’s a fairly awesome space opera, although some of the characters tick me off. Still one of the most intriguing aspects is that her main character is Latina; it made me realise just how Anglo a lot of the future is projected to be (at least in the stuff I’ve mostly read; maybe that’s just a reflection of me).
twenty-six lies/one truth, by Ben Peek. About the weirdest book I’ve read in a long time. 26 chapters, each with ten or so entries; each chapter has entries starting with the same letter. It’s roughly “autobiographical” – although like Ines, Peek has a lot to say about the unreliability of memory, and when you pair that with his many entries on fraudsters and hoaxes of the literary world, it’s clear he’s sending up the whole idea of autobiographical ‘truth’. It also reminded me of Eddie Burrup, the male Aboriginal artist who sold a lot of paintings and was then revealed to be the female, white Elizabeth Durack; she’s a distant relative. Anyway, twenty-six lies is confronting, absorbing, and disturbing – mostly in a good way. I read it in a few hours. Half way through I realised it doesn’t have to be read in a linear fashion, but I’m stuck in my ways so I just kept turning the pages. And, at the end, I realised that in fact it does work linearly – there are revelations towards the end that change the way you think about the rest of it. You could read it haphazardly, it would just change your reception of some of the things Peek reveals, although it wouldn’t spoil the story as it would your bog-standard narrative. I also like the cover – typewrite art by Andy Macrae, and the art by Anna Brown, which I recognised from the Nowhere Near Savannah webcomic Peek and Brown collaborated on.
At the moment… Chocolate: A Bittersweet Saga of Dark and Light, by Mort Rosenblum. I had thought this would be more about the history of chocolate, and it does have some of that, but it’s actually more about chocolate today – the chocolate masters, the chocolate producers, the scandals, the individuals, different perspectives around the world. It’s made me realise that I am in no way a chocolate connoisseur, and probably never will be – living in Australia, and not having the money to spend on it! It’s brilliantly written… and I think I will go back to it right now.
When a franchise just doesn’t know when to die
AvP: Requiem.
Aliens hunt humans. Predator hunts aliens. Lots of humans die.
I was not expecting big things, don’t worry. I was hoping for a straightforward action shoot ’em up. I had hoped for it to make sense, in the alien/predator universe.
Well… it’s a weird movie when the predator is the hero. But there were absolutely no humans that I cared about enough to see them as the hero; not even the pseudo-Ripley figure was particularly engaging. I guess it’s fun to meet new types of aliens (although surely, in five movies, we would have met them all?), and it is always (like, the one time it’s happened before) to see what happens when humans realise the predator is worth keeping on their side.
Seriously though? Not a movie I would receommend even if you are seriously in need of veging. AvP 1, yes; so insanely over the top that I really quite enjoyed it. This one? Being set in a town makes it too cluttered; there are way too many characters to encourage caring about any of them; and there is no reason for most of what happens, except Kill! KILL!!
And I haven’t even finished watching it yet…
This video is full of awesomeness
Of course, you will have to have a passing appreciation of both Star Wars and Star Trek to get the awesomeness… but it’s still remarkably clever editing, even if you don’t!
Iron Man
I’ve seen Iron Man, finally.
And it was brilliant, as I’d heard. I know nothing about the comics, so obviously I can’t comment on its authenticity. But the opening – how he gets the idea, creates it – very clever! Ridiculous, but clever. Tony Stark is one hilarious hero, and hugely enjoyable to watch. I hadn’t expected Robert Downey Jr to be nearly as good as he was! Infinitely watchable. I had expected Gwyneth Paltrow to be a bit painful, but actually I thought she fit the character quite nicely.
The story was interesting enough, without trying to be too ambitious, which I think can sometimes be a failing in films that really, should be all about the action. (OK, I don’t really mean that, but I think directors do sometimes forget that there are lots of us who are happy with good solid stories, and lots of action, and don’t need more convolutions than The Wheel of Time.) There were a couple of points where I was surprised, which is really all I ask for!
The effects were also brilliant.
On the Beach
I’ve finally got around to watching it: the Gregory Peck version.
The opening credits have a delightful orchestral theme. It took me a while to realise it was Waltzing Matilda. It continues as a theme throughout the whole flick, which gets a bit distracting for those of us who know the words.
It’s the most glorious black and white. Colour doesn’t allow for the lovely use of shadow that b&w does, or contrasts; I’ve seen a coloured version of Casablanca and it just doesn’t have the same mood.
It’s set in Melbourne! There’s the Post Office!
I adore Peck. That voice!
Filmed in 1959; there’s a dramatic moment when the calendar reveals that it’s 1964. Dum dum dum.
This is quite a different post-apocalyptic film from what we have tended to get more recently. It’s a peculiarly old-fashioned view of the apocalypse: no anarchy. It’s complicated – in its relationships, its view of causes – and it likes being complicated. It also likes thinking about the causes, which perhaps results from its Cold War origins.
It’s also a lot more forthright than I was expecting, perhaps because it’s based on an Australian book? Example: Lt and wife having a kiss near the beach, stranger walks past and says “Give ‘er what for, mate.” The Lt just waves.
Also: no petrol. Lots of bikes! And horse-drawn buggies.
Ah yes… blame the scientists… there’s even a hint of blaming computers. Fred Astaire is not, so far, as bad as I had feared. Ava Gardner is good; Donna Anderson is marvelous, as the somewhat naive, innocent young wife. Anthony Perkins is utterly fabulous as the young Lt.
My darling has always said we should move to the east coast of NZ’s south island, because the prevailing currents and winds would make it the safest place in the event of a nuclear disaster.
Oh, I really think I’ll have to read this. I’ve never read any Shute; A Town like Alice is really not my thing; this, on the other hand, is right up my alley.
Eagle Eye
We saw it today. It was a lot better than I expected, to be honest.
Shia is pretty crap. The chick was ok. Billy Bob Thornton is great.
I love the plane-in-the-tunnel trick.
I really wasn’t expecting what this turned out to be, but it made sense (you know, in context, where “making sense” is associated with “utter suspension of belief”).
Lots of explosions! And car chases! And scenes where I couldn’t really follow who was where!
I enjoyed it a lot.
Two utterly different movies
1. Aeon Flux. I love this movie. I love the look, I love Theron, I love Csokas… it’s just wonderful. I’ve never seen the animated series and from the stills I don’t want to. For me, this movie exists in glorious isolation. Yes, there are vague resonances with cloning issues today (and it could be interesting to draw parallels between it and Children of Men), but they’re not important for my enjoyment of the film. It’s just cool, and it remains so – this must be the third time I’ve seen it, and I could probably rewatch it every year or so.
2. Dukes of Hazzard. One that, frankly, I thought I would never bother to watch, but it was just sitting there, and J convinced me we should give it a go. So, OK, it’s hilarious in spots. And there’s not quite as much of Jessica Simpson’s boobs as I had expected. The car chases are fun to watch; Luke and Bo are an enjoyable duo, and it’s played well by Scott and Knoxville. Boss Hogg could have been a bit more evil, I thought – he wasn’t quite as hateful as I anticipated. And heck, who doesn’t like a spot of Willie Nelson being a moonshine-swilling, Korean War vet? So it was entirely appropriate fun for a Saturday night.
Further consideration of the 32
Yesterday I blogged about this list of 32 recommended SF novels. I mentioned at the time I wasn’t sure how much store to set by the compiler. Last night, as I considered the list further, I realised there are some serious flaws.
Firstly, the things I think are good about the list:
- There were a few books, and some authors, I hadn’t heard of. They might actually be crap, but it’s cool to have new people suggested – and not to have lists dominated by the same old people. Now, perhaps I’m just not entirely up with my SF classics, and these are all people I ‘should’ have heard of – but I don’t, so it works for me.
- It covers a good range of time – from Mary Shelley through Jules Verne and HG Wells, up to Cory Doctorow and Richard Morgan. It’s useful to see the history of SF reflected in a list like this, and presumably shows the compiler has a good understanding of the range of SF over time.
- There’s a variety in types of SF. That is, you’ve got your loony Douglas Adams, the slightly farcical Michael Crichton’s Timeline, through to the more serious, epic-like works such as those of Frank Herbert and Robert Heinlein, as well the cyperpunk of William Gibson. It’s good to see this range reflected, too – because SF is no monolithic structure.
However, there are obviously some problems with the list. Now, this just may reflect the compiler’s reading taste, but it’s still interesting – I hope – to offer a critique.
- Firstly, I’m not sure all of the works mentioned count as SF. Animal Farm, basically. Not convinced.
- By my count, only Lois Lowry and Mary Shelley rate a mention to represent female publishing. What happened to Ursula le Guin, and Left Hand of Darkness? Perhaps the compiler hasn’t read it, but if they claim to be making a somewhat-authoritative list, she’s a fairly glaring omission. Octavia Butler (of whom I’ve only read short stories), Nancy Kress… I could go on. It’s the main thing I’ve got a beef about, actually.
- One, by my count, young-adult book (the Lowry, which again I haven’t read). Now, perhaps again this reflects the compiler’s reading habits – came to SF as an adult? – but there are some truly awesome YA scifi books out there. Madeline l’Engels’ Wrinkle in Time, for starters… and a lot more I won’t bother to list.
- Clarke’s 2001 only rates a little mention at the end??
- There shouldn’t be more than one book by any one author, I think. Fair enough to say “this is representative of the author, see also…” but I think that padding the list with multiple entires from one author is laziness, or the compiler isn’t as well-read as it might seem… or they really wanted it to be 32 books in the list and didn’t think anything else rated.
- Finally, as a list of recommendations, it bugs me a little that it’s got only quotes from Amazon (and Wikipedia). Does this mean the compiler hasn’t actually read them, or doesn’t trust their writing/reviewing skills, or thinks people want something more ‘objective’ than a more personal opinion would seem?
Anyway, those are my thoughts. I will still try to read some of the things of the list, despite my reservations about the list as a whole – because even given those, there are still some books that I know are good and interesting, and this has in some ways simply jogged my memory, as well as giving me some others to consider.
32 SF novels
This is the list. I actually don’t know the blog, so I don’t know if I have to beat myself up over having only read 10 of them… at least a number of the others are on my list!! And that’s one reason why I’ve got the link here, to be honest – to keep it in my head.
Lists are interesting things. Very interesting. Cos… 32? Really? I wonder why the author didn’t just make it 38 and add the honorable mentions? Anyway. Yet more books to add to the list.
Internet Review of SF
So I decided to become a casual subscriber to the Interenet Review of Science Fiction. I am increasingly becoming interested in reading scifi crit and essays, so it will be interesting to see if this fulfills its task in my life.
If it does, I fully intend to become a paying subscriber. Heck, they promise public recognition – and goodies! I wonder if that applies to non-US residents…
Randomly Yours, Alex 