Hello again!
It's time for my semi-regular Reading Updates!
Week One - A Book with Magic: The Iron Trial by Holly Black & Cassandra Clare
According to wikipedia, Cassandra Clare is the author of The Mortal Instruments series, and Holly Black is best known for The Spiderwick Chronicles series, and that is all news to me. I haven't read either of those, and only picked up The Iron Trial 'cause Half Price Books had signed copies and I had a coupon.
Turns out it's the first book in the Magisterium series. It's about Callum Hunt, a boy wizard of about 12 who's being shipped off to magic school - but with a twist! He doesn't wanna go. Ok... not exactly reinventing the genre. But it does make for an interesting new take on the teen wizard story.
Callum isn't the hero you expect. He's been told since birth that the Magisterium is a horrible place, and he seems hellbent on not fitting in - failing his tests, annoying his fellow students, breaking every rule he can, all in the hopes that they'll send him home and he can go back to life as normal. But of course, he can help but find friends, and as his interest and skills develop, so does the intrigue.
Of course, the Harry Potter comparison is unavoidable. But this book mixes things up in some key ways. The magic is presented as a mastery over the four elements... five? six, I guess. Anyway, each mage has an affinity to one element or another, much like benders in Avatar: The Last Airbender. Chaos mages are the most rare, so of course, the good guys are waiting for the next Chaos mage to come around and be their chosen one, who will defeat the big bad guy.
And, while the story uses the 2 guys and a girl formula for the protagonists, Callum is almost more of a Ron Weasley type - the less popular, less capable, less likable of the two guys, it almost seems he's gonna be a sidekick in his own book. Though as the book reaches it's climax, it becomes clear why that won't be.
All this together makes a book that I really enjoyed, actually. Callum isn't the typical protagonist, but his story kept me engaged. The Magisterium itself is an interesting take on the magic school trope, and I'm curious to learn more about it. And the resolution of the story sets the series in a direction that is interesting and unique enough to make me read the next one.
Week Two - A Book That I Own, But Have Never Read: Doctor Who and the Dinosaur Invasion by Malcolm Hulke
So this week I was gonna finish Let Me In, and when that clearly wasn't gonna happen, I thought "how about a Doctor Who for 'a book i can read in a day'?" And then that didn't happen either. But since I bought it in 2013, I figured it wasn't a total loss, I'll just check off this other goal.
As for the book itself, it's a 140 page novelisation of a sci-fi show from the seventies, so don't expect greatness. It's actually one of the better ones I've read (and I've read 19); good action, a little intrigue, and flippin' dinosaurs.
As for a recommendation, do you like Doctor who? No? Then don't read this.
Yes? ... like, David Tennant Doctor Who? Still don't read this...
You've watched the old show, and actually enjoyed it? Still, you probably don't need to read this...
But, if you're still interested, and you know what you're in for (maybe you've read some of the spin off books, or you're into the Star Wars EU) then give this a shot, 'cause it's a good way to experience old Doctor Who stories without suffering through 1970's BBC production value.
So there we have it! 2 weeks in and still more-or-less on track. For next week, I'm still shooting for Let Me In and as soon as I find a copy of the original Stand, I can dig back in on the Stephen King project.
See ya next time!
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
Friday, January 2, 2015
A resolution
Holy Crap, it's been a while!
It's a new year, and that means Resolutions.
And for the third year in a row, my resolution is to read more. One book a week (on average) to be exact. A resolution at which I have failed miserably two years running!
But this time I have a new approach: the 2015 Reading Challenge. I guess that's a thing that Goodreads does, where you say "I'm gonna read hella books" and then you use Goodreads to track how many hellas of books you read. And I'm doing that (I'm "explodenator" on Goodreads, so you know). However that seems kinda unexciting, and so more specifically I'll be using this list. And I realize that I just linked to some women's health blog thing, and that figures since I only know about this list 'cause my mom found it on Pinterest, but whatever, gosh. It's seems like an interesting list.
For those of you who didn't click the link, it's a checklist of goals for your reading, like "A book with a number in the title" and "A book by someone under thirty". It's got 50 things to check off, and since one entry is "A trilogy", that's 52 books - one a week (51 if you don't count "a graphic novel", which I don't, for reasons I will get to).
So as I take this on, I'm gonna lay down some ground rules (for myself - you do whatever you want). First off, One Goal per Book. I could knock out the list in a month if I allowed myself to meet multiple criteria with one book, and as the goal is to read a book a week, I'm not going for efficiency.
Second, No Re-Reading Books. My goal in past years was to read one NEW book a week, so I'm applying this constraint to the Reading Challenge as well.
Third, Graphic Novels Don't Count. No disrespect to comics. Mostly just 'cause it would confuse my count. I spend way too much on comics every month, but I read most of them in single issues, and thus, it would inflate my book count. Plus, I could read a Graphic Novel a Day, just cause they're so light on words, but that would get even more expensive. I'll keep reading them, but it's not part of the challenge.
Fourth, a major concern from previous attempts: What IS a book? And to that I say, a front cover, a back cover, and all the words found between. However, I made a few exceptions for myself in the past. Anything advertised as Multiple Novels (ie. an ACE Double Book) counts as multiple entries. Also, collections of material originally published separately counts as multiple entries. But not short story collections; those are one book each. Or "The Complete So-And-So" if so and so wrote a lot of poems and short stories (like "The Complete Edgar Allen Poe" for instance, is one book). But "The Complete H.G. Wells" counts as hella books 'cause those are all separate novels. Get it?
Now, as I said, my ultimate goal is to read more new books. Not to enrich myself or expand my mind, but simply because I have way too many unread books cluttering my house. I'm not going for literary, entertainment, historical or whatever, value - just sheer volume of... volumes.
I have so many books 'cause I am quite fond of buying cheap used paperbacks. But reading books is competing for my free time with other equally valid pastimes such as reading websites like Cracked and Straight Dope, reading comics, watching TV, Movies, and Youtube, playing video games, and tabletop games; and other less savory pastimes like getting 16 hours of sleep a day (BTW, I do work... I was just listing the things I do with my SPARE time, which is only spare because it isn't spent fulfilling grown-up-type obligations).
... Yeah, I'm not done yet. In addition to this reading challenge, I have set two goals. One, a long term goal, is to read all of Stephen King's books, in the order they were published. No deadline on that one, and I jump ahead whenever he releases a new one, just to stay current. But the nature of this side-challenge is that, when I reach a book I have already read, I must reread it. And that doesn't count towards my overall goal.
Two, I have a calendar from Half Price Books. Maybe you have it, too. Each month it features a different author, and gives their list of Favorite Books. I will try to read one book each month by that author, as well as one from their list. No promises, but I'll use it as a guide.
And so you say "Andrew, that's half your books right there! Throw in a Stephen King every other week, and the list writes itself."
Except... remember when I said I've never actually met that book-a-week goal? I meant I REALLY FAILED, and in order to be at a book-a-week average for 2013-15, I'll actually have to read 92 books this year. Which is totally do-able. But Netflix is also a thing. Which hurts.
Anyway, Happy New Year, folks!
It's a new year, and that means Resolutions.
And for the third year in a row, my resolution is to read more. One book a week (on average) to be exact. A resolution at which I have failed miserably two years running!
But this time I have a new approach: the 2015 Reading Challenge. I guess that's a thing that Goodreads does, where you say "I'm gonna read hella books" and then you use Goodreads to track how many hellas of books you read. And I'm doing that (I'm "explodenator" on Goodreads, so you know). However that seems kinda unexciting, and so more specifically I'll be using this list. And I realize that I just linked to some women's health blog thing, and that figures since I only know about this list 'cause my mom found it on Pinterest, but whatever, gosh. It's seems like an interesting list.
For those of you who didn't click the link, it's a checklist of goals for your reading, like "A book with a number in the title" and "A book by someone under thirty". It's got 50 things to check off, and since one entry is "A trilogy", that's 52 books - one a week (51 if you don't count "a graphic novel", which I don't, for reasons I will get to).
So as I take this on, I'm gonna lay down some ground rules (for myself - you do whatever you want). First off, One Goal per Book. I could knock out the list in a month if I allowed myself to meet multiple criteria with one book, and as the goal is to read a book a week, I'm not going for efficiency.
Second, No Re-Reading Books. My goal in past years was to read one NEW book a week, so I'm applying this constraint to the Reading Challenge as well.
Third, Graphic Novels Don't Count. No disrespect to comics. Mostly just 'cause it would confuse my count. I spend way too much on comics every month, but I read most of them in single issues, and thus, it would inflate my book count. Plus, I could read a Graphic Novel a Day, just cause they're so light on words, but that would get even more expensive. I'll keep reading them, but it's not part of the challenge.
Fourth, a major concern from previous attempts: What IS a book? And to that I say, a front cover, a back cover, and all the words found between. However, I made a few exceptions for myself in the past. Anything advertised as Multiple Novels (ie. an ACE Double Book) counts as multiple entries. Also, collections of material originally published separately counts as multiple entries. But not short story collections; those are one book each. Or "The Complete So-And-So" if so and so wrote a lot of poems and short stories (like "The Complete Edgar Allen Poe" for instance, is one book). But "The Complete H.G. Wells" counts as hella books 'cause those are all separate novels. Get it?
Now, as I said, my ultimate goal is to read more new books. Not to enrich myself or expand my mind, but simply because I have way too many unread books cluttering my house. I'm not going for literary, entertainment, historical or whatever, value - just sheer volume of... volumes.
I have so many books 'cause I am quite fond of buying cheap used paperbacks. But reading books is competing for my free time with other equally valid pastimes such as reading websites like Cracked and Straight Dope, reading comics, watching TV, Movies, and Youtube, playing video games, and tabletop games; and other less savory pastimes like getting 16 hours of sleep a day (BTW, I do work... I was just listing the things I do with my SPARE time, which is only spare because it isn't spent fulfilling grown-up-type obligations).
... Yeah, I'm not done yet. In addition to this reading challenge, I have set two goals. One, a long term goal, is to read all of Stephen King's books, in the order they were published. No deadline on that one, and I jump ahead whenever he releases a new one, just to stay current. But the nature of this side-challenge is that, when I reach a book I have already read, I must reread it. And that doesn't count towards my overall goal.
Two, I have a calendar from Half Price Books. Maybe you have it, too. Each month it features a different author, and gives their list of Favorite Books. I will try to read one book each month by that author, as well as one from their list. No promises, but I'll use it as a guide.
And so you say "Andrew, that's half your books right there! Throw in a Stephen King every other week, and the list writes itself."
Except... remember when I said I've never actually met that book-a-week goal? I meant I REALLY FAILED, and in order to be at a book-a-week average for 2013-15, I'll actually have to read 92 books this year. Which is totally do-able. But Netflix is also a thing. Which hurts.
Anyway, Happy New Year, folks!
Monday, September 6, 2010
Coon Cat?!
So there's a cat what lives in my neighborhood. Except, it's a raccoon.
But really, it's a cat. But I could'a swore it was a raccoon.
So I, being the sharp wit that I am, dubbed it 'Coon Cat.'
Turns out, that's a real cat. The Maine Coon Cat. It's even their state cat. Who knew?
But really, it's a cat. But I could'a swore it was a raccoon.
So I, being the sharp wit that I am, dubbed it 'Coon Cat.'
Turns out, that's a real cat. The Maine Coon Cat. It's even their state cat. Who knew?
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Video Games as Art
I have just discovered, via Twitter, Roger Ebert's latest thoughts on why "video games can never be art," and, via that blog, the talk by Kellee Santiago to which that original post was a response.
So, like all half-ass bloggers with no real knowledge of the nuance of video game production or appreciation for fine art, I felt compelled to lend my thoughts on the subject.
First, I, too, will begin by defining 'art', or rather agreeing to define it, as 'the process of deliberately arranging elements in a way that appeals to the senses or emotions' (appeals to, mind you, not pleases), 'being motivated by a desire to touch the audience.' Hell... works for me.
But what is a game? Must someone win? Must scores be kept? I vote 'no,' and instead proclaim that a game is a manufactured and reproducible experience meant to be interacted with, within predetermined arbitrary parameters, by individuals. It's agreeing to follow a certain set of rules, not because it behooves you, but because it entertains you.
And moreover, the playing of the game should be the justification of the game. Now, if the rules dictate a win condition, one should desire to meet those conditions, or else you aren't following the rules. But, if the game claims no purpose beyond accomplishing fun, then that's fine, too.
So, what makes 'game = art'? Well, we simply need one idea that meets both definitions. But more than that, right? For me, video games as art doesn't mean using well crafted novel-like stories, or well rendered picturesque landscapes; we already know prose and painting are art forms. But true video game art 'touches the audience' by 'deliberately arranging elements' in way that is uniquely video game, that other art forms can't accomplish, and thus becomes unique and relevant.
Now, bear in mind, I am in no way qualified to start spouting artsy game titles as if I've ever played them, and will, instead comment on the three Ms. Santiago brought up, and Mr. Ebert then ripped to shreds based upon nothing but his obviously half-assed comprehension of the points Ms. Santiago made and his deeply ingrained prejudices against the video game medium.
'Waco: Resurrection,' what looks to be a terribly tasteless piece of garbage, strives for art in the way it forces it's players to interact with the event. The mask, the declaration of being before the game will start, the voice activated game mechanics, are all examples of the manipulation of elements in order to touch the audience. It doesn't just portray the events at hand through the artist's lens. It uses very specific and deliberate sensations available only in a video game to create a sense of empathy and thus make the player feel the creators feelings. However, I don't know if it succeeds. I don't think I'd find this game very enjoyable, probably just cumbersome. But like I said, it's appealing to my senses, I just don't think it's making it's case too well. ART. Not good art, but ART.
Now, 'Braid' I've played... the demo. Was it art? I say so. And it is art because it uses metaphor. Heavy-handed, level zero metaphor. But not, This story is about regret and wanting to go back and fix stuff, so let's make it a time travel story. No, that would be the art of story telling, using plot devices to express a deeper truth. Instead, this metaphor comes as a game mechanic. Instant do-overs. It communicates a desire of creators in a way that even the most confounded piece of 'Lost'-esque time travel lit could never, because through this video game, you don't just read about this desire, you live this desire.
(Do you see where I'm going with this...? Turns out I kinda had a point after all.)
And 'Flower...' I may hafta vote 'nay' on this one. It's may have beautiful artistic imagery, and beautiful artistic sounds, but what does it accomplish as a video game? I seriously don't know. Does it convey the joy of nature and the desire to reach harmony between the natural and the artificial any differently than a good song or a well crafted documentary could, or is the video game just a vehicle for more conventional aesthetics?
I may never know if I don't play the game myself, but the question helps to sum up my very point. The art of video games is not just in touching the audiences on new levels - hell, some video games may not touch people at all, try as they might - but in trying to touch those audiences, on whatever level, in a way only video games can.
And what ways are those? I don't know; the art is only 35 years old, and game designers are only now becoming aware of it's potential. But Ms. Santiago is right; we are privileged enough to witness the birth of a new art, and we need to recognize and nurture it, 'cause who knows what good (or evil) we could be spawning right now?
So, like all half-ass bloggers with no real knowledge of the nuance of video game production or appreciation for fine art, I felt compelled to lend my thoughts on the subject.
First, I, too, will begin by defining 'art', or rather agreeing to define it, as 'the process of deliberately arranging elements in a way that appeals to the senses or emotions' (appeals to, mind you, not pleases), 'being motivated by a desire to touch the audience.' Hell... works for me.
But what is a game? Must someone win? Must scores be kept? I vote 'no,' and instead proclaim that a game is a manufactured and reproducible experience meant to be interacted with, within predetermined arbitrary parameters, by individuals. It's agreeing to follow a certain set of rules, not because it behooves you, but because it entertains you.
And moreover, the playing of the game should be the justification of the game. Now, if the rules dictate a win condition, one should desire to meet those conditions, or else you aren't following the rules. But, if the game claims no purpose beyond accomplishing fun, then that's fine, too.
So, what makes 'game = art'? Well, we simply need one idea that meets both definitions. But more than that, right? For me, video games as art doesn't mean using well crafted novel-like stories, or well rendered picturesque landscapes; we already know prose and painting are art forms. But true video game art 'touches the audience' by 'deliberately arranging elements' in way that is uniquely video game, that other art forms can't accomplish, and thus becomes unique and relevant.
Now, bear in mind, I am in no way qualified to start spouting artsy game titles as if I've ever played them, and will, instead comment on the three Ms. Santiago brought up, and Mr. Ebert then ripped to shreds based upon nothing but his obviously half-assed comprehension of the points Ms. Santiago made and his deeply ingrained prejudices against the video game medium.
'Waco: Resurrection,' what looks to be a terribly tasteless piece of garbage, strives for art in the way it forces it's players to interact with the event. The mask, the declaration of being before the game will start, the voice activated game mechanics, are all examples of the manipulation of elements in order to touch the audience. It doesn't just portray the events at hand through the artist's lens. It uses very specific and deliberate sensations available only in a video game to create a sense of empathy and thus make the player feel the creators feelings. However, I don't know if it succeeds. I don't think I'd find this game very enjoyable, probably just cumbersome. But like I said, it's appealing to my senses, I just don't think it's making it's case too well. ART. Not good art, but ART.
Now, 'Braid' I've played... the demo. Was it art? I say so. And it is art because it uses metaphor. Heavy-handed, level zero metaphor. But not, This story is about regret and wanting to go back and fix stuff, so let's make it a time travel story. No, that would be the art of story telling, using plot devices to express a deeper truth. Instead, this metaphor comes as a game mechanic. Instant do-overs. It communicates a desire of creators in a way that even the most confounded piece of 'Lost'-esque time travel lit could never, because through this video game, you don't just read about this desire, you live this desire.
(Do you see where I'm going with this...? Turns out I kinda had a point after all.)
And 'Flower...' I may hafta vote 'nay' on this one. It's may have beautiful artistic imagery, and beautiful artistic sounds, but what does it accomplish as a video game? I seriously don't know. Does it convey the joy of nature and the desire to reach harmony between the natural and the artificial any differently than a good song or a well crafted documentary could, or is the video game just a vehicle for more conventional aesthetics?
I may never know if I don't play the game myself, but the question helps to sum up my very point. The art of video games is not just in touching the audiences on new levels - hell, some video games may not touch people at all, try as they might - but in trying to touch those audiences, on whatever level, in a way only video games can.
And what ways are those? I don't know; the art is only 35 years old, and game designers are only now becoming aware of it's potential. But Ms. Santiago is right; we are privileged enough to witness the birth of a new art, and we need to recognize and nurture it, 'cause who knows what good (or evil) we could be spawning right now?
Sunday, April 11, 2010
What I found at Wondercon
Hello peeples!
I went to Wondercon this year! FUN! Where I met Travis Hanson! FUNFUN!
And Mr. Travis Hanson was wonderful enough to create for me a sketch of the Mighty Goose -- free of charge.
For those of you who don't know, Travis Hanson is the Writer/Artist behind a delightful comic called The Bean. I guess it's an adaptation of a novel he co-wrote? Anyway, it's all about a young boy who was raised by ogres, who goes out for 'shrooms one day and doesn't come back.
I picked up the first issue (half out of a feeling of obligation)for 5.50 (75 cents OVER cover price, what the fuck Trav?!) and I must say, I actually really dug it.
At 40 B/W pages, no ads, it's really quite a steal. The art is solid at least, really quite good if you're into cartoon-ish fantasy realms (which I am!), and this first issue (did I mention it's 40 full pages of story) sets up what may prove to be a fairly epic story.
Would I be offending anyone if I call it "Lite-'Bone'"? 'Cause I mean that in a good way. I love Bone and this is definitely in that vane. Vein... Vain?
My only complaint (seriously, the only one): The dialogue comes off a bit stilted(?). You ever read a book and feel like the author is putting words in the characters mouths. Like ALWAYS! No, I mean when the dialogue sounds less like conversation and more like story notes.
Whatever.. You try setting up the next great fantasy epic in only 40 pages (40 whole pages!) without coming off as forced.
Anyway...
Bottomline: 8.5/10, A solid read, I definitely want more.
PS. Find Mr. Hanson at BeanLeafPress.com
I went to Wondercon this year! FUN! Where I met Travis Hanson! FUNFUN!
And Mr. Travis Hanson was wonderful enough to create for me a sketch of the Mighty Goose -- free of charge.
For those of you who don't know, Travis Hanson is the Writer/Artist behind a delightful comic called The Bean. I guess it's an adaptation of a novel he co-wrote? Anyway, it's all about a young boy who was raised by ogres, who goes out for 'shrooms one day and doesn't come back.
I picked up the first issue (half out of a feeling of obligation)for 5.50 (75 cents OVER cover price, what the fuck Trav?!) and I must say, I actually really dug it.
At 40 B/W pages, no ads, it's really quite a steal. The art is solid at least, really quite good if you're into cartoon-ish fantasy realms (which I am!), and this first issue (did I mention it's 40 full pages of story) sets up what may prove to be a fairly epic story.
Would I be offending anyone if I call it "Lite-'Bone'"? 'Cause I mean that in a good way. I love Bone and this is definitely in that vane. Vein... Vain?
My only complaint (seriously, the only one): The dialogue comes off a bit stilted(?). You ever read a book and feel like the author is putting words in the characters mouths. Like ALWAYS! No, I mean when the dialogue sounds less like conversation and more like story notes.
Whatever.. You try setting up the next great fantasy epic in only 40 pages (40 whole pages!) without coming off as forced.
Anyway...
Bottomline: 8.5/10, A solid read, I definitely want more.
PS. Find Mr. Hanson at BeanLeafPress.com
Friday, February 5, 2010
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
HOLA!
What up, Faithful Reader?!
well, lately I've been feeling INSPIRED! Inspired enough to begin WRITING!
i hope this may signal the re-birth of [insert band name], the Best [insert genre] Band ever to [insert deviant sex act] a Chicken...EVER!!!! WOOO!
So, stay tuned... This could get creative!!
well, lately I've been feeling INSPIRED! Inspired enough to begin WRITING!
i hope this may signal the re-birth of [insert band name], the Best [insert genre] Band ever to [insert deviant sex act] a Chicken...EVER!!!! WOOO!
So, stay tuned... This could get creative!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
