#and he's definitely never manipulated histories to suit his narrative

[waukeentide]

So is anyone going to point out Ludinus's entire rant about "those in power" could also apply...to himself? Or are we only holding the gods to that standard

[nightcolorz]

Armand surgical malpractice meta (spoilers for TVA)

It’s, at least from what I’ve seen, a pretty popularly agreed upon conception that Armand’s mutation of Claudia b4 her death as described in TVA didn’t actually happen..partly bcus it’s such a drastic and grotesque retcon from her death in interview with the vampire so lots of ppl don’t want to address it as canon, and partly bcus it’s so bizarre and seemingly unprompted in context that it just seems more plausible that Armand would make this up as some sort of twisted shock value rather then actually do it. I used to buy into this theory and never rlly thought about it beyond that, and today for the first time I thought about it deeply and realized. Damn I rlly disagree! I think that Armand 100% canonically chopped Claudia’s head off and sewed it onto an adult body. I believe it happened as told. And I have many reasons !

First and foremost I don’t think that Armand is actually capable of lying so deliberately in this context. Interpreting most tvc narrators as potentially lying to our faces and intentionally twisting events to suit a narrative and a purpose of dictating our perception of them is, I think, accurate and justified, and smth I love about this fandom. Everyone is not to be trusted 100%, especially Louis and Lestat, who are said and implied many times to have completely fabricated some events in the books for the sake of painting a picture. Tvc serve as this over arching plot about multiple conflicting characters manipulating events of their lives to suit a narrative that we as the audience can pick apart and discover the truth within. Very much “this bitch said WHAT about me?? that dumb cunt is always spreading lies smh, it actually happened LIKE THIS” (they r both not telling the full truth). Armand however is very much an outlier here, and it’s part of what makes TVA so unique as a chronicle. It’s a big part of his character throughout the series, in TVA and leading up to TVA, that Armand’s way of thinking is so dysfunctional and his memory is so flawed (bcus of all his trauma) (and neurodivergence) (imo) that he isn’t able to fully conceptualize the events of his life as chronological and meaningful in the way that one would need to do to be able to write a memoir.

He can’t describe events in broad strokes, or wrap his head around a vast emotional impact in a way that is explanatory or intentional. Think of that conversation he has with Daniel in queen of the damned, where he explains that he isn’t capable of telling Daniel what his life in the past “was like” because that’s a concept incomprehensible to him. He only knows what happened, not what it was like, not how it affected him or how it shaped his personhood, what it means etc. It’s a form of dissociation almost. The vampire armand is the first time in Armand’s vampiric life that he self reflects beyond acknowledging events and his emotions in that moment, it’s the first time he attempts to make connections and understand himself in a way that is narrative and structured and not fragmented bits of history and A names. Part of this requires further dissociation. I definitely get the impression that since Armand is being so vulnerable in a way he is so unused to, yet is so significant, he is unable to register while he’s talking that not only David, but millions of people including every vampire in the world, will know what he says. He’s just laying himself completely bare, he’s talking and talking and only once he finishes realizes oh. Oh. everyone’s going to read this huh. It’s so cathartic he doesn’t consider that in the moment. It’s the first time he’s ever been capable of reckoning with his life in a self reflective way, of looking at it and explaining it and reasoning with it, structuring it in order, not fragments, etc, seeing the cause and the impact and touching on an overall conclusion (tho he never entirely gets there). These baby steps are so difficult for him already, and considering this part of his character I really think it’s a stretch to say that Armand would be capable of the thought process in his book of pure venting to go “maybe I should twist the truth here or change this or add this or lie about this so people will think of me this way or so Lestat can see this, etc” TVA is unreliable, more so bcus of how mentally ill armand is and how little he understands his own life and emotions, but not deliberately like iwtv and tvl. Armand even says that the book was for Benji and Sybelle, but it’s so unfiltered and horrific and vent-like that this sounds ridiculous. He doesn’t even have his stated audience in mind while he’s telling his story, let alone his broader audience. The audience was a complete afterthought, a barely registered consequence. So why would he lie about Claudia? How would he be capable?

it’s another common piece of conversation around this part of TVA where we go, Armand discusses how he never would want to tell this to Louis bcus he knows how badly it would hurt him, so why did he describe it so graphically? Well, cause of all I mentioned. It seems pretty clear to me that armand is almost haunted by the affair with Claudia, and he has no way of lying about this, so his descriptions seemed very much to me like a desperate bit of venting. He has never told anyone how horrific it actually was and it’s always been in his mind, so he just lets it all out. Makes sense, but the broader question is, if Armand wasn’t lying…why did he do that at all?? This I think is so interesting.

To understand this I had to think a lot about Armand’s motivations for killing Claudia at all, which is well, simply, revenge against Lestat and claiming of Louis without barriers. If Claudia dies Lestat will be sad and Louis will be mine and mine alone 👍👍 etc. but Claudia’s mutation was not rooted in either of these motivations, which is part of why it’s so shocking. He didn’t do it to hurt Lestat, lestat never found out. It just seems so odd and unprompted. But once I thought more about why Armand hates Lestat, and why he wants to hurt him by killing Claudia, it started to fit into place. Armand’s hatred for Lestat is rooted very much in his twisted resemblance to Marius that he perceives as being very strong and basically mocking. When he first sees Lestat in tvl he’s repulsed by him instantly bcus he sees him as this parody of Marius, this beautiful blonde man in striking red robes who boldly and carelessly defies the laws of vampires established by the children of Satan as if they are meaningless to him, revels in the indulgent world of humans like he belongs there, shamelessly as armand devotes himself to miserable repression. It strikes a nerve for armand, feels very personally offensive to him, like the embodiment of the traits that got Marius’s destroyed r coming back to mock him in his face. And then as he gets to know Lestat more deeply he only hates him more, bcus Lestat is not only bold and careless, but he’s immature and stupid, and he knows nothing. Armand in his horribly traumatized mind set registers Lestat as “like Marius” and takes this to mean “maybe he can save me, maybe he will teach me and free me from this hell, guide me and give me the purpose I need to be given.” But Lestat does not do this, lmfao. He actually destroys any sense of purpose armand had, rips him from his safety net, and when Armand begs for guidance, asks to be allowed to travel alongside Lestat so he can learn to be a person again, Lestat denies him. The only purpose he bothers to give him is the scraps, symbolic of his perverse indulgence that Armand despises, and fucks off. Lestat is grotesquely reminiscent of Marius, in the worst ways. It’s like his presence alone opens Armand’s eyes to how badly Marius has ruined him. He was the sun, the purpose, the guiding light, and then it was ripped away, and there was nothing else without him. Just a void.

So Armand hates Lestat for this very personal mockery of his own plight, and this hatred spirals into unbridled rage when Lestat returns to him and expects Armand to give Lestat the assistance that he denied him. Not only this, but Lestat found Marius, found marius and was granted guidance and love that Marius refused to give Armand after his indoctrination into the children of Satan. And Marius told Lestat to never ever do what he did, never make an Armand, because Armand was a mistake, he was too young to be a vampire, and now he’s a mistake he will never forgive himself for. And with this immense privilege that Armand spent a huge chunk of his life yearning for, guidance from Marius when he was his most lost, Lestat decides to disregard it. He decides that since Marius said it was bad to turn a child as young as Armand, he’d turn a child even younger then Armand, just cuz. He is once again the embodiment of Marius’s sins, the grotesque parody. Marius turned a teenager, Lestat turns a five year old. It’s almost cruel in how mocking it is, almost intentional in how personal. So Claudia is this child, this deliberate mistake made by someone who knew her turning would be harmful to her but was selfish enough not to care, then went on to regret it when he has to reckon with the consequences. Seem familiar? Armand sure thought so. So I imagine that being alone with Claudia, looking this deeply sad reflection of his own agony in the eyes, knowing she is about to die for justice against a warped parody of his Maker, for the sake of punishment for her own existence, I imagine this struck a cord of insanity in Armand’s fucked up mind, caused him to loose his absolute shit for just long enough to go what if I can fix her, what if I can turn this narrative around, give her the remarkable ending I know deep down that she, I , will never be granted. What if I can give her a body that will reflect her mind? What if I can make this abomination into a miracle? No wonder he pulled out the surgical tools 😭 No wonder he was so horrified by his own actions when he came to his senses, no wonder he refused to share this, kept it to himself for so long, until he finally broke and confessed it all in a desperate moment when he was too caught up in the dam breaking to realize he’d be exposing this horrific action to the world.

Armand sees Claudia as a repulsive mistake that should’ve never existed made by Lestat to deliberately mock him up until the surgery, when then for only a moment lost to time ended in blood she is another child who had her life taken from her too soon by an egotistical blonde man who thought he could play god with someone’s life. “They were done for anyway, he was going to starve to death in a brothel, she was going to die as a street orphan, the blood would be a service to them, a chance they never had” But they both know that’s a lie they tell themselves to justify the act of taking a child and molding it into what they please for fun, for pleasure, for companionship, just to see what would happen. Armand sees this for a moment and wants to give her a chance, give them both a chance, wants to see her as an adult, as someone who could have a life. And then of course, we know how that turns out 😭

[portmantaur]

I’ve been thinking about it, and I’ve somewhat changed my mind. I still think there’s some truth to the whole ‘no such thing as a truly reliable narrator’ angle in the iwtv series, but i also think we as an audience are in fact meant to process the fact that lestat’s version of Claudia’s turning and the Big Fight are really, really not reflective of reality

Firstly, because in season 1, we didn’t get those events from Louis’ perspective. We got both of those events from Claudia’s diary, with Louis’ commentary. I mean, the episode of her turning is when the narrative source so distinctly changes that we get her actual voiceover to indicate it. And yes i definitely believe that Claudia’s anti-lestat bias colors her narrative, but to me that is much more reflective of someone who is processing abuse than someone who is, say, defining their history for audience interpretation. Lestat is recounting on stage for a spectacle, Claudia was recording in her diary in place of having literally anyone even mildly objective to talk to. Claudia’s reliability as a narrator is not subject to the same scrutiny as leatat’s, imo, not least of all because her diaries were never actually intended to be shared.

Secondly, and this is absolutely born of the Continuity Inconsistency Spotter in me, because of lestat’s hair. In the original S1 cut, for Claudia’s turning, lestat has his hair cut to just about his neck. Again this is from primarily Claudia and Louis’ perspective, and given how very clearly and materially Louis has been able to recall lestat’s appearance over time, i see no reason to believe that his short hair is not an accurate recollection of his appearance at the time.

In lestat’s on-stage version of events, he has the exact same long haircut he has at the time of the play. I know this could be handwaived away as continuity error, but so far this show hasn’t really done anything so visually inconsistent that there hasn’t been payoff for - at least, not that I’ve seen, particularly surrounding the imagery of the theater. I mean we’ve already got the whole visual of ‘if Sam is guarding Armand, but Sam is also putting Louis in his coffin, then who’s flying the plane (and willingly not saving Claudia & madeleine)?!’ aspect in the same episode. We’ve got the rocks from Louis’ living burial in the tree room of Dubai, we’ve got Armand’s ‘I could not prevent it’ performance of oh-so-effortfully manipulating the minds of a room full of mortals directly contrasting the ease & nonchalance with which he previously froze time/cognition within a whole restaurant & a long table full of his coven members. It doesn’t seem like a careless mistake to me, it seems to me to be another purposeful choice in a series of similar choices that highlight the fact that the unreliability of previous narration involving Louis and Claudia is unreliable in the way most narrators can be, whereas almost the entirety of the narrative involving the trial is distorted very much on purpose for the sake of manipulating an audience.

Like even Armand is saying, during the interview, that lestat could not be bound by a script. The script itself is largely a lie - only so much of the truth as could be bent into serving the pre-decided resolution of the mock-trial. I don’t think there’s any reason to believe that lestat going off script is indicative of him suddenly telling the whole truth, but rather his altering of the narrative to suit himself above all (hence his apology; im not even going to debate the legitimacy of it bc I don’t even think that’s super relevant to my point, I just think that lestat wanted to force Louis and possibly Claudia to listen to a perfected version of the apology he had been trying to manufacture since the incident itself, and that was more important to him than anything in the script)

anyway part of me also thinks the clear lack of intervention by Armand was at least in part because he didn’t believe he could ever have the fullness of Louis’ attention as long as Claudia (& by extension madeleine, but also her in her own right being Louis’ fledgling) existed. But Armand is a beautiful fool because Louis doesn’t give anyone the fullness of his attention mostly bc he doesn’t know how to do that. Louis can’t love anyone closer than arm’s length, even (& especially) Claudia. Like, just the way Claudia knew her decision to invest her attention and love in someone else was right when Louis refused to level with her about ‘does it matter? I got the result’, I think she very much included herself when she scolded him in the whole ‘love makes you stupid’ scene. Not romantically, but she had to have known by then that after neglecting her for lestat, Louis spent so much time turned inward and not indulging the very man/relationship for whom he neglected Claudia.

Long post long post im unwell & so are my vampire blorbos.

[lizziestudieshistory]

Books of 2021 - July

I read a lot this month! I’m not even sure how I managed it, especially when we consider I’ve read another 850 pages between Anna Karenina and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows on top of this lot!

I’m just going to apologise now for not proof reading this... I’m finishing this off at 2 in the morning to schedule and I’m sick of looking at my own writing at the moment.

Amnesty by Lara Elena Donnelly - Technically I read this at the end of June, however, I was on holiday so couldn’t include it in last month’s wrap up.

I’ve already spoken about the Amberlough Dossier and anyone who’s been around my blog for longer than about 10 seconds knows I love this trilogy. Amnesty was no exception. We have the return of Cyril, he and Ari working through their relationship (or not quite understandably), and the fall out from the fall of the Ospies - this world’s equivalent to the Nazi party. It’s not an easy book to read and the glamour of the first installment is completely stripped away to deal with very complex moral and political questions. I don’t necessarily agree with Donnelly’s answers, however, I do admire her for really delving into these very difficult topics. She used the speculative nature of the Amberlough Dossier to come up with a sensitive and interesting discussion on a very difficult period in history.

I’m hoping to write a proper review for the whole trilogy at some point (once I’ve finished the monstrosity that is my Words of Radiance review) so I don’t want to say too much more here. However, I do want to say I really enjoyed that Donnelly found the space to continue looking at the smaller, private, and interpersonal consequences of the Ospies’ regime, particularly for families. It’s a sensitive look into this situation and I loved every second of it - I also adore Cyril and Ari’s relationship, but I’ll dig into them in my proper reivew.

Master of Sorrows by Justin Call - this was a slightly underwhelming read for me, although I did really enjoy it. I’ve seen Master of Sorrows praised everywhere, I don’t think I’ve seen it given less than 5 stars? Yet, for me it was a solid 4 star read. I’d wanted a 5 star read (I’ve been sorely lacking them) but something was holding me back with this one - I do think the series has 5 star potential though and I’m going to read Master Artificer soon!

This is a book clearly embedded in a love of mythology and fantasy. It’s dark and gritty, especially in the second half, with plenty for the reader to sink their teeth into. I’ve also never seen such a strong focus on physical disability in a fantasy novel - it was refreshing to see and led to an interesting use of the magic system to develop ways of overcoming physical disadvantages. Although I’m hoping this is going to be explored further in later installments as, for a large part of this book, Annev was essentially able bodied due to a magical prosthetic he never takes off.

Unfortuantely the most interesting part of this book, for me, was the mythological world building at the start of each part in the book. The myths, clearly based on Norse mythology (I’m sorry but “Odar” was a bit obvious), were fascinating, particularly as they started to have an influence on the events of the main narrative. I just wanted to know more about the gods than the actual story, this is probably a me issue though... The main plotline felt generic: Annev is a boy in a coming of age story, complete with a magic(ish) assassin school, a wise old mentor, and a destiny/prophesy surrounding him. It’s a typical fantasy story, so far, and while I do really enjoy these plotlines (I read enough of them!) it’s not exactly the most original. Nevertheless, I am excited to see where Call goes with this as I do think the rest of the series will start growing into something much more interesting and I look forward to Master Artificer.

Wuthering Heights by Emily Bronte - this is one of my favourite books of all time, we all know this by now... See my full review for Bronte’s masterpiece here.

The Bedlam Stacks by Natasha Pulley - July has been the month of Natasha Pulley for me because I’ve rediscovered just how much I LOVE her books. I first read Pulley back in...what, 2017? (It’s been a while...) with her debut novel, The Watchmaker of Filigree Street which I remember loving, but I never continued with The Bedlam Stacks, the only other available book by Pulley at the time. To be frank with you, it’s because at 18/19 I wasn’t that interested in Peru. However, I now really want to read The Kingdoms, Pulley’s new release, but I felt obliged to read the books I already owned by her and hadn’t read - so I picked up The Bedlam Stacks as it’s the one I’ve owned the longest without having read it...

Not reading The Bedlam Stacks back then was the best decision I’ve ever made because I know at 18 I wouldn’t have appreciated what a stunning masterpiece this book is - it would have flown over my head because, at the time, I just wanted more Thaniel and Mori. At 23 I ADORED this book. I absolutely fell in love with the subtle whimsy and quite, understated beauty of this story. Pulley has such an elegant way of writing, it’s never overdone - she has a way of playing with words which reads beautifully but doesn’t feel like too much. She’s never flowery or purple with her prose, but she does create a work of art.

Unfortunately, The Bedlam Stacks is a book I think a lot of people may struggle with - there’s not a lot of plot, everything is a bit weird, and it’s largely a character study for our two main characters: Merrick Tremayne and Raphael. Merrick’s journey to Peru to find quinine - a cure for malaria - for the British Empire is really a set up to allow the rest of the book to focus on these two characters. It’s centred on the very slow development of their relationship together, coming to understand each other, and eventually open up about themselves - well this is more in Raphael’s case. It’s a poignant story about two people finding a home with each other that will endure across time and distance - it’s not quite a romance, but it’s certainly more than a friendship. Personally I read them as ace, but there is definitely scope here to read them in a variety of other ways depending on your own experiences. But what is certain is their deep connection, and that their love (platonic or otherwise) is what drives the outcome of this story.

It’s beautiful, poignant, and slightly tragic when you think about it... I loved every minuet of it and just wanted the book to continue, I was genuinely sad it was over! It’s not a novel for everyone, and I do think the opening section needed some more work as it did feel like Pulley was saying ‘lets get over this necessary but boring set up’. However, it was exactly what I wanted and I’m so happy I’ve finally read it.

I’m also much more interested in Peru now, so that’s something else to hold in it’s favour!

The Watchmaker of Filigree Street by Natasha Pulley - I’m falling slightly out of order here but it seems better to continue with Pulley’s books. Most of the same praise I gave to The Bedlam Stacks can be repeated here - Pulley’s writing is slightly weaker here but it’s only really noticable because I read both books one after the other and I was thinking about her prose. The same whimsical, poetic, and understated style is used in both books and it really suits the type of stories Pulley like to tell - and again it’s a style that really works for me.

The Watchmaker of Filigree Street I think is a slightly more universally likeable story - although I would argue Pulley is an acquired taste. There is a bit less whimsy, and the relationship between Thaniel and Mori is more easily quantifiable for readers. There is also a more obvious plotline to follow, whilst still developing three compelling characters with Mori, Thaniel, and Grace. Personally I don’t love Grace - I find her brash and callous - however, she does have as good of an arc as Thaniel and Mori, she’s also someone who regularly get overlooked when people talk about this book. She’s not someone I like or approve of, but I do really understand where she’s coming from and can appreciate her growth. Pulley doesn’t need us to like Grace - or any of her characters - she presents them as they are and lets us cast our own judgements on them, and I sincerely love this about her. (I’m also so up for reading more about Grace and her relationship with Matsumoto, they’re fabulous together!)

The main draw to this book is definitely the relationship between Thaniel and Mori - how could you not love them? They’re fascianting to watch - together and separately - and throughout the course of this nove you really feel them grow into their relationship. It’s beautiful to watch and feels genuine. Their bond is earnt, not just presented to us as a fact. However, what I really love about Mori and Thaniel is the slightly sinister route Mori takes to make sure he meets Thaniel. Honestly, in any other book Mori would be horrifying with his slightly callous use of his abilities to manipulate the world around him to achieve his own ends. However, with the narrative framing here he’s slightly toned down, it’s a spectacular example of framing shaping audience perspectives on a character. It’s great and I appreciate the sensitivity Pulley used to shape Mori and the relationship between him and Thaniel. I’m also really looking forward to seeing how they develope in The Lost Future of Pepperharrow.

Henry V by William Shakespeare - I don’t really have a lot to say about Henry V... I’ve never felt that strongly about this play - it’s fine? It’s a FABULOUS play to watch (I’ve partial to the Tom Hiddleston version in The Hollow Crown) but to read it’s merely okay. There are some fantastic and very famous speeches - and I absolutely adore the Chorus. However, as a whole the play is merely a decent one. I’m always left a bit uncomfortable with how Shakespeare treats the French, and I’m yet to work out where I stand on Henry as a person and the morality of the war... It’s something to ponder and maybe write something on at a later date.

Unfortunately, this one falls into a similar issue as the Henry IV plays - I just don’t like the common men plotline within this one... It’s slightly better because Falstaff isn’t in this play, except in name (I have an absolute burning hatred of Falstaff... Like we could burn him out of English literature and I’d dance on the ashes level of hatred, it’s perhaps sllightly irrational but I loathe him. I’d otherwise like the Henry IV plays but I see Falstaff and I’m immediately full of seething rage. It’s apparently very funny for my best friend.) However, I just find the common men a tedious distraction from the rest of the play. I switch off whenever I’m watching the play and they’re on stage/screen. I know why they’re there I just don’t care - it’s a me issue, I’m well aware.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince by J.K. Rowling - okay I’m not going to write much on Half-Blood Prince as a whole becasue 1. Rowling herself, and 2. I’m going to rank the Harry Potter books when I’ve finished with Deathly Hallows. Overall, I loved this book, it’s always been one of my favourite Potter novels and my reread only cemented its place. The plot is genuinely interesting and well thought out, it’s one of the best books for exploring Harry as a character (I adore seeing his darker side!), and the set up for the finale is excellent. I actually perfer it to Deathly Hallows because the promises it makes are more interesting than the actual execution of the book.

However, I do want to say that this book made Snape my new favourite character - I won’t explain why yet, I need to do a full spoiler discussion of ALL the Harry Potter books, including Deathly Hallows. But Snape is by far the best drawn character in the Potter series. He’s certainly not the nicest, kindest of most likeable. Snape’s not a moral paragon, neither has he ‘done nothing wrong’ as I’ve seen argued. But he is the most interesting and morally complex.

Everytime I’ve read Potter before, Snape’s a character I’ve not really thought about - which is shocking considering how much he’s in these books, the role he plays, and the discourse around him in the Harry Potter fandom. I’ve always just gone along with the face-value presentation of his character. Yet on this reread I’ve paid attention to Snape, not deliberately, it just naturally happened. Anyway, to cut a long story short - Snape is my new favourite character! Yes Lupin is still my irrational, undying favourite. But, in terms of having a genuine interest and reason for loving him Snape is my new favourite because he is so complicated! He’s someone I’ve come to understand and sympathise with. I don’t condone Snape, I still think he’s a piece of work who should NEVER be allowed around children. But he is a good person. Again not nice, likeable, or morally sound. Yet he does spend the best part of 20 years working tirelessly for good without praise, acknowledgement, or recongition.

He’s a fascinating character and I’ve adored diving into his mind, as much as you can in this very Harry-centric series, without the accepting bias of a child’s eyes. Snape’s one of the few characters in Harry Potter I’d like to read a book about - I’ve neber been one to want a Marauder’s spin off or Hogwarts founding story. But I think diving into Snape’s mind would genuinely be worth it and an interesting experiment, I just don’t think J.K. Rowling would be the right author to do it.

[apples-r-rubbish]

Institute (13th Doctor x Reader) Part 1

Summary: After a weird encounter on a victorian street the doctor is drawn to you a fellow time traveller AN: HI!! this is a 13 x fem! reader as I started this a while ago and it would’ve meant very heavy delays if I had altered it Word count: 1.6k Warnings: death mention 

(PART 2) (PART 3) (PART 4) (PART 5) (PART 6) (PART 7)  (PART 8) MASTERLIST

The doctor stepped out of the TARDIS, rubbing her hands together “C’mon gang, let’s get a shift on. Lots to see, lots to do.” She said taking the lead and walking ahead. The victorian streets were cobblestone, and covered in mud, “Doc, I thought the victorian era was supposed to be more, I don’t know? Glamorous.” Graham sighed

“Oi! This is real history, you can’t believe everything you see in movies. They’re more historically inaccurate than you’d think,” The doctor snapped jokingly

“Then why’s she wearing jeans?” Ryan asked, gesturing towards you. The entire group turned to look at you. 

“Another time traveller probably. I’m not the only one knocking about time and space. She’s definitely not a time agent because she would be dressed era appropriate, so I assume she’s just passing through,” She rambled. Whilst she talked about the intricacies of the time agency you approached them. 

“You do understand it is rude to talk about someone, and not include them, regardless, of how well you know someone, Doctor, Ryan, Graham, Yaz,” You interrupted

“Who are you? Sorry, time travel, you should know what it’s like, nothings ever in the right order. Especially with people,” A confused expression fixed on her face

“Oh, of course, that makes sense. It’s all coming together,” You said glaring at the vortex manipulator and sticking your hand out to her “My name’s (Y/N). (Y/N) (L/N).”

“That’s a lovely name. A really lovely name,” The doctor said smiling widely, Ryan and Yaz chuckling at her.

“You’ll see me again,” You said kissing her on the cheek “That’ll make more sense eventually, I promise,”

“Do you happen to know an archeologist by any chance?”

“I think I know the one you’re referring to. We happen to be friends I’ll have you know,” You blinked staring off into the distance for a second “Well, if you haven't met me yet, I should get going,” You said tapping the travel device and slamming your hand down against it. You vanished.

“Well that definitely was one of the more confusing interactions we’ve had,” Yaz frowned. Electricity fizzed and you reappeared behind them, “Sorry, sorry,” You said making them jump “Doctor, when you see me next, give me this, it’ll make sense to her, maybe. Anyway, onwards,”  You handed her a heavy ring as you spoke, ”I’ve always wanted to die on a foreign planet.” And before she could respond, you vanished into thin air once again.

“How- How did she do that?” Graham asked “And what did she mean? Die on a foriegn planet,”

“Vortex manipulator, nasty way to time travel, bad for the kidneys,” She frowned “as for the death bit, I don’t know,”

It’d been 3 months since the doctor had met you. She had tried to search for you and found nothing. She’d bored the fam to death rambling about time and the way it worked and who you could be and things she’d done to try to track you down. Nothing seemed to work, at one point they’d tried to stage an intervention which did not help as it merely gave her a platform to theorise. Until one day they arrived on Earth. 

“Right gang, this is an abandoned building, middle of London. 3 hours to get some stuff done before we set off again,” the doctor said as she pushed the door open. The building outside the doors was definitely not abandoned. It looked like an office, floor to ceiling windows and a beautiful view of London outwards, a desk opposite them. 

“Are you sure you’re right? This looks awfully officey for an abandoned building,” Ryan commented with a frown. The room was large, there were a variety of chairs placed around the room, along with a few futuristic looking lights

“No, it’s definitely Earth the gravity feels right,” The doctor answered, she licked her finger and lifted it into the air, “It’s earth, middle of London, Wednesday and it’s 11:02am,” She said a smug smile framing her face, wiping her finger on Yaz despite her protests. A door opened, you stepped out looking younger than the version in the victorian street, dressed in a suit, the opposite to how you were in the street.

“Hello, you’re the doctor, and I presume these are your companions? Assistants? Friends? Whatever you call them now,” You said extending a hand out to the timelord

“Yes, I am and yes they’re friends,” She said taking it “So you’re (Y/N) (L/N) then? What is this place?”

“Yes I am. It’s my office, I’ll explain on the tour, follow me, this way,” You said taking the lead and exiting the room

“We can’t tell her about what we saw, it runs the risk of collapsing reality or potentially ruining a fixed point, which is very, very bad, specifically 4 suitcase fulls and a bus journey full of bad,” The doctor explained in a hushed whisper to the other three

“But what if we could save her? Stop her from believing she’ll die on another planet?” Yaz asked empathetic as always

“Look, we can’t, I’ve tried that before and it ends up worse, we can’t do that. We can’t choose who lives and who dies,” She said glaring at all of them before snapping back to her usual sunny disposition and following you out of the room, the others trailing behind

“We always knew you would visit us at one point, it was inevitable given what we deal with,” You stated

“What is this place? Is this some kind of database an information hub? Why didn’t it show up on TARDIS scanners?” She asked, her list of questions increasing

“No, we’re an institute. Future tech, didn’t want you interfering. We help people, or we try to. London’s best kept secret, used internationally, U.N.I.T. doesn’t even know we exist. It didn’t show up on scanners because we planned for you and we knew that, of we wanted to do our jobs properly we couldn’t have interferences be it human or otherwise, especially not from you,” You replied 

“What exactly are you the institute of?” Graham interrupted

“Formally, rehabilitation of former time travelers and people who come into contact with aliens. Informally, cleaning up after the Doctor. We’re The Bad Wolf Institute, formerly known as The Trenzalore institute, but Captain Harkness insisted we change it, after an old friend of yours, I believe” 

The doctor froze in her tracks “Sorry? The Bad Wolf institute?”

“Yes, Jack was very insistent, pitched it to Me and she seemed to like the concept. The meeting of human and alien so to speak,” 

“Did you just refer to yourself in the third person and first person?” Yaz mumbled

“No, Lady Me founded the institute and is formally the director of it, however, when she is away with one of your former friends or running trap street, I become acting director,” You explained opening a door and ushering them inside “She did claim she was trying to protect the world from you. She kept her word Doctor.” Inside the room was sectioned off areas of ground and a locked cabinet. “Vortex manipulators,” You answered the moment the doctor opened her mouth to ask “Called in a favour from Jack and Torchwood, he owed us after the 456 issue, but we took care of it. Use them to jump planets and time, smooth over any damage you’ve done, better us than the time agents, you know what they’re like.”

“Isn’t that a violation of time having them in the 21st century considering they were invented in the 51st century?”

“Yes, however, we’re erased from future narratives, we’re ghosts in the future, barely echos of echos,” 

The doctor stopped suddenly, “How can I trust you? Hm? How do I know you aren’t lying? You could be a trap, a trick,” 

“I can pull out a file on any former companion and read it to you.  Amy, Rory, Jack, Martha, Clara, Rose, Harry, Donna, Jamie, pick a name and we’ll find it,” Your tone was neutral, but your face wasn’t harsh. 

“Too general, anyone from U.N.I.T can do that, I need something more specific,”

“I was the rep assigned to Amelia and Rory Williams, the Ponds. Visited her, 1946, New York, made some connections for her. Hooked up with an adoption agency, her and Rory adopted a son. She also repeatedly referred to you as raggedy man, and told me you used to eat fishfingers and custard which is something we didn’t have on file. We didn’t add it, you’re allowed some secrets, old man, no matter how vile it sounds,” A smile gracing for face at the last words

“Sorry? You used to be a man?” Graham asked. You chuckled at that, the formal facade finally slipping.

“Yes? That’s what you take away from that Graham? I believe you, no one other than her calls me that.” The doctor nodded at you, pulling the weighted silver ring from one of her many coat pockets “Oh before I forget, someone told me to give you this. They said it was important.”

You examined the ring for a second, a small chuckle escaped you “This was my mother’s, it went missing not long after she died. Never found it, searched the whole house, nothing,” You explained, slipping it on to your finger. “Thank you, I presume it was me then. My future must be in safe hands.”

“How did you- How did you work that out?” Ryan asked 

“Time travel, it’s weird,”

“Want to come with us?” The doctor said unexpectedly

“Not especially. I have an institute to look after while Me runs Trap street, ask me again one day and I might just say yes,” You sighed a small wink directed towards her at the end of your sentence “Leave the TARDIS here as long as you’d like, no harm will come to it here.”

And that’s where it began.

[dear-wormwoods]

Someone truly in the reddie tag saying Myra was not abusive and that she wasn’t like Sonia. Even saying Bev and Eddie don’t have similar arcs bc their abusive situations were entirely different and that people just reach to bend arguments in order to prove reddie. Biggest bs I have read in a while ahdhd

I’m assuming you are new to my blog, because uhh, I’m sorry to burst your bubble anon, but I am also someone who doesn’t consider Myra abusive. Idk what post you’re talking about specifically but I’d sure like to know what ‘proving reddie’ has to do with it, lol. But anyway, I have said before that I consider Eddie’s marriage to be toxic, but not abusive. These two people should not be married. And not just because Eddie is gay and doesn’t love her. Beyond that, they are definitely bad for each other. The entire marriage is a conduit for misery and deception. It’s a codependent circus of projection and enabling. It’s unhealthy as hell! But it isn’t abusive. And here’s why I think that: 

Stephen King wasn’t trying to make a point that Sonia and Myra are exactly the same. He was, however, making a point that when people enter into adulthood and adult relationships while carrying a bunch of baggage from trauma they never properly dealt with, the cycle will continue in one way or another (this is why Eddie and Bev are ‘parallel’ characters, not the surface-level abuse interpretation). Eddie suffered from emotional abuse for most of his life; Sonia was very calculating and intentional about it and made sure that she always held sway in Eddie’s life to suit her own needs. The result is that Eddie is a very inexperienced and sheltered adult who believes in all of the lies his mother told him. He tried to move out three times and failed each time. Sonia controlled him until the day she died. It’s all Eddie knows. So in his mid-thirties, alone in the world for the first time, he doesn’t know how to take care of himself and, more importantly, believes he can’t learn. Because of his history of abuse and control, Eddie can’t fathom taking the reins in his own life and instead seeks out someone who will take care of him the way he’s become accustomed to. 

So, Eddie meets Myra and latches onto her because she’s inexperienced and malleable, like him. She physically reminds him of his mother, so it’s easy for him to project onto her all of the abuse Sonia inflicted on him. And because that life was all he knew, it was also what made him feel comfortable, so he nudged Myra into the role he wanted her to fill - a replacement mom. He did this subconsciously at first, but he was able to recognize it before they got married… and then he decided to go through with it anyway. 

Eddie brought a lot of baggage into that relationship, baggage that Myra was most likely completely unaware of. Obviously he’s a repressed gay man, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Eddie doesn’t love Myra, but it’s not just because he’s gay, it’s also because he has created a maternal figure in her and, since he (rightfully) resents his mother, he also resents Myra. She conforms to that caretaker role and enables everything he’s learned from a life with Sonia, and he in turn enables her bad habits too. Enabling is toxic behavior, but it isn’t inherently abusive. 

But then, when he leaves to go back to Derry, it all comes to a head. She freaks out because as far as she knows, he’s very sick, and he’s leaving her without an explanation, this man who she is married to and financially dependent on. She has no idea how to communicate, so she resorts to panicky, emotionally manipulative attempts to get him to talk to her and stay. On the flipside, Eddie has no idea how to communicate with her either, so he withholds information, deflects, and snaps at her in moments of frustration. They both have irrational thoughts about hurting each other and they both do and say things that make the situation worse. They are both VERY bad at communication. Because they’re both grown adults with almost no relationship experience outside of each other and are therefore emotionally stunted. 

That whole chapter reads, to me, like “bad breakups 101″ - one person can’t articulate how they feel so they’re deflecting and coming off as cold, and the other person is so over the top emotional that they end up making no sense and coming off as hysterical. And it’s no wonder! If you make it to your late 30′s without ever having much of a social circle or relationship experience, you’re not going to know how to act in a situation like this. And this applies to both of them. If what Eddie says about her is true, this is probably the first time Myra has ever been left by a partner, and it’s happening suddenly and with no explanation. So, she’s hysterical and resorts to manipulation - not out of habit, but out of desperation (Eddie makes the distinction that this isn’t typical behavior for her!!). For Eddie’s part, this is the first major decision he’s made in probably his whole life, and he doesn’t know how to explain himself, so he just… decides not to. And because he does not love Myra, he is completely emotionally detached from her. Their individual reactions to the situation just make it worse for them both - Eddie shutting down makes Myra more hysterical, and her hysterics cause him to shut down more.

People like to cite a couple of damning quotes about Myra as proof that she’s exactly like Sonia, but making that argument requires you to actively ignore the damning quotes about Eddie. There are also quite a few quotes that highlight the differences between her and Sonia, things Eddie himself acknowledges, as well as quotes about the guilt he feels for knowingly projecting his own baggage onto this woman. (Note: see the posts linked at the end of this for a breakdown of all those quotes) The text makes it clear that this was never a happy marriage. Neither of them are better for being in each other’s lives. They don’t help each other become healthier people. Rather, they both actively enable each other’s toxic habits. The marriage is, in a lot of ways, a form of self-harm for Eddie, and he knows it - upon Sonia’s death, he exited the cage his mother built for him and then built a new cage for himself and threw the key at Myra’s feet. For her part, I believe Myra began as an unwitting enabler but ultimately realized that she gained a “purpose” from the relationship (being a caretaker, being “needed”) and subsequently turned a blind eye to all the ways it wasn’t actually a healthy marriage. 

This is such a long post already but I want to make it very clear that Eddie’s cycle of abuse continuing does not actually require Myra herself to be abusive - rather, it is Eddie’s projection onto her that exacerbates the toxic environment. It’s the ghost of Sonia that haunts him in that chapter and throughout the rest of the novel. Myra is not a villain in Eddie’s life - he hardly even thinks about her after he leaves. This is one of the main points that make Eddie and Bev’s parallel arcs different - Bev very clearly has a secondary villain in her life, Tom, and she gets the closure of him dying in the end. But Eddie doesn’t need closure about his marriage, because Myra is just an extension of what Sonia did to him. 

The one time he does think of her unprompted is during his walking tour, and it’s such a great example of what his marriage actually means for him: when faced with the leper offering him a blowjob and other IT manifestations, he wishes he was home with Myra. He doesn’t think of her badly - he’s not afraid of her in any way. But she represents his comfort zone. IT is forcing him to confront things like his repressed sexuality, and he decidedly does not want to do that. That’s the only moment he “misses” Myra. But he doesn’t actually miss Myra. He misses the way her enabling allowed him to escape from having to face himself. And that’s really what it comes down to - Eddie’s marriage is toxic because it’s an escape, a way for him to avoid having to grow as a person and face the hard realities of who he is and what his mother has done to him. Myra isn’t evil, she’s not a calculating abuser like Sonia was, but she is toxic because her very presence prevents Eddie from reaching his full potential and being happy. 

Sonia’s abuse permeates Eddie’s entire life, even well after her death. Her actions dictate how he sees himself, as well as how he acts in relationships. Sonia is the reason Eddie’s marriage is the way it is. Hell, Sonia is the reason Eddie’s marriage exists in the first place. It is Sonia’s ghost that continues to manipulate him throughout the book and it is Sonia’s voice he needs to overcome in the end. If Myra were truly abusive, she would matter more in the overarching narrative of Eddie’s trip to Derry. But she doesn’t matter and because of that, she’s never really given a personality or motivations. She’s truly a blank canvas for Eddie to project his issues onto, and then he simultaneously berates himself for projecting and resents her for existing within his projections. Through all of this, everything always comes back to Sonia. Due to the vast disparity between their respective levels of influence, placing Myra on equal footing with Sonia is, in my opinion, a form of downplaying how bad Sonia truly was. 

Finally, and it’s wild that this even needs to be said, people need to recognize that saying ���Myra isn’t abusive’ is NOT the same thing as saying she did nothing wrong. Myra was an enabler and that’s not okay, whether she meant to be or not. She also had moments of manipulation, terrible communication skills and poor emotional regulation. She was a toxic presence in Eddie’s life. Saying she isn’t abusive doesn’t mean I’m excusing her actions. But it’s also important to recognize that the chapter in which she appears has a lot more nuance to it than some people realize, and it’s necessary to hold Eddie accountable for his part in making that night so difficult. On that note, holding Eddie accountable and recognizing his harmful moments is not the same as calling him abusive either (fsr that’s become some kind of urban legend, but literally no one ever said he was! ever!!). There does not always have to be an abuser and a victim - sometimes bad relationships are just… bad.

Eddie is obviously a lot more sympathetic than Myra because we know about his past and get his POV. We know that he’s a good person. We also know that Sonia is the root of all of his issues. But the fact is, he has some shitty moments in that chapter, just as Myra does! His past experiences are not an excuse for that, they’re just an explanation. And, because I know there are people out there who equate accountability with victim blaming, being able to recognize where Eddie went wrong and why he entered into this marriage to begin with is NOT the same as saying he deserved any of his misery. There’s a huge, huge difference between accountability and blame. Holding people, even fictional characters, accountable is a good thing. In the end, Eddie is a very damaged person - an inherently good person, to be sure, but sometimes damaged people who are inherently good can, and often do, create, foster, and contribute to unhealthy relationships. It can’t all be unquestioningly pinned on Myra. 

Anyway, if after all of that you’re still confused as to why some people choose not to use the abuse label, here’s some additional reading:

An amazing breakdown of the entire chapter, using quotes, by @tossertozier

A more recent & shorter breakdown using quotes by @richietozierhateblog 

[toaarcan]

RvB 15-17 Condensed

The working title for this was “RvB 15-17 but not crap”.

Now, this might seem a little presumptuous to include Season 17 in this, which, at time of writing, has yet to be released, buuuut I’m basically mashing S15 and S16 into a single block which would make S17 actually the sixteenth season in this version. So the rewrite is that Season 17 happens a year earlier.

Now, I have my problems with RvB 15-16.

I don’t want to start off on such a negative tone, but I feel like I need to establish that before we go ahead.

While Season 15 was at worst, a mediocre RvB Season with tonal problems and inconsistent characterisation for our leads, Season 16 is all of those problems made worse. Like, it’s not Season 9 bad, but it’s still bad, and while I’ve mostly covered those issues in past posts, I haven’t really covered how much the setup for the climax is just plain stupid.

Like the setup for the finale, and thus Season 17, is as follows:

Atlus: Don’t do the thing.

Wash: Don’t do the thing.

Huggins: Don’t do the thing.

Carolina: ... Alright guys let’s do the thing.

[Time breaks because they did the thing]

It’s a little more complex than that, but not by much.

Now, I ummed and ahhhed over how to make this work for a while, but ultimately, I came to the conclusion that this is how I would do it.

For starters, 90% of Season 16’s plot is getting dumped. If not all of it. Legitimately all I’m keeping is the ending. Sorry, it’s not exactly a big loss.

Second off, I’m not heavily altering Season 15. While there’s definitely a good Season 5-13 tier plot that could be told with a fake BGC, this isn’t it, and attempting to alter that leads into a completely different set of stories. So Season 15 is mostly unchanged, just assume Temple is actually a competent villain and the plot isn’t driven entirely by the BGC being dumber than usual for a week.

So the timeline is now Season 15 -> Paradox -> Season 17.

We’re also scrubbing Wash’s injury from Season 15. It’s going to be an unnecessary complication for the lead-in to the next season anyway. If we’re going straight for the time paradox, then having Wash be injured is kinda pointless. Given that Season 16 ended on a warped Blood Gulch way before Wash ever showed up, there’s nothing to gain by having him out of action. He’s already imperilled enough by time being fucked.

“But wait,” I hear you say. “If Wash and Locus are with the heroes when they take on the Blues and Reds, surely they catch up to Temple quickly enough that the time machine doesn’t get turned on!”

Ah, but that’s the beauty of it. Whether the time machine is turned on or not is not the focus of the paradox here. And because that’s not a vital plot point, we’re free to have the characters just Travel At The Speed Of Plot, and arrive precisely in time for the actual climax.

You see, rather than changing history around Wash’s injury and thus fucking the timeline up, the key to the paradox is Church. Specifically, what happens when Church is removed from their history because someone pulled him into the present before the events of Blood Gulch really happened.

In the actual show, when Church appears in the portal, Tucker tells Caboose to pull him through, and Caboose refuses, instead bidding farewell to an extremely confused Alpha and allowing the portal to close. It’s a big moment for Caboose’s character, and it’s one of the parts of Season 15 which is pretty well-executed.

Obviously, I’m not going to overturn that and have him not have the growth. So, how does Church end up being pulled through?

“Tucker did it!”

Now, I’m not a big fan of Joe’s Tucker. In fact, that’s an understatement. I hate the way Joe writes Tucker, and I’d rather not fall into that same trap, so I’m going to explain in detail why Tucker would make this mistake.

 1) Tucker just had Epsilon die on him. Inside his head. And at the same time, the other remaining pieces of Epsilon all faded away too. And Tucker didn’t even notice it was happening, by the time he realised what was going in, the fragments were gone and he was left in a very empty and very non-functioning suit of power armour. Given how heavy this armour is, with it non-functioning, Tucker was probably unable to move until his friends removed most of the suit, so he was trapped in a coffin that was emptier than it should’ve been.

2) Struggling to cope with his grief, Tucker does something frankly stupid and activates the Temple of Procreation.

3) A while later, Tucker is starting to recover from his friend’s death, when Dylan shows up and he finds out in short order that A) Someone is committing terrorist acts while disguised as him and his friends, B) The planet he sacrificed so much, and Church gave his life for, is being blamed and might be invaded, and C) Church might be alive. This effectively halts Tucker’s recovery.

4) The consequences of his fuckup with the Temple of Procreation come back to haunt him, and suddenly, something Tucker has always been proud of- that he’s a great father to Junior- is called into question because he’s now an absentee dad to a fuckton of Chorus babies, which deals a blow to the poor man’s ego.

5) Shortly after that, the fiasco where Temple manages to manipulate him happens, and it makes things even worse for him. He should’ve seen through it after Felix, but he didn’t. And now, Wash and Carolina are hurt because of him, and the message from Church was a fake.

6) Finally, after all of this, he’s face to face with Church, and he has the chance to save him, and while maybe he could follow Caboose’s example… there’s one key problem. This isn’t Epsilon, it’s Alpha.

Y’see, there’s a big difference between those two. As has been pointed out before, Epsilon was always kind of a total prick to Tucker. A lot of this can be chalked up to Epsilon’s knowledge of the BGC coming entirely from Caboose, who purposefully left Tucker out of his recounts of their many adventures.

But this isn’t Epsilon. It’s Alpha. Tucker’s best friend, Alpha. Alpha, who went off and died without Tucker being there. Without Tucker ever getting a chance to see him once again. They got separated and one year later, Alpha died, in denial about a fact that Tucker had figured out long ago. Maybe Tucker could’ve helped save Alpha if he’d been there. Maybe Alpha wouldn’t have had to leave the safety of Wash’s suit and end up vulnerable to the emp if someone else had been there to hold the Meta’s attention.

 Tucker decides to save his friend. He’s at the end of his rope and after all the crap he’s been through on this journey, which he set out on because he wanted to save Church, he’s going to damn well save Church.

Additionally, by tying Tucker into the portal scene properly, there’s now a proper narrative throughline from the characters receiving Church’s message to the portal. Caboose has been covered, but Tucker hasn’t.

 Time paradox.

Despite his best intentions and hopefully understandable motives, Tucker has just pulled Alpha-Church out of their history before it even got started. And given how much of Seasons 1-13 was motivated by Church in some form or another… well, they’ve just unmade themselves.

The final twist is that time isn’t rewound to Season 1. We don’t need to see that. Season 1 retreads aren’t needed. If they want to remake Season 1, they should just bite the bullet and do a full remaster of the early Seasons to clean up the audio, rather than forcing new Seasons of the show to ape it.

Instead, we see a Blood Gulch wherein the same amount of time has passed since S1E01, but with none of the elements that Church brought in having happened.

Tex never goes to Blood Gulch. She spends her time hiding from Freelancer and desperately trying to find her other half, whom she was ripped away from and now will never be able to reunite with.

Tucker loses his friend, and is left with Caboose, who already doesn’t like him.

Caboose, for his part, doesn’t get brain damaged by Omega, but he still has his air shut off and Church still convinces him to drink Scorpion fuel, so he’s not doing much better.

Kai probably gets deployed to Blood Gulch faster, since Blue team is undermanned. She’s stuck in an empty box canyon with the rest of them.

York lives on, not getting recruited by Tex, until the Meta comes for him. The Meta takes Delta and leaves York to die alone.

Wyoming is not sent after Tucker, and doesn’t get the chance to formulate the plan with Omega.

Junior is never born.

Because Wyoming’s plan doesn’t happen, Wash is left to try and combat the Meta without the aid of the Reds and Blues. He fails.

The Meta remains free to hunt down and murder its former comrades. Like Tex, it ends up searching endlessly for the Alpha, which it will not find.

Without the Project’s downfall, and without Epsilon’s activation, Carolina remains in hiding.

The Director remains in hiding, endlessly repeating his attempts to perfect his remake of Allison. He never finds the answer.

Chorus is destroyed by perpetual civil war, all according to Hargrove’s design.

And as the galaxy darkens, people who would’ve been friends die or are left alone to rot, and the Project that put them there tears itself apart until only Tex, the Meta, Carolina, and the Director remain, scattered to the winds and pursuing impossible tasks, Blood Gulch remains. Its purpose is lost without Alpha, and the Project is gone, but with no new orders, VIC perpetuates the “war” between Red and Blue teams, and so it goes on. Static. Unchanging.

Cue the ending, and the setup for the next season. A Blood Gulch without Church.

[philippmichelreichold]

#review #scifi Space Dreadnoughts by Dave Drake, et al

#review #scifi Space Dreadnoughts by Dave Drake, et al

Space Dreadnoughts is a Military Science Fiction anthology by David Drake, Martin H Greenberg and Charles G Waugh. The contents in order of appearance are: •"Introduction: A quick Look at Battle Fleets" by David Drake •"The Only Thing We Learn" by Cyril M. Kornbluth •"C-Chute" by Isaac Asimov •"Allamagoosa" by Eric Frank Russell (won the Hugo Award for best short story in 1955) •"A Question of Courage" by J. F. Bone •"Superiority" by Arthur C. Clarke •"Hindsight" by Jack Williamson •"The Last Battalion" by David Drake •"Shadow on the Stars" by Algis Budrys •"Time Lag" by Poul Anderson

The first Military Sci Fi story I remember is the Star Trek TOS episode "Balance of Terror," in which Enterprise duels with a Romulan interloper. The military conflict was setting to other conflicts between the crew, the story was full of suspense, and actual battle was a small part of the story. And so it is here.

The book's title is a misnomer. The back cover blurb is misleading-- "Massive and arrogant, they patrol the final war zone-- deep space. All great battleships before them-- . . . are mere toys in comparison." It goes on about "bristling artillery" and "battalions of soldiers." I expected fleet actions involving capital ships. Tactics. Maneuvers. Gunplay. While there are fleet actions and even battleships in some of these stories, they are mere backdrops on a stage where people play out the stories. Truly good Science Fiction involves people, and in all these stories, the people overshadow the military settings that serve only to bring out the characters and whatever lessons there are to be learned from them. All of these stories are well worth reading.

"Introduction: A quick Look at Battle Fleets" Mr Drake's introduction is a wonderful retrospective about the history of the Dreadnought battleships with a mention of two 1950's Astounding essays on the armaments of spaceships-- one by Willy Ley, the other by Malcolm Jameson. If one is going to write stories about ship-to-ship combat, the introduction is a good starting point. But only a starting point. One should definitely read Mahan, and consider the lessons of Taranto and Pearl Harbor. And the US Navy's Harpoon's and Tomahawk's are wonderful arguments in favor of missles over guns. One should also consider the time honored techniques of ramming and boarding actions.

Perhaps the question of guns vs missles is mooted today. Todays real world warships employ both-- including the Iowa class heavy battleships brought out of retirement and refurbished for President Reagan's naval buildup of the 1980's. The arms race has continued in Sci-Fi beyond what could be imagined with a knowledge of 1950's physics. The Ley and Jameson essays were written before fighters raked Formoria, before rail guns, and CTD imploders, before GRASER's, X-ray LASER's and phaser banks, before the Moties bombarded Mote Prime with asteroids, and before Captain Sheridan laid a gigaton on Z'ha'dum.

"The Only Thing We Learn" Kornbluth tells a cautionary tale of faded Imperial glory. The barbarians at the gates will one day have descendants that are as decadent and prissy as the effete and ineffectual empire they deposed and replaced. History blurs and magnifies the epic tales of glory. The details are lost. The character is lost. One day a fresh wave of barbarians sweeps aside succcessors that their ancestors would be ashamed to acknowledge. The reader may decide what relationship if any there is between this story and the quote from Friedrich Hegel. A fun story despite the dire consequences for the past and future losers. In  his column, "Rereading Kornbluth", Robert Silverberg calls The Only Thing We Learn, "a subtle, oblique, elliptical, sardonic piece of work."

"C-Chute" Dr. Asimov wrote this story in 1951. It is a psychodrama set aboard a passenger ship taken as a prize by a race of chlorine breathers in Earth's first intersteller war. Each of the passengers is sketched by Asimov to reveal their several flaws of personality, physicality or character. Each has reasons why he should not exit the cabin via the C-chute, EVA, and enter and retake the control room from outside the ship. The reason for the dubious hero to take the heroic action required to retake the ship is one unlikey to appear in the work of any author but Dr. Asimov.

"Allamagoosa" This story won the 1955 Hugo for best short story. It's a farcical look at officious bureaucracy of the greatest gravity. It's sort of a shaggy dog story, wink, wink. This story in and of itself is worth buying the book for. The build up and so obvious in hindsight ending is fresh enough to be as enjoyable today as it was then.

"A Question of Courage" Sometimes flair and heedless risk taking can be mistaken for true personal courage. When the genuine article appears, there's no mistaking it. Bone craftliy deveops his characters and sets the reader up for the old maidish Captain "Cautious Charley" Chase of Lachesis to reveal his true nature. It is available from Project Gutenberg.

"Superiority" Sir Arthur requires no introduction for this story, a reductio ad absurdum about the principle of Illusory Superiority. Technology and bedazzlment with the latest, most theoretically wonderful advances are no substitutes for common sense and sound military doctrine. Perhaps this should serve as a cautionary tale at a time when Iraqi insurgents hack into our drones. According to Wikipedia, this gem was required reading at West Point. The reader easily empathizes with the narrator and his plight, revealed at the end.

"Hindsight" Jack Williamson has won both the Nebula and the Hugo Awards, and had a career that spanned about seventy years. This story involves temporal mechanics and love, oppression and liberation, and meeting engagements. Incidentally, the guns employed by the Astrach's fleet are of 20-inch caliber and fire four salvos per second. It's a tightly written story, though I think the ending is a little drippy.

"The Last Battalion" Imagine that Hitler did not die in a bunker in Berlin, but escaped via U-Boat to a secret Waffen-SS base in New Swabia. There German scientists built flying saucers from which they reached the moon to to mine aluminum and build more flying saucers. Now imagine them getting into a war with aliens. With things not looking so good, they kidnap a US Senator to let him know what is going on, intending to drag the US into the conflict. Before they can get where they're going with the Senator, the aliens lay a nuke on their Antartic base. They drop the Senator off to find his own way home. He asks them what they will do. Their colonel replies, we are SS-- we will fight.

"Shadow on the Stars" Budrys's Farlans are felinoid aliens who at first blush look like humans in cat suits. But they are, on a closer look, "raving paranoid quote." The paranoia is pathological and eventually fatal for Farla-- any military leader with sufficient ability to be effective cannot be trusted by Farla's rulers, and will be killed at the earliest sign of that fatal disease, military competence. The story is a retrospective, the central character telling how he and Farla came to be in their present straits. It is too late for him to convey the warning against trusting Earth, and to late to avoid the inevitable dissolution of Farla.

I have a problem accepting the plot device Budrys uses to set up the narrative, but otherwise the story is interesting and fun to read. The prose is a bit over decourous and affected, but that brings out the effeteness and pretentiousness of the Farlan culture. At the start, the Farlans are hard-pressed by a barabarian culture, the Vilk, and need a strong, capable leader to drive them back. OF course the strong, capable leaders keep their heads down so has not to find themselves assassinated by the Ministry of Preparedness-- and then comes L'Miranid. A previously unknown reservist, he quickly dominates the Fleet and whips them into shape. Victory follows victory until the Vilk host is driven back, their subject planets pounded to rubble, and a Farlan imposed king seated upon their throne.

The real story action is not fleet engatgements and daring raids, though. The story is related by Henlo, one of those capable leaders who has balanced command of a capital ship wtih avoiding notice by the governmental hunters down of competence. He starts the story as having a clear understanding of Farla's problems and the steps necessary to remedy them, but can't afford to be noticed. He becomes L'Mararind's aid, admirer, vice-admiral, intended assasin and successor, and finally, his unwilling co-conspirator and successor. Unwilling to be assasinated himself, he seizes control of the Farlan government. By this time, the sad (for Farla) truth is known to him, but (I love Latin quotes.) "alea jacta est." This is a fine little story with a lovely twist toward the end.

"Time Lag" Poul Anderson has won both the Hugo and Nebula Awards. Time Lag is a study in contrasts-- evil, greedy invaders against noble, selfless defenders. Chertkoi is a heavily overpopulated industrial planet, drowning in pollution and resource starved. Vaynamo is pristine, with a population sustainable through resource management. Vayanmo is never the less technologically advanced, with the technology's goal as preservation rather than exploitation. Expolitation is the name of Chertkoi's game. It's people conquer other worlds to fuel the industrial fires that smother their world under a cloud of pollution.

The archetype of the Chertoi is the Admiral commanding the invasion fleet. He is matched against the story's view point character, Elva. Elva is the widow of a Vayanmoan noble and prisoner of the Admiral. He is gross, vulgar and uncouth. She is pretty, cultured and well-mannered. He is a love struck boor, hopelessly smitten by her. She subtly endures his presence to manipulate him so that she an return herself and the other captives to Vayanmo in a portrayal that is believable and sympathetic. The invasion is a leveraged takeover in three stages-- a scouting raid, a strategic strike to destroy what little industry the Vayanmo posses, and a full-scale invasion. The title relativistic time lag (fifteen years) gives the Chertkoi time to build their invasion fleet and the Vaynamo time to prepare their reception.

Image cover art under fair use for the review. Contact publisher for reuse.

My text creative commons 4.0

190417

[popculturespiritwow]

THE WICKED + THE DIVINE #23: PROFILES IN PLUMAGE

LIFE AFTER MOMMY

While Issue 23 is in a sense a prelude to the arc proper, magazine-style profiles of our Pantheon post-Blood Blister-Ananke-Pop!, one of the great elements of the issue is how it lays out the new status quo within interviews that are the fruit entirely of online role play between Kieron and the interviewers. In other words, the interviewers didn’t have a sense of the story goals, they were just approaching their subjects the way they would in real life, and it was up to Kieron to improvise in a couple key notes – Baal as now Responsible Father Figure/Super Hero who is Going to Stop the Great Darkness and Wear Suits**; Laura as Maybe Actually the Destroyer After All Tho; Morrigan receding into the Undeworld with Baphomet; Ammy’s continued insistence that everything is going to turn out super great for everybody; Woden making a machine to “mimic” people’s powers (see: things that will also work out super great for everybody); oh, and everybody’s still going to die, tick tock. 

It’s all a pretty big gamble and it works really really well.

**Just realizing, the guy who makes it his mission in Imperial Phase to protect Minerva is simultaneously quietly killing children. Wow I don’t know how to feel about any of that.

TOMATO, TOMATO

What is this thing we’re reading, issue #23? Is it a comic book recreating itself for an issue as a magazine in order to do something fun and different and also expand the whole “gods viewed as celebrities” concept, show us how the Pantheon are viewed by the wider world?

Certainly that’s how it presents itself. And I dare you to find an issue of another book that does that as well, from layout to shot selection to the kinds of narratives it weaves. And other than the Chris Eliopolis-style three panel strip that ends the issue, and maybe Jamie’s four panels depicting Ananke’s death, there’s not a lot about what goes on within the issue that seems to resemble the storytelling methods of a comic.

But its cover is 100% comic book. We’re given an issue number, the title of the comic, the creative team, the production company. The page dimension are also those of every other issue of the series. And the cover design, Baal against the white background, as though having escaped the comic book frame which now hangs over his shoulder, is the design for the Imperial Phase run of issues.

The back cover fronts (backs?) the magazine vibe, replacing the series’ normal quote from within the book with an advertisement for a Persephone-branded phone. (I have to believe in a world where the ring tone is “Persephone is in Hell.”)  But even there, if you want to be picky, you’ve got the bar code and comic book rating in the bottom right. 

So it’s a comic book, right, doing celebrity rag really well and why am I wasting your time debating about this. But then there’s this... even if it’s not in a way like pretty much any comic book the art of the issue does generate story, in the way that magazines of its variety do, costume plus setting plus pose revealing character and plotline.

And not only that but the fullness of the story being told in each article and the issue as a whole is a result precisely as a result of the interactions between art and text. Indeed, the very choice of photos first to take and then to use emerges out of both the text of the story and the pre-interview idea for the story that the writer or editor brought. 

Clearly issue 23 is the band we love at the top of their game innovating even further and making us think that much more. But maybe it’s also a way of highlighting not that a comic can be a magazine, but that in the way they deliver story, magazines are actually a kind of comic books themselves.

WHO TO GET TO WRITE YOUR PROFILE IF YOU’RE NOT A TOOL

Kevin Wada’s art is just fantastic, both spot on for the kind of magazine the issue is trying to present and also with just the perfect shot selection for the characters.

That two page spread of Baal or the crazy shot of Woden. Wow.

But for me the gold of the issue is the fresh insights the article authors bring to the characters.

“It’s why fans love her,” Leigh Alexander writes of the Morrigan. “She creates spaces where it all feels inevitable, and therefore okay. Or definitely, assuredly not okay, so you can stop pretending, You can stop struggling. Or you can only struggle. Either way it’s a relief.” The blessing of the Morrigan, yes it’s a nightmare, you’re right, and with that truth, an easing of the pain. (I love all the articles, but Alexander’s is particularly wonderful. The feeling she has for the Morrigan gives the piece such pathos.)

Or here’s Dorian Lynskey, writing about Baal. “This, then, is Baal’s spin for the day: there will be a plan. We mortals might not know what it is, it may not even be decided yet, but there will be one. DO I believe it? I’m not sure. But I believe that Baal believes it. After so much blood and chaos, he needs to believe it.”

(Did Lynskey have any idea of the secrets Baal was hiding? I don’t think so. And yet knowing what we know not, could his piece be any more dead on?)

In her profile of Woden, author Laurie Penny says “He takes women and turns them into videogame cheesecake. He takes women and turns them into something less than human, something comprehensible and controllable, with clear win conditions.”

She also kids that his workshop is like the Batcave, and follows with another incredibly prescient remark: “’Where’s Alfred? Or...no, hang on. You’re Alfred.”   

Mary HK Choi’s insistence on often calling Lucifer by her birth name, which at first works as a refusal to take the claims of godhood as anything more than as millennial celebrity publicity stunt; but then becomes part of insisting on Luci’s innocence and vulnerability: “Lucifer if perfect right now – vibrant and happy. And while there is a humane aspect to  the fatalistic branding, the finite relevance that is the reality of the celebrity industrial complex in the age of social media, it’s still super sad.

“When she’s skipping to the mall, shudder at how her parents (unrepentant Beatles fans) conceived her on the night of a Blur gig...she is very much a kid. A kid swaggering to impress you and thousands of people for whom everything is performance.”

(Also, we get that great quote from Kieron, “Being the devil is knowing you’re lost.” Rather than Purveyor of Lies, Lucifer once again as the one who understands the lie within it all.)

Lastly, here’s Ezekiel Kweku, after hearing Ammy explain away Ananke’s death: “She looks preternaturally serene, godlike once more. For some reason, this makes me even sadder.”

(“She doesn’t want you to see in her a deconstructed divinity, she wants to appear as whole and uncomplicated as an undivided beam of light,” is so perfect as sentences go I would be filled with a jealous rage if I could stop enjoying it.)

NO BUT SURE ANOTHER WOODY ALLEN MOVIE IS FINE THO

I do this newsletter on pop culture and spirituality called Pop Culture Spirit Wow. (Join us and we can rule the galaxy forever.) And the week  Avengers: Infinity War came out I did a whole thing on the history of the Avengers, including some of their most iconic storylines.

And in doing research, I stumbled upon this post from former Avengers writer Jim Shooter, who insists that Hank Pym “was not a wife-beater”. The famous moment where Pym hits Janet van Dyne, he said was actually the mistake of the artist. “In that story (issue 213, I think),” Shooter writes, “there is a scene in which Hank is supposed to have accidentally struck Jan while throwing his hands up in despair and frustration—making a sort of ‘get away from me’ gesture while not looking at her.  Bob Hall, who had been taught by John Buscema to always go for the most extreme action, turned that into a right cross!” And it was too late to fix it, so they had to go with it. 

Years later, Bob Hall responded, saying Shooter “had never said he didn’t like the slap panel”, but that he could believe he’d made a mistake, because he was young and didn’t know what he was doing.

But I don’t know, this is a pretty different from an “accidental slap”:

Also, what precipitates this terrible moment is Pym on trial for having seemingly shot a woman in the back (turns out she was a robot) and feeling a lot of pressure. The issue features Tigra worrying about Jan and wondering why she stays with him. “Don’t you see you’re worth ten of him?” she asks.

And after his “accidental slap” he flips out in court, ultimately sending in a robot to save him.

So I don’t know, actually an accidental slap feels a lot less likely than what was drawn. (Actually it feels exactly like what someone who just hit a woman says to try and get away with it.)

Once it “happened”, Shooter and Marvel were “stuck” with it (#TheRealVictims), and Shooter had to rethink where he was headed with the characters. Jan files for divorce next issue, in fact.

If you look at the history of comics, you won’t find many moments like this, at least not at the Big Two. Men do not hit women.

Unless they have powers, that is. Then it’s kind of all fair, or at least occasionally permissible. And it never comes up in later conversation. It’s just the way things are. She was super strong, she hit me first, of course it’s okay. 

In both the Morrigan and Baal pieces the characters talk about Baal having hit her. That attack happened twelve issues ago (when you include the 1831 special), and it’s still considered a significant ongoing story point for both characters.

Once again, WicDiv making us consider things that the world kind of ignores. (Or even enjoys.)

DENIAL, THE NEW FRAGRANCE

The very last beat of this issue, the wacky cartoon, is maybe the hardest hitting punch of all.

They’ve been through all this craziness, they’ve found out they were being manipulated all this time, and they just straight murdered someone. So what do they do now?

What else? They party.

It’s like the Danger Laura Wilson warning of the first two arcs, but now applied to the whole group, and just as firmly ignored. The only one who really seems to understand at all it is Luci, and she’s dead, er, a living head stuck in a cave we won’t know about for another year of issues.

[jandjsalmon]

“What’s he then that says I play the villain?” (Othello: Act 2, Scene 3)

Okay - so to start this review. I have to place myself outside of myself. Jandy the fangirl watched this film at least twice (maybe three times) and couldn’t shut up about how hot Dylan was when he was being  dreamy but evil.

BUT then I decided to be fair… and Jessica the impartial observer and critical thinker watched Dismissed one more time and actually had some worthwhile (and spoilery) thoughts.

SO. The story as an outline is actually very clever: Mr. Butler is a teacher at a school without a lot of student engagement. He doesn’t really want to be there either though - his dreams are the tenure track at a nearby university. But we start the film with him trying to get his students interested in English. There is a lot of Othello talk - and dips into Dostoevsky too. We also see a bit of his  family life - which doesn’t actually seem too terrible. Wife. New Baby. Great.

Enter Lucas Ward. Okay - so it’s hard to deny that this boy is freaking beautiful. He’s also more than a little awkward socially but he’s hella smart and he's got goals. Dylan’s own speech cadence (which is on display… this is literally how he talks himself) suits this slightly (more than slightly) awkward young man. He really wants Mr. Butler to like him. Lucas is a bit of a keener (this is the understatement of this post).

He even gives Mr. Butler a fancy decorative apple (which made my 14 year old son shout FORESHADOWING! – and he was right! Smart kid), does all the assignments from earlier in the term before he moved to town (because it’s important to him not to fall behind... even though he didn't have to do them) and answers questions and engages in Mr. Butler’s class. He’s the DREAM student. Even Mr. Butler is excited. He decides he wants to be Lucas’ mentor.

This is made even more convenient and easy when Lucas joins (and kicks ass at) the Chess Club (which Mr. Butler supervises) where he informs Mr. Butler that there is no point in doing anything unless you can be the very best at it.  Then, despite being the best player, Mr. Butler makes him the 2nd Seat at their next chess competition. (I literally facepalmed at David Butler at this point - he’s clearly never seen a suspenseful movie before) Lucas isn’t very thrilled at the prospect of being 2nd - but he seems to recover. This is one of Dylan’s best moments. You can literally see the wheels turning in Lucas’ head. It was very real here. He hasn't recovered... he just has a plan now.

Then (because by now we know there is a lot more going on here than just a teenager who really really likes to be the best at stuff) Lucas eliminates his competition at the chess club (as you do) with exploding Chemistry, and hands in a frakking dissertation on how Iago is actually the hero of Othello (seriously though- he’s not, guys). Lucas threatens to stab his pen through another kid in his class’ throat for talking too much in class… which was delightful actually - as was the smirk we barely see when he hears the kid in question murmur to a neighbour to be quiet) But of course the shit hits the fan when he’s only given a B+ on the paper and we start to see things unravel and tires are slashed among some other things.

Of course, winding around the rest of the initial narrative is Lucas’ friendship with Becca… can we call this a friendship? He uses her. He manipulates her. I was shocked that they didn’t end up romantically entangled… but then I wasn’t shocked because Lucas wouldn’t be able to pretend those kinds of feelings long term because at this point in the story we already know that as a child he used to imitate expressions trying to ‘pretend’ feelings… because he lacks the empathy and understanding to really feel them. Classic sociopath (not psychopath as stated in the film).

So when Mr. Butler sorta figures out what’s going on here with Lucas and the fact that he’s basically extorting his teacher for a grade. He also conveniently finds out about Lucas’ past… after talking to Lucas’ father (Holy cow Chris Bauer delivers a great performance!) where Lucas basically ruined a previous teacher’s life over a History term paper about how it was Hitler’s methods that were the problem - but his belief in perfection was totally possible. The teacher thought it in bad taste (as it is) and gave him a poor grade… BIG Mistake.

This leads Mr. Butler to choose to give Lucas an F for his mid-term grade --- honestly how did this become a good idea, David? But it brought about my favourite scene (as gif’d below) - I just want you to pay close attention to the lack of socks as Lucas trashes his bedroom. I wonder if this was a Dylan decision or a costume designer decision. Perhaps we’ll never know. Can one of you fangirls who meet him in the future ask about his thoughts on socks? ANYWAY - back to the meta.

This is the point where my biggest criticism of the film comes in actually. I feel the beginning of the film was neat and clear - if not struggling because I am not a huge fan of how Kent Osborn (Mr. Butler) chose to interpret his character. I don’t ever actually LIKE Mr. Butler. He’s cold. Aside from one scene where he’s excited to be a mentor to a kid who has shown actual interest in his subject - there is little in this performance to bring me to Mr. Butler’s side. I mean - other than the other side being inhabited by a complete sociopathic monster.

I found (and this is Jessica the impartial reviewer here) just wondering why the hell Mr. Butler couldn’t give the kid his A so he could go to Harvard and become a titan of industry someday? It’s not like Lucas is any worse than those in power right now anyway. Mr. Butler comes across as a spiteful bitter man off put by Lucas' Type A personality. This has absolutely nothing to do with my love for Dylan. It was a flaw in the writing for Mr. Butler. Lol.

Add to that - Lucas’ underhanded plan to get Becca to make a move on Mr. Butler (another way for Lucas to manipulate the situation and ruin Mr. Butler’s life) and how that bombs…. and then her fall off a roof now that Lucas is desperate (whoops - that was a mega spoiler… and was my second favourite scene in the film). But hey, on the upside - she got to hug Dylan before she was pushed so that’s a plus, right?

Anyway yes. So after that part the ending basically falls apart. Not counting the really great scene where Lucas emotionally (fake) talks to the police, the ending includes an almost disassociating Lucas (though not - because he’s in way more control than that) and a really really great performance from Dylan… but the writing just SUFFERS the closer we get to the denouement. And the absolute climax has a choking scene that borders on ridiculous - though YAY for bringing back the glass apple from the beginning! Way to go foreshadowing! Honestly, Dylan is LITERALLY holding the movie together at this point.

His last soliloqy might be my favourite few lines in the film. Where Lucas puts himself into the Iago role essentially. He /deserves/ success and when it was taken away from him… he was going to make Mr. Butler pay.

Of course Lucas doesn’t win. The story ends with things all tied up with a nice red bow with like 3 people dead and Lucas is in prison but it was the GETTING there that was such a huge disappointment.

The real travesty is that Dylan (in all his awesomeness) wasn’t enough to save the end of this movie. After the second rewatch it was pretty clear to me why it didn’t get wider release after it’s festival circuit - which is a shame because honestly, Dylan is a great actor and his performance is solid. He deserves another meaty role with better writing.

But the writing of the ending was just a HUGE disappointment to me. Give me the same result… just don’t give me a half-assed attempt at a choking scene - and Mr. Butler... he was just so unlikable.

ANYWAY - it was definitely worth watching (four times) and the Jandy part of me is thrilled that super pretty Dylan is back on my screen showing how freaking talented he is. The Jessica part of me was sad that something with so much huge potential had such a disappointing ending.

What were your thoughts? I'd love to hear.

[wingheadshellhead]

Hey, I've been skimming a lot of Iron Man and Avengers comics. I can't believe the amount of maiming and physical hurt Tony endures through most of them. I might be incredibly naive but are there any cute comics with Tony like "Thor: The Mighty Avenger"? Or non-IM comics where it's just adventures, Tony being a Science-Dad or something, where he doesn't get the daylights kicked out of him on the reg? Are the older comics from the 60s or 70s any kinder? Thank you!

he is……. really marvel’s favorite punching bag and whipping boy. like, there is your Standard comic book character SufferingTM that they all go through, and then there is the Tony Stark equation which goes something like:  Blame for every single thing under the sun that is related to the current universe-wide event but also multiple past (and future!) events  +  Tasteless, unwarranted jokes about his mental illness and stability that are treated as perfectly normal observations by both characters (and writers)  +  Canon narratives and dialogue explicitly seeming to support characters (and writers) who have extremely selective memories about what… actually happened… in canon  =  An average year for comic Tony Stark.

as the official professional tony stark authority on this website (the universe), nat @knightinironarmor has an extremely fantastic and comprehensive list here.  with more great additions from @blossomsinthemist here.

the 60s and 70s comics are equally heavy but i’d say they’re fairly well-balanced with feel-good tony moments? there’s definitely a lot more up + down of highs and lows rather than just a never-ending plummet to rock bottom. but again, tony is one of those characters whose stories lend best to tragedy and the maiming and physical hurt is just a regular occurence due to his physical condition (shrapnel-induced issues as well as canonical issues with heart problems + not superhuman squishy human in only a metal suit + terrible at self-care and… going to hospitals and seeking proper medical care + high susceptibility to mind control and mental manipulation in part – and this is my own personal headcanon but i think it’s pretty accurate – due to his struggles with mental illness/es). aside from being marvel’s go-to scapegoat, tony is, and will always be, your Classic Tragic Hero, in every sense of the word and archetype.

fun avengers/team-centric appearances: 

tony’s appearances in guardians of the galaxy vol. 3 are some of my favorite panels ever. 

avengers assemble vol. 2 !!!!!  not the one based on the show but the original 2012 run by deconnick, specifically #1-5, #11, #24, #25 and the annual. 

the entire marvel adventures: avengers run is also a lot of fun, super light-hearted and 0% pain or unnecessary suffering. 

gotta rep avengers: prime for the rainbows and naked horseback riding.

new avengers vol. 1 is specifically the run i am never going to shut up about every but it’s one of my favourite team-ups (iron man, captain america, spider-man, spider-woman, power man, wolverine) and it’s a Lot of fun. 

avengers vol. 3 is relatively light on the angst and it’s another great team-up

avengers vol. 4 deals with the aftermath of civil war so things are still a little tense but it’s got some great tony moments and the team being an actual team. 

specifically, if you’re looking for science dad moments:

tony’s appearances in invincible iron man vol. 3, riri’s run, have been amazing and all kinds of wonderful

all-new all-different avengers has all the dad!tony and smolvengers stuff, including tony taking the trio of kids on a ‘field trip’ to space. in all-new marvel he’s also shown up in ms. marvel #4 and #6, spider-man #6 and nova #3

one of tony’s earliest dad!tony moments was with one anya corazon in avengers assemble #24. 

i Loathe everything abt this run incl. tony’s and peter’s characterisations in it but amazing spider-man vol. 4 #15 features some nice (although ooc lol) tony and peter interactions but More Importantly mj in the iron spider suit teaming up w/ tony to kick ass.

one-off appearances in other characters’ runs: 

daredevil vol. 3 #29, aka…. the most beautiful and iconic thing sb has ever had tony stark do and it wasn’t even in his own comic oh my god. 

captain marvel vol. 1 #2 and captain marvel vol. 2 #1 bc tony and carol’s friendship is incredible ignore everything you’ve heard about them from 2017. 

she-hulk vol. 3 #1, bc like tony himself i am in Awe of jenn walters and love their dynamic to death. 

thor vol. 2 #80 and #81 where tony actually shows up in the ragnarok event! it’s cute! and there is a little tony with kids moment!

black widow vol. 4 #1 and black widow vol. 5 #12, natasha and tony’s relationship in the comics is so so so underrated and overlooked and i demand Justice bc their history goes back to literally tony’s first appearances in tales of suspense and as a result, their modern day friendship is super cute and Deep and it’s just nice when writers actually remember it exists.

[judgeanon]

A SHORT HISTORY OF FEMALE JUDGES IN JUDGE DREDD FROM 2004 TO 2007

With a sense of newfound stability and confidence brought about by finally being owned by a company that genuinely cared for its characters and stories, 2000AD carried onwards into the new millennium, with John Wagner leading Dredd into a new epic and setting him off on the road to a storyline that would redefine both character and setting forever. One particular staple of this era is the solidification of the strip as a very character-driven, procedural crime drama, building even further on the lessons learned from “The Pit” but also adding a deeper layer of examination of the strip’s protagonist and his relationships with his supporting cast.

Unfortunately, said supporting cast is still running a bit low in the female judges department, although that doesn’t really put a dent on female protagonism in general, as Dredd’s niece Vienna takes a much more center stage. And although Chief Judge Hershey likewise remains a regular fixture, it’ll still take a few more years for Wagner to introduce a new female judge with any real lasting power. In the meantime, however, a new generation of writers and artists will begin introducing several new female judges in a variety of roles, from background extras to one-thrill wonders and maybe even villains...

(Previous posts: 1979 to 1982 - 1982 to 1986 - 1986 to 1990 - 1990 to 1993 - 1993 to 1995 - 1995 to 1998 - 1998 to 2001 - 2001 to 2004. All stories written by John Wagner unless noted otherwise. Cover art by Henry Flint)

Our first stop is “Terror”, painted by Colin MacNeil and published in progs 1392-1399 (June-July 2004). A prologue to the upcoming mini-epic of the year, it heavily features a Judge Stuyvesant as part of a small task force of judges investigating the extremist democratic terrorist group Total War. Sporting her own variant on the black bobcut, Stuyvesant runs surveillance on a suspected Total War operative as he falls hopelessly in love with a citizen, acting as a secret bridge of sorts between them and Dredd, and saving the latter from having to spend hours looking at monitors.

Right after the last episode of “Terror” comes “Big Deal at Drekk City”, drawn by Cam Kennedy (progs 1400-1404, August ’04), where Dredd and a Judge Vance take a handful of cadets, including a very aptly-named Cadet Laws on a rather troubled Cursed Earth familiarization trip. Vance proves to be an experienced judge, not just in combat but also at testing the cadets’ attitude, but at the story’s climax she takes a spear to the chest and comes extremely close to dying. Luckily for her, the cadets overturn Dredd’s orders to stay back and return to save both of them, with Laws taking care of her injuries. So a decent outing, all things considered.

And so we get to the first big thrill of this post, the 12-episodes long “Total War”, drawn by Henry Flint and published in progs 1408 to 1419 (September-December ’04). This is also Chief Judge Hershey’s first city-wide crisis in office, as both “Helter Skelter” and the Aliens invasion were events mostly isolated to one or two sectors. The threat itself comes from an alleged two hundred nuclear explosives secretly placed around the city by Total War, the afore-introduced terrorist group. Their demands are simple: all judges must turn in their badges and surrender their power to the public, or they will begin detonating the bombs at regular intervals until they accept or the city has been reduced to glowing dust.

With a clear (albeit hidden) enemy and the tense, gripping pace of a good Tom Clancy novel, “Total War” has little room for character development, and most of it is taken by a subplot involving Dredd, Vienna and a genetically-altered clone. The impersonal nature of the threat also means there’s not much in the way of gunplay or fight scenes, with most of the action being a race against the clock for Dredd and a team of investigators to locate and dispose of the nukes. One thing we do get to see, however, is Hershey at her best as Chief Judge: unfettered, collected and focused, but also willing to resort to certain tactics that many of her predecessors would’ve found difficult to stomach. The most obvious case being the opening page of episode 7, where in a citywide broadcast she concedes to Total War’s demands and orders the immediate disbanding of the judges and a return to a civilian government.

Naturally, it’s all a ruse designed to buy more time as Dredd and company desperately chase every possible lead and exhaust every resource to find the bombs, and to Hershey’s credit it works like a spell. Chief of Undercover Division Judge Hollister also makes an appearance, as does Judge Stuyvesant from a few months back, and it’s actually pretty interesting to see how Flint manages to give the latter’s design a few unique qualities to differentiate her from her chief.

A few female undercover judges, an unnamed bespectacled control judge and a fairly striking PSU judge also make small appearances, and once the crisis is over we get a short and somewhat odd scene where Dredd tries to hand over his badge for racing to save an endangered Vienna from the devastation of a nuclear blast instead of protecting the citizens, but Hershey downplays his perceived dereliction of duty and reminds him that he’s still human. It’s rather strange and almost out of place at the end of a story where her stoicism reached almost robotic heights, but it does make a good job of showing the personal bond that still exists between them. And at any rate, it’s worth it to see her turn Dredd’s catchphrase against him.

By way of intermission, the special prog 2005′s “Christmas with the Blints” (Andrew Currie, January ‘05) has Dredd travelling to Brit-Cit hot on the trail of a married couple of serial killers, which nets us a couple of background female brit judges in a few panels. Then it’s back to the Big Meg for a handful of epilogue stories dealing with the fallout of Total War’s terrorist attack. “After the Bombs” (Jason Brashill, 1420-1422, idem) has yet another appearance by Stuyvesant; “Horror in Emergency Camp 4″ (D’Israeli, 1425-1428, February ‘05) has a quite staggering amount of possible background female street judges, including two named ones called Rush and Woo and a very librarian-like PSU judge; and “Missing in Action” (written by Gordon Rennie and drawn by Ian Gibson, 1429-1431, March ‘05) has not only a young Judge Herriman as a small plot point, but also a very odd female judge with dual straight shoulderpads, platinum blonde hair and a Justice Dept. branded hairband who may be a psi (Anderson, even?), although it’s hard to tell because the badge looks like a regular street judge’s.

(The one liberty Justice Dept. hasn’t crushed: artistic liberties!)

EDIT: via Facebook, Gibson himself has confirmed the judge pictured here is indeed a regular street judge. He also had a few comments about the design:

"Returning to the ‘uniform’ topic, for some reason that now escapes me, I decided to give the female judge from the Missing in action adventure a Justice department head scarf. I think it suits her and makes her less scary for the little girl they rescue.”

Speaking of Psis, a slightly redesigned Judge Karyn reappears in progs 1432-1436’s “Descent” (by Rennie and Boo Cook, April ‘05) with a new pink hairstyle and a psi-flash that leads her and Dredd into the Undercity to rescue some survivors of a hovership crash through the hole left by one of Total War’s bombs. Unfortunately, what they find there is a supernatural entity known as the Shadow King, which Dredd and Karyn had already fought in the Megazine (volume 4, issue 5). In the ensuing firefight, Dredd is possessed by the Shadow King’s spirit and turns into a hulking monstrosity, and Karyn takes her whole “Anderson wannabe” character trait to its logical conclusion by knocking Dredd out and absorbing the spirit into herself. Unfortunately, the Shadow King turns out to be too powerful for Karyn, and ends up destroying her mind and taking over her body. She’s eventually subdued by Dredd and judge reinforcements, and the creature once known as Judge Karyn is locked inside a holding cell deep inside Psi Division’s headquarters, never to escape.

It’s a move somewhat reminiscent of Garth Ennis’ treatment of Judge Perrier or Dekker: bring an obscure character back from the depths of oblivion, use them as supporting cast for a couple of years, then kill ‘em off at a later date. And it can definitely be read as a fairly manipulative attempt at getting some emotion out of disposable characters by offing recognizable names rather than complete nobodies. However, the difference between them and Karyn to me lies in Rennie’s very meta-textual idea of her chasing after Anderson’s star. Karyn, much like Janus, was created as a reserve Anderson and swiftly put aside once she returned. They both have their fans, sure, but the general consensus is that try as they might, they just couldn’t match up to the original. Which is exactly what happens to Karyn in this story. She tries to be Anderson but ultimately isn’t as strong as her, and ends up literally erased as a result. It’s still a very heroic sacrifice, as she dies saving Dredd, but it also has a deeper narrative core that was missing from pretty much every other revival of old, forgotten judges.

Rennie sticks around to write the much longer “Blood Trails” (art by Currie, progs 1440-1449, May-July ‘05), which is his own take on the Wagnerian procedural cop show-style mini-epic. As such it features a nice couple of female background judges (only one gets a name: Weisak), including a surprise cameo by Judge Morinta, the inventor med-judge from “Gulag”, although for some reason she’s now blonde instead of brunette. And of course, there’s the by now mandatory final page visit to Hershey’s office, this time to orchestrate a covert retaliatory orbital strike against Anatoli Kazan, War Marshall Kazan’s clone (also introduced in “Gulag”), for siccing a bunch of assassins on Dredd’s niece. Needless to say, it gets carried out quite swiftly.

A few weeks later, Carlos Ezquerra draws another background female judge in “Matters of Life and Death”, also by Rennie (1452, August ‘05). Wagner returns with artist Kev Walker in tow to deliver “Mandroid” (1453-1464, August-November ‘05), and although the main female character in that story is not really a judge, there are still a few proper ones scattered throughout, including a Judge Kowalski who gets a tender little background moment in what’s otherwise one of the absolute bleakest stories of the decade.

Right afterwards, we get a Tek Judge James in prog 1465′s “Everything In The Garden” (Arthur Ranson, November ‘05). Then Rennie and Flint return for a small epilogue to “Blood Trails”, as Anatoli Kazan, now hunted by his own government, arrives in Mega-City One requesting political asylum in “Change of Loyalties” (1466, November ‘05). Of course, Dredd’s having none of it, but since Anatoli could potentially be an invaluable tactical resource and a goldmine of intel, Hershey asks him to at least talk to the creep before calling for his execution. So what we’ve got here is maybe the first example of the main conflict between Dredd and Hershey, one that continues literally to this day in stories like “Harvey”.

(Also of note: this Brendan McCarthy-esque coloring job by Flint. Talk about seeing red!)

On this corner we have the immovable object: Judge Dredd, with a mindset as narrow as his helmet’s visor, never one to double-think himself or back down, apt to following both his sharp gut instincts and his Everestian mountains of experience, and usually very, very right. On the other, we have the irresistible force: Chief Judge Hershey, focused on the big picture, willing to take a chance on a potentially risky idea that could also bring about huge benefits to her city, confident that they’ll be able to handle whatever pitfalls may appear later on, but willing to listen to all parties involved. That last part is important because with any other chief this is the kind of conflict that would lead to some serious fallout, but Hershey is smarter than that, and more importantly, has seen first-hand what happens to Chiefs who don’t listen to Dredd. Her default way, then, of bridging the gap between the two forces is to plainly ask Dredd his opinion and promise to act accordingly to it, in this case, by letting him decide her vote on the council.

Overall it’s a decent way to avoid some very cliche drama, but there’s a couple of problems with it, not least of all that the sheer number of stories like this has turned it into a cliche in and of itself. However, the biggest problem, for me, is that it reduces Hershey to a bit of an echo chamber or political proxy for Dredd, allowing him to make decisions and direct the course of the city without actually leaving his position as a street judge. It lets him play in both arenas at once but doesn’t chain him to anything. From an in-story perspective it makes sense, since despite everything they still have a history together and Dredd is rarely wrong, but it’s annoying from a character standpoint because it stifles Hershey quite a bit. At its worst, she comes off as just a puppet of Dredd’s, although her directly asking for his council and seemingly agreeing with it on some level helps stave that off. And in a sneaky bit of storytelling, when the council does make its decision on Anatoli’s fate we get to see the result but we don’t get to see who actually voted for what. So whether Hershey actually went through with her promise is left, much like the voting hands, up in the air.

Rounding up 2005 we have a forensic judge at the start of “Nobody”, by Robbie Morrison and Richard Elson (1467, November). The new year then kicks off with a nice handful of background judges through “Your Beating Heart”, by Wagner and Patrick Goddard (1469-1474, January-February ‘06) and the return of Judge Lola in Ian Edginton and D’Israeli’s “Time and Again” (1475, February ‘06), which makes sense considering it’s a sequel to “Tempus Fugitive”. The same story also features an elderly, unnamed scarred female judge as head of a parole board. 

Things get a little more exciting in our next stop, with newcomer writer Simon Spurrier, artist Laurence Campbell and (awesomely-named) inker Kris Justice’s “Dominoes” (1482, April ‘06), a story that plants some seeds that would take six years to blossom.

(This is also the first time an artist draws the oversized chains holding Hershey’s badge far as I've been able to gleam, which means I owe Campbell a drink because it’s my absolute favorite detail of her uniform)

Ostensibly, the story is all about Dredd going on a diplomatic mission to Neocuba to handle a prisoner exchange with their president. Two pages in, however, we learn that his ship’s pilot is actually a fanatical black ops agent with a mission of her own: assassinating said president in such a way that it looks like either an accident or a covert sov op. Which she does beautifully and without Dredd ever realizing it. And in a final bit of very sharp writing, Spurrier all but screams she did it all on Hershey’s orders.

Overall, a fair lot to unpack for a six page story. We’ve known for a while now that Hershey favours more subtle, underhanded ways of securing Mega-City One’s interests than blunt force of arms, but something about this one feels like pushing it. Maybe it’s keeping Dredd in the dark about it, or directly targeting a foreign head of state, but if it’s not crossing a line, at the very least it’s toeing it. In a way it echoes "The Chief Judge’s Man”, but having the target be an implicitly corrupt foreign leader makes it slightly less damning than murdering rebellious but innocent MC-1 citizens. And, more importantly, Spurrier decides to end the story without confirming nor denying Hershey’s involvement in it, although at the time it seemed like a sure thing.

From a six-pager to a six-episode-er as Gordon Rennie, Ian Richardson and PJ Holden bring us “House of Pain” (1485-1490, May ‘06), and what a treat it is. Right off the bat we open with Judge Alice, a street judge driving a catch wagon on the graveyard shift, being harassed by a couple of punks. Her scene is mostly set-up for Judge Guthrie’s return, but things get a lot better as the story goes along. First, with a small guest appearance by Wally Chief Judge Hollister going undercover with two others as kneepad models in a pretty funny, albeit pretty skeevy scene; then with Judge Corson, a bomb defusal specialist tek who first helps Dredd deal with a perp’s suicide box implant and later with the main villain’s offshore platform’s self-destruct; and there’s still enough space for Hershey to deliver a short lesson on law economics:

By contrast, “Jumped”, by John Smith and Simon Fraser (1491-1494, June ‘06), only has a lone unhelmeted female judge in a panel, although she is seen with a similarly unhelmeted male judge, so maybe all those fan letters about lady judges being allergic to helmets are finally having an effect. “Neoweirdies”, by Simon Spurrier and Paul Marshall, (1496-1498, July ‘06) has a couple of background sightings but also co-stars a Judge Garris as part of a team investigating murders in a pretentious weirdos competition, including a cheeky little panel of her checking out a naked contestant. Avert your eyes, lest the SJS pluck ‘em out. Spurrier also writes the Pete Doherty-drawn “Versus” (1499, August ‘06), a mostly silent tale featuring a female control judge.

Now we reach what’s probably the most important and certainly the longest story of the decade: “Origins”, by Wagner and Ezquerra (progs 1505 to 1535 -with interludes- September ‘06 to May ‘07). The premise is a heavy one: Justice Department receives a note demanding a ransom for the corpse of Judge Fargo, creator of the judge system and father of justice. With the note is a tissue sample that was taken from a living organism, so if it is indeed Fargo, he’s also alive. Chief Judge Hershey quickly sends Dredd and a team of hand-picked judges into the Cursed Earth with one billion credits and a wagon to follow the trail of the kidnappers. The team includes two female judges: the returning Judge Sanchez from “Incubus” and a Judge Waters. Of the two, Waters is definitely the most impressive, a hardened street judge who acts as Dredd’s second in command early on, leading a defensive action against an army of Mad Max extras with a very calm, matter-of-fact badass attitude that feels quite refreshing after years of more troubled, insecure judges. It also helps that Ezquerra draws her as noticeably older than Sanchez, so it’s clear from the get-go that Waters is a veteran. And near the end of the story, Waters gets another chance to shine as she orchestrates and executes the rescue of Dredd and Fargo from the renegade army of the damned. Overall, she proves herself more than worthy of being in a Brian Bolland cover.

Of course, as the name suggests, “Origins” is mostly concerned with showing the birth of the Justice Department and the events leading to Dredd’s creation, so there’s not much else there that concerns this post, save for one small but crucial page: when the young Fargo is outlining his plans for the creation of a corps of judges armed with the power to dispense instant justice to the United States senate, he specifically mentions the need for choosing “good men and women.” And on the same page we get a glimpse of an early class of judge cadets in training which also includes a couple of women. So here is confirmation that from day one the judges counted several women in their ranks, although admittedly by now this probably wasn’t terribly in doubt.

The final episode also has a predictable appearance by Hershey, who gets the unexpected privilege of being the second to last person to talk to Fargo before he finally expires. The last one, naturally, is Dredd himself, although both of them lie through their teeth about what his final words to each other were. More on that later.

Now, about those interludes. Prog 1521′s “The Sexmek Slasher” (January ‘07) by Wagner and Vince Locke features a Judge Wyler in a supporting role. And Gordon Rennie teams-up with Ian Gibson to bring us “Judgement” (1523-1528, February-March ‘07), a supernatural revenge story guest-starring Judge Anderson in one of her rare not-Grant/Wagner-scripted appearances.

(Also featuring the return of Teddy Dredd!)

The story is a tightly-written tale about a ghost judge murdering members of a crime cartel known for using psykers to mask their activities. The revenant also murders a judge but spares his partner, a Judge Bunns (could it be the same Bunns from 1983′s “Rumble in the Jungle”?), demonstrating some kind of psychic ability to tell the guilty from the innocent, although how innocent a Mega-City One judge can really be is anyone’s guess. Dredd and Anderson’s investigation reveals that the ghost is actually the enraged soul of a long-dead judge, killed by Rico Dredd before he was sent to Titan. But it’s Anderson who connects the final dot and reaches the real source of the apparition: Judge Edek, a veteran psi-judge ambushed and all but murdered by the aforementioned cartel. Crippled beyond repair and frozen in cryo-stasis in the hopes that some day technology would advance enough to heal her, some part of Edek’s consciousness remained, well, conscious, and reached out in anger to another betrayed judge in order to turn them into a revenant and get her revenge. Ultimately, Anderson reaches Edek’s chamber after fighting her way through a gorgeously drawn horde of ectoplasmic monsters and pulls the plug, while Dredd handles what remains of Judgement on his own.

Overall, “Judgement” is a very strong showing for Anderson and a great psychic/supernatural twist on the old “judge turned vigilante” premise of stories like “The Executioner” or “Raider.” Also on display is Gibson’s slight redesign of the psi judge uniform, as Anderson sports twin straight shoulderpads all the way through. According to Gibson himself, the pads helped him make her more “dynamic.” He also had a spot of trouble rendering Anderson’s new shorter haircut, first shown in Alan Grant and Arthur Ranson’s ongoing Psi Division strip in the Megazine. In his own words:

"Then, when I was back doing a Dredd for 2000ad, on a story called ‘Judgement’ ( I think ), Andy was again in the script. But someone had cut off all her lovely flowing blonde tresses, for reasons of their own. So I had to render her thus.”

Rounding up this post we have a trio of short done-in-ones: “Fifty-Year Man” (Wagner and Patrick Goddard, prog 1536, May ‘07) has a female judge, perhaps a public relations administrator, as head of a team putting together a retrospective of Dredd’s fifty years on the streets, with some predictably disastrous results. In a similar vein, a journalist is arrested by a Judge Socks (maybe, her badge is hard to read) after going insane trying to write a biography of Dredd in “The Biographer”, Rob Williams’ first appearance in this project (with Boo Cook, 1537, idem). And we end in a note of tragedy with “The Incident”, by Robbie Morrison and Richard Elson (1538, idem). The story kicks off when undercover Judge Ferrara has her cover blown and is kidnapped by assassins who use a nano-virus to destroy the high tech implant wire on her brain that she’d being using to spy on their boss. Unfortunately for her, both PSU and Dredd are too slow to reach her, and the virus erases her mind. One seriously bleak story, although we do get to see Elson draw some seriously unique uniforms for the Control judges:

In our next episode: the hardest part to write for me. Also, the most important female judge of the new millennium has her prog debut.

[hellyeahsupermanandwonderwoman]

To answer this I needed to put this together. Thank you for your attempt to try to explain away Superman Rebirth/Reborn. No disrespect to you but I find myself not really prepared to swallow something so convoluted if this is what DC needed to do to pimp one couple over all others.

IMO this is actually a high handed attempt by DC to relaunch AGAIN to compete with Marvel to get #1s in and scrape back some market share. They could not reboot so soon but hey why not backpedal?

DC rebooted in 2011. They advertised it to everyone as a new verse.  A whole new continuity. Old canon having had their time had said their goodbyes. As they should. They had 25 plus years after all. Doesn't a new generation deserve a Superman or Wonder Woman to grow with? You would think, right?

They rebooted and got good talent. They tooted their horn. They got market share. They got new readers. Then by the time DCYOU hit, they begun to mismanage their line and fell behind Marvel. Then they suddenly pretended ...they never meant to reboot...it w as just a scheme of the Watchmen or as you conjecture perhaps Superboy Prime...and an excuse to drag back in pre new 52 to appease the loud hating fans who wanted everything to stay the same. Fans who hated on the new 52 Superman from day one. Fans who refused to buy comics I might add.

And then it seemed pre ne 52 Superman was back. He and Lois and son survived their world dying and came to live on new 52 earth as “refugees”. A guy, if you liked and cared for HIM, had HIS own origins. And they were very different to new 52. It is no biggie to have 2 Supermen in one verse. It happened before with the KC one in the JSA. But he played happy family for 10 years. Never stepped up. They killed new 52 and made his friends and lover mourn him. Then made older guy take his place. Then they made the son meet Damien and blah blah.  

Then we had a full 180. Suddenly they the same man! They were split! The power of Love reunited them. And new 52 haters rejoiced because the guy they hated for his youth, his idealism, his pro activeness,his suit, his powerful girlfriend, they loved. Cuz you know, nothing defines a man than who he bangs. Or the one human he bangs.

Five effing years of fans lives wasted on comics that were a LIE. Comics that deceived us into thinking it was a new verse. Only to have them come in 1 fell swoop to pimp how important one couple is to the universe and  how real their love is never mind they had no reason for us to give a damn when they were younger in the new 52. I’d faster believe he’d love new 52 Lana than new 52 Lois. She never deserved new 52 Superman’s love. Unless love is pining to be noticed by a woman who was blind to you and throwing the woman  who loved you for you and put her life on the line for you many times under the bus. The reality is, it was 5 years of Diana we had in the narrative. Five years of lies if one is to swallow the bull from Dan Jurgens and Greg Rucka, propped by master mind Geoff Johns.  DC must think we are assholes, I guess. 

If Lois and Clark are so great and such true love why did they deceive so many readers? Why the convoluted bull that changes like the wind and ultimately doesn’t amount to squat nor matter because once they forcibly merged them...everything from Convergence to last month never happened.  You’re not getting pre new 52 Superman back but a getting a whole new origin and events plucked from the past to suit Jurgens. Notice his 90ties stuff will be there, other peoples dumped. He hated the new 52 but will poach from it. Superman will be a great old mish mash. Superboy Prime? Dr Manhattan? Really, Johns?  Only a lazy writer could try to dilute a great story  like Watchmen or try to pretend this as what he planned all along.

Where are the stakes in these stories if nothing was real? Where is the consequence? Unless one is  a blind rabid clois shipper this is plot is full of holes. Holes they can’t cover so they wave their wands to make it all go poof. Events should matter. The journey should be the most important part of the destination. Not you jump from A to Z with no rhyme or reason other than to sound self important. 

The explanation is so confusing and so overly messed up and it’s goal was to elevate Lois and Clark? Like really? Without compromise? So no matter who, when,   what and how ? DC has to lump these 2 together and if you don’t buy it or care...then you’re a fake fan, I guess? I mean Jurgens did say so.

Sorry, I can’t begin to even say how stupid this whole thing is.

Good story telling is fairly simple. It’s about consistency, a good plot, good development and a meaningful payoff. Not jumping the shark to pander to one fandom.

Lois and Clark is not love triumphing. It’s about trying to dictate to fans what they should believe. It is about manipulating a story so badly they are willing to dump on good origins and history. It all feels very self masturbatory. 

Love. It’s a word that is often bandied about. But it means different things to people. 

Let me say, in many books I read Diana and Clark, be they friends or lovers their love has been a love that never preened nor pimped itself. It was always selfless and sacrificing and mostly they stayed true to themselves. It was never about his or her comfort. They never stood by and allowed shit to happen to other people because they saw themselves as some superior symbol that defines the universe. They did their duty by each other and the earth.

And before people try to say Injustice. That guy’s love for his  wife was so dependent it is unhealthy. If you love someone, they should make you a better man.No matter what. A testament to their love is you being the best you can be especially in the face of adversity and loss. Superman is not the only man that loses a family in the DCU. Martian Manhunter and his cousin Kara lost more and they don’t become tyrants. So did being with Lois really help him? Don’t dump his douchebag behavior on the woman. Tom Taylor tries to do that just to pimp clois again. So lazy. 

Superman has tried to change the course of the earth/time to bring Lois back never caring about the consequence to history, people etc. He was willing to give it all up to have sex with her. Reeve movies.

He was willing to muscle in on a good decent man who was a father to his child. Superman Returns.

He drops everything to save Lois, a woman he knows all of 2 yrs but can’t save his own mother.Leaves Wonder Woman in the lurch in a deadly battle to go save Lois. Kills a man for her in Africa and Lois found it quite cute. Fact Jimmy Olsen getting shot in the face seemed to be like an aphrodisiac  

He was willing to kill for Lois if anyone harms her but Diana? Willing to condemn and judge her for Max Lord because she tried to save him and Lois and everyone's life from him!

He stands by and allows the shit to hit the fan just to play happy family. He’s not unhappy , disillusioned, or angry. He just has to be told the obvious to step up and be a hero.

Now they not only kill one but 2 timelines so they could pet themselves on the back on how great they are. 

My definition of love must surely be different. 

Clois can keep their love. I don’t grudge them a place in the multiverse. Reality is they have many places. Clark and Diana only had one in canon, now they can’t even have that. It was stolen. If clois has to be a law in the multiverse then I am glad to be illegal. Love is not what you say but what you do. Clark and Diana embodied this. No imp acting the writers’ mouthpiece is going to dictate to me.

[harrisonkitteridge-blog]

The Lying Detective: I’m Actively Hate-watching Now

SPOILERS FOLLOW

I didn’t like the first episode of the new season of Sherlock, but I sincerely hoped having the risible nonsense of the Mary Watson/AGRA storyline tied up would free things up a bit. I think the Culverton Smith case might have delivered, but they went all in on the “I’m so beset by grief I’m hallucinating my dead spouse” gambit. Really? In what we keep being told is “clever” television? Grief is about absence, about a space that can’t be filled, about feeling trapped and asphyxiated by it. But we were never actually shown Mary and John’s relationship, so all the emotional heavy lifting is being done retroactively, and it’s heavy-handed, saccharine, out-of-character claptrap. John being with Rosie, struggling to parent alone would have had me in floods, but Moftiss always chooses exposition when there isn’t a gun being pulled or a joke being cracked. There is something about genuine, non-sensational emotion that seems to make them uncomfortable; it always has to be book-ended by effacing humour. As much as I dislike the “I see dead people” shortcut to exploring grief, I understand that it probably worked for most of the viewing audience, but Moftiss could have at least allowed some of those moments sink in. They just had to cut off the opening scene in the therapist’s office with police sirens and helicopters in service to a gag about Sherlock’s penchant for grand entrances.

Twists>Action>Jokes>>>>>>>>Characters.

The “Culverton Smith is a serial killer case” was serviceable (in spite of the horrible pun they worked in), and I liked Toby Jones’s performance, but they oversold him as a villain, and it didn’t really live up to the hype. There was too much extemporizing – all that soliloquizing in the boardroom had me staring off into space after a while. Giving Toby Jones all the scenery in Greater London to chew isn’t the same as making his character “evil”. There being no victims was a huge omission, in my opinion. You have to see what they’ve done, whom they’ve hurt or none of it really matters. Them erasing all of Smith’s victims sits really poorly with me, and it goes back to the heart of my problem with the direction of the show – the people don’t matter. Not really. Nevertheless, the story held my interest, and (before the twist at the end) I actually quite liked Sherlock’s interaction with Culverton’s “daughter” (even though it was a bit drawn out).

The middle episode of each season tends to be the weakest, and The Lying Detective was definitely one of the better offerings, and I loved Mrs. Hudson deducing Sherlock, her recognising that he’s not a “cold reasoning machine”. So why am I actively hate-watching?

That third act…

Gurl…

Where to begin?

“I killed his wife.”

No you didn’t, Sherlock. Stop making everything about you. Don’t get me wrong, I understand the potential source of the guilt – he thinks he should have seen it coming and is gutted that he didn’t. That feeling that there’s something incongruous about his reaction stems from Moftiss’s story being driven solely by plot. The entire premise of The Lying Detective is that, even off his head on drugs, Sherlock can predict other people’s behaviour a fortnight out. So why the Norbury deduction, then? You didn’t have to be a genius to see that de-escalation was the only play. So, is Moftiss’s Sherlock clever or isn’t he? It depends on what direction they want to take the plot. They play up his intellect for style when it suits them and ignore it when it gets in the way of having a trigger pulled. If he’d given it all he had, used the full power of his mind and still failed, Mary had still died, that twinge of the ego and John’s irrational feeling of betrayal would have been more warranted. All the stubbled, Byronic theatrics would have been earned. He would have been replaying everything in his mind to see what he missed. But he didn’t miss anything. He just acted like a not very clever arrogant cock.

I’ve made it pretty clear that I think the Mary Watson/AGRA storyline was a steaming pile. I didn’t like or believe her character. The character is head-spinningly inconsistent because they keep shoving her around in the plot and not reconciling the conflicts that arise. Nevertheless, I’m sickened by how ill-used she’s been. If The Six Thatchers didn’t already demonstrate it, Mary’s story was all in service to ramping up the man-emo quotient – to get John and Sherlock to gnash their teeth and rend their garments. The loving spouse, smiling beatifically and giving emotional advice from beyond the veil – that’s where they decided to take the BAMF assassin. They can take that nonsense straight back to the vomitorium where they sourced it. But that’s not really my biggest problem with the narrative.

“The only way to save John is to make him save you.”

As, Moftiss has written it, the entire construct of the Sherlock-John-Mary relationship is organised around John being an object – there to be manipulated. Mary couldn’t advise Sherlock to treat John like an adult and be patient and do the unsexy, heavy lifting of being a best mate. That would mean treating John like a person, not a series of buttons to push. Do you know what works with most non-personality disordered people who have “trust issues”? Persistence. But that’s not flashy enough, though, is it? Telling a drug addict who has a history of reckless behaviour that might reasonably be classified as self-harm to put himself in terrible danger to spur John into action is something a psychopath would suggest. That is Moftiss’s vision of the loving spouse whose spectre is haunting John. Except I honestly don’t think they even see the deeply disturbed psychology they’ve conjured. In their minds, Mary has been completely rehabilitated, and her egging Sherlock into self-harm is noble, just like shooting and nearly killing him somehow was. Are mature adults who’ve actually been in relationships or who’ve just interacted with other human beings for any length of time really meant to be taking any of this seriously? And then there’s the notion that someone as warped as Mary had much to teach John about being a good man – that her vision of him was somehow superior to what he already is. John Watson isn’t perfect, but this idea that he needed Mary to improve him and get him up to scratch is not only unsupported by everything that’s come before but relies on the grotesque stereotype that every man is a bumbling dumb fuck who needs a “good woman” to straighten him out. Disgusting. Moftiss have constructed a reality in which a person who is willing to shoot and kill people to hide her past ill deeds has a superior moral compass to someone who inappropriately texted a woman he met on a bus. All the brutal violence Mary did to the eponymous hero of the show is inconsequential, but John flirting via text is of great importance. It’s no wonder the story is careening out of control. The things that should matter don’t.

The return of Irene Adler.

A few months ago, in an Instagram post, I theorised that Sherlolly was the ship Moftiss would most likely go for (there was never going to be Johnlock). I knew an attractive woman was always going to be their play, so, barring a newcomer, I assumed it would be Molly. Irene Adler would be next in line. Sherlolly just seemed like the likeliest outcome given Molly helping Sherlock fake his death and the way she came out of her shell and started calling him on his bullshit. But I underestimated just how much Moftiss esteem flash over substance. I do not like the handling of Irene Adler in any of the recent incarnations of Sherlock Holmes and will continue to argue until there is no breath left in me that: Irene Adler is not Delilah to Sherlock Holmes’s Samson! In the original Arthur Conan Doyle story, A Scandal in Bohemia, she beats him while keeping all of her clothes on and by outstrategising him, not by distracting him and drugging him. Not-quite-dead Mary cackling, “I bet you saved her! The posh boy loves the dominatrix!” made me want to rage puke. The whole point of Irene Adler, what makes her “The Woman”, is that she doesn’t need anyone, least of all Sherlock Holmes to White Knight for her. She handles her business better than he ever could.

Moving on.

I can’t believe they actually had a middle-aged adult tell another middle-aged adult: “romantic entanglement would complete you as a human being.“ Our relationships (romantic and otherwise) should enrich and improve our lives, but this notion that we’re all hobbled and shambling through life and need to be repaired by our “soulmates” has got to stop. It’s why so many people can’t have healthy romantic relationships grounded in reality – they’ve set their significant others (and themselves) unmeetable, fairy tale standards, and their disappointment and ensuing resentment are foregone conclusions.

Take it all straight back to the vomitorium.

Miss me?

No, Jim. I don’t. Whenever a show circles back to the vanquished supervillain, Fonzie is prepping his water skis.

The secret brother is really a secret sister whose name is The East Wind, and she’s completely unhinged and may be Moriarty or is at least connected to him, and there’s some weird psychosexual element between her and her brother who doesn’t seem to know what she looks like, and…

GTFOH AND GTFOH FOREVER!

Once Mary Watson said “It’s a skip code”, a preposterous story became virtually inevitable, so I’m not surprised Sherlock has descended into near pantomime. The real reason I’m pre-emptively upset about the finale is because I know Eurus’s mental illness will be treated solely as a plot driver. Moftiss will only scratch the surface of the pain, the fear, the feelings of failure, the societally enforced shame, the hopelessness that a family goes through when one of them is diagnosed with a mental illness serious enough to require long-term institutionalisation. Really think about what it means to be related to someone who is criminally insane and how much good drama lives there. There will be helicopters and gunfights and fisticuffs, maybe even abseiling, in the finale, but virtually no real examination of the damage done by the emotional claymore mine that went off, kept going off and is still going off in the Holmes family after Eurus was diagnosed. And Eurus herself? Maybe they’ll show her as a child strangling a cat or hurting Redbeard (if they even pay her that much attention outside of letting her gorge herself on the scenery), but she’ll be a caricature, a monster with no inner life. How do I know they’ll do this? Because they spent this entire episode using visual and auditory hallucinations – signs of extreme mental disturbance and distress that require urgent psychiatric intervention – as shorthand for “I’m grieving the death of my spouse”. They couldn’t show John alone, struggling with a newborn, suffering through the feelings of abandonment and intense isolation that underpin grief because it’s too ordinary.

Everyone has been pointing out all the call-backs to previous episodes and what they mean. Here’s my go at it: I predict that John’s grief and psychiatric issues are now magically fixed, just like his limp and his PTSD. Moftiss told us from the very beginning that Sherlock was shallow and emotionally incoherent. But:

I’ll hate-watch the finale just for the sake of completion and as source material for the inevitable rant.

Moftiss…

Ugh…

Thank goodness for the palate cleanser of Elementary…

[nellie-elizabeth]

Arrow: You Have Saved This City (7x22)

I do not feel satisfied with this episode. I don't even feel kind of okay with it. I think it was bad. And I'm bummed out about that.

Cons:

Let's start with... well, honestly I don't even really know where to start. The thing is, nothing about this season, or this particular conflict with the Ninth Circle, feels bigger or more scary than any of the other threats we've faced over the years. So the idea that this time, Felicity and Oliver are going to go live in a safe house "until the situation has resolved itself," just doesn't make any narrative sense. Dante was a weak villain all season. The Ninth Circle has no particularly compelling attributes. And Emiko?

So... she just dies? She was firmly anti-Oliver all season, and nothing Oliver did could change her mind. Then, at the last second, she is sort of redeemed. How? Well, the Ninth Circle turns on her, and she and Oliver end up fighting together against them. She dies in the fight. This is so narratively unsatisfying. It didn't feel like Emiko had actually made a choice to be a good person. It felt like her bad guy buddies had decided they were done with her, so she basically had no other option. There was so much buildup with this character, and then in the end she dies, warning Oliver as she does that the Ninth Circle will be coming after Felicity and the baby. But why? If the Ninth Circle has cut ties with Emiko, why would they continue her specific vendetta to hurt Oliver? And Rene. Rene had so much of a vested interest in Emiko, and that just went nowhere.

Laurel and Curtis both turned up so that the whole gang could be back together, but it felt super pointless and lackluster. Curtis and Felicity had a cute moment where Curtis tells her he's about to propose to his boyfriend... but Curtis and Rene didn't even talk to each other, and I did not understand how Curtis was helpful at all in the mission. Felicity was still in the bunker as Overwatch, and Curtis didn't suit up, so he was just kind of... there. Same thing with Laurel. What did she contribute that Dinah wasn't already doing?

Ben Turner is so not a character in my mind that I actually didn't remember who he was when he first turned up. I guess he's Connor's father? So... okay then? What a weird person to include here at the end.

And then we've got the flash-forwards. Still no answer as to what exactly happened to several important missing people in the twenty year interim. Thea? Diggle? Can we assume dead? I don't know how to feel about that. All season, I thought we were going to get to a point where we discovered that the flash-forwards were a splinter universe or something. I thought the goal was going to be to prevent this horrible dark future where Rene turns evil, Felicity and Mia are isolated, Felicity and Oliver never get custody of William, and Oliver never gets to raise his daughter. But now, it appears that... yeah. That's what happens.

Here's another thing - this show tries to manipulate you into watching the rest of the shows in the shared universe. Apparently Oliver made some deal to protect the multi-verse, but as someone who only watches Arrow and doesn't bother with Flash or any of the cross-over events, I had no idea that was a thing. So, the supposed end of Oliver's arc on this show is dependent on something that happened on a totally different show, with a conflict that has nothing to do with what we've been concerned with all season. How lame!

And what a dissatisfying end for Oliver and Felicity. Oliver's whole arc has been about family and legacy, and now, even if Oliver and Felicity find each other again, we know Oliver is going to die, and we know that Ollie didn't ever get to raise his children. That's... that's way too depressing. The narrative should have given him more than that, honestly.

The flash-forward had an end to the conflict just as lack-luster as the one with the Ninth Circle. Connor helps save the day, Mia is a bad-ass and helps blow up the wall, Felicity learns to trust that her kids can protect themselves... and it looks like the Glades and Star City are reunited once more, as the wall separating them gets blown up. Dinah, Rene, Felicity, and Roy are going to take the fall for what happened, to allow the kids - Mia, William, Connor, and Zoe, to take over and continue on the Canaries, etc. That's... great? I guess? But the future is still an apocalyptic shit-show, which undermines Oliver's whole "save this city" credo, doesn't it? Frustrating.

Pros:

The only things about this finale that I truly loved were the performances. The power of emotions coming from Oliver, John, and Felicity in particular was so spectacular that I didn't really mind that the scenarios underpinning these moments were annoying and lackluster.

We all knew this would be Felicity's last episode as a regular cast member, but the realization that it would be Oliver's as well hit me slowly, and definitely made me feel some feelings. Oliver's speech to Felicity as they said goodbye, the way he was choking back his tears... unf. Stephen Amell did such a great job. Also, even though it was short lived, the montage of Felicity and Oliver being together, a happy little family with Mia, making plans to get William back... that was all very sweet and gave us a chance to appreciate the power of their love.

We get a great moment towards the end where Team Arrow all puts their arms around each other and contemplates the future. Oliver's legacy is his team. That's a cute idea. But after that, we get just the Original Team Arrow - Felicity, John, and Oliver. It's adorable. It's weepy. It's sentimental. And despite all of my frustrations with this finale, I did feel the power of that. I hope we can see them all together one last time in Season Eight, but if this is the final send-off, at least they lingered on it, and made me feel the power of all that history.

So. Yeah. That's all I can say at this point. I feel bad, I wanted to like this more. All season I've been saying that I was worried about a satisfying resolution to all of this stuff, and unfortunately I don't feel like we really got it here. There were just too many things that felt lackluster and disappointing, and that's a real bummer for such an important season finale. I feel like Season Eight this fall will be more like an epilogue than anything else. I'll be tuning in for sure, but I'm not much looking forward to it.

5/10

[philippmichelreichold]

#review #scifi Space Dreadnoughts by Dave Drake, et al

#review #scifi Space Dreadnoughts by Dave Drake, et al

Space Dreadnoughts is a Military Science Fiction anthology by David Drake, Martin H Greenberg and Charles G Waugh. The contents in order of appearance are:

•"Introduction: A quick Look at Battle Fleets" by David Drake

•"The Only Thing We Learn" by Cyril M. Kornbluth

•"C-Chute" by Isaac Asimov

•"Allamagoosa" by Eric Frank Russell (won the Hugo Award for best short story in 1955)

•"A Question of Courage" by J. F. Bone

•"Superiority" by Arthur C. Clarke

•"Hindsight" by Jack Williamson

•"The Last Battalion" by David Drake

•"Shadow on the Stars" by Algis Budrys

•"Time Lag" by Poul Anderson

The first Military Sci Fi story I remember is the Star Trek TOS episode "Balance of Terror," in which Enterprise duels with a Romulan interloper. The military conflict was setting to other conflicts between the crew, the story was full of suspense, and actual battle was a small part of the story. And so it is here.

The book's title is a misnomer. The back cover blurb is misleading-- "Massive and arrogant, they patrol the final war zone-- deep space. All great battleships before them-- . . . are mere toys in comparison." It goes on about "bristling artillery" and "battalions of soldiers." I expected fleet actions involving capital ships. Tactics. Maneuvers. Gunplay. While there are fleet actions and even battleships in some of these stories, they are mere backdrops on a stage where people play out the stories. Truly good Science Fiction involves people, and in all these stories, the people overshadow the military settings that serve only to bring out the characters and whatever lessons there are to be learned from them. All of these stories are well worth reading.

"Introduction: A quick Look at Battle Fleets"

Mr Drake's introduction is a wonderful retrospective about the history of the Dreadnought battleships with a mention of two 1950's Astounding essays on the armaments of spaceships-- one by Willy Ley, the other by Malcolm Jameson. If one is going to write stories about ship-to-ship combat, the introduction is a good starting point. But only a starting point. One should definitely read Mahan, and consider the lessons of Taranto and Pearl Harbor. And the US Navy's Harpoon's and Tomahawk's are wonderful arguments in favor of missles over guns. One should also consider the time honored techniques of ramming and boarding actions.

Perhaps the question of guns vs missles is mooted today. Todays real world warships employ both-- including the Iowa class heavy battleships brought out of retirement and refurbished for President Reagan's naval buildup of the 1980's. The arms race has continued in Sci-Fi beyond what could be imagined with a knowledge of 1950's physics. The Ley and Jameson essays were written before fighters raked Formoria, before rail guns, and CTD imploders, before GRASER's, X-ray LASER's and phaser banks, before the Moties bombarded Mote Prime with asteroids, and before Captain Sheridan laid a gigaton on Z'ha'dum.

"The Only Thing We Learn"

Kornbluth tells a cautionary tale of faded Imperial glory. The barbarians at the gates will one day have descendants that are as decadent and prissy as the effete and ineffectual empire they deposed and replaced. History blurs and magnifies the epic tales of glory. The details are lost. The character is lost. One day a fresh wave of barbarians sweeps aside succcessors that their ancestors would be ashamed to acknowledge. The reader may decide what relationship if any there is between this story and the quote from Friedrich Hegel. A fun story despite the dire consequences for the past and future losers. In  his column, "Rereading Kornbluth", Robert Silverberg calls The Only Thing We Learn, "a subtle, oblique, elliptical, sardonic piece of work."

"C-Chute"

Dr. Asimov wrote this story in 1951. It is a psychodrama set aboard a passenger ship taken as a prize by a race of chlorine breathers in Earth's first intersteller war. Each of the passengers is sketched by Asimov to reveal their several flaws of personality, physicality or character. Each has reasons why he should not exit the cabin via the C-chute, EVA, and enter and retake the control room from outside the ship. The reason for the dubious hero to take the heroic action required to retake the ship is one unlikey to appear in the work of any author but Dr. Asimov.

"Allamagoosa"

This story won the 1955 Hugo for best short story. It's a farcical look at officious bureaucracy of the greatest gravity. It's sort of a shaggy dog story, wink, wink. This story in and of itself is worth buying the book for. The build up and so obvious in hindsight ending is fresh enough to be as enjoyable today as it was then.

"A Question of Courage"

Sometimes flair and heedless risk taking can be mistaken for true personal courage. When the genuine article appears, there's no mistaking it. Bone craftliy deveops his characters and sets the reader up for the old maidish Captain "Cautious Charley" Chase of Lachesis to reveal his true nature. It is available from Project Gutenberg.

"Superiority"

Sir Arthur requires no introduction for this story, a reductio ad absurdum about the principle of Illusory Superiority. Technology and bedazzlment with the latest, most theoretically wonderful advances are no substitutes for common sense and sound military doctrine. Perhaps this should serve as a cautionary tale at a time when Iraqi insurgents hack into our drones. According to Wikipedia, this gem was required reading at West Point. The reader easily empathizes with the narrator and his plight, revealed at the end.

"Hindsight"

Jack Williamson has won both the Nebula and the Hugo Awards, and had a career that spanned about seventy years. This story involves temporal mechanics and love, oppression and liberation, and meeting engagements. Incidentally, the guns employed by the Astrach's fleet are of 20-inch caliber and fire four salvos per second. It's a tightly written story, though I think the ending is a little drippy.

"The Last Battalion"

Imagine that Hitler did not die in a bunker in Berlin, but escaped via U-Boat to a secret Waffen-SS base in New Swabia. There German scientists built flying saucers from which they reached the moon to to mine aluminum and build more flying saucers. Now imagine them getting into a war with aliens. With things not looking so good, they kidnap a US Senator to let him know what is going on, intending to drag the US into the conflict. Before they can get where they're going with the Senator, the aliens lay a nuke on their Antartic base. They drop the Senator off to find his own way home. He asks them what they will do. Their colonel replies, we are SS-- we will fight.

"Shadow on the Stars"

Budrys's Farlans are felinoid aliens who at first blush look like humans in cat suits. But they are, on a closer look, "raving paranoid quote." The paranoia is pathological and eventually fatal for Farla-- any military leader with sufficient ability to be effective cannot be trusted by Farla's rulers, and will be killed at the earliest sign of that fatal disease, military competence. The story is a retrospective, the central character telling how he and Farla came to be in their present straits. It is too late for him to convey the warning against trusting Earth, and to late to avoid the inevitable dissolution of Farla.

I have a problem accepting the plot device Budrys uses to set up the narrative, but otherwise the story is interesting and fun to read. The prose is a bit over decourous and affected, but that brings out the effeteness and pretentiousness of the Farlan culture. At the start, the Farlans are hard-pressed by a barabarian culture, the Vilk, and need a strong, capable leader to drive them back. OF course the strong, capable leaders keep their heads down so has not to find themselves assassinated by the Ministry of Preparedness-- and then comes L'Miranid. A previously unknown reservist, he quickly dominates the Fleet and whips them into shape. Victory follows victory until the Vilk host is driven back, their subject planets pounded to rubble, and a Farlan imposed king seated upon their throne.

The real story action is not fleet engatgements and daring raids, though. The story is related by Henlo, one of those capable leaders who has balanced command of a capital ship wtih avoiding notice by the governmental hunters down of competence. He starts the story as having a clear understanding of Farla's problems and the steps necessary to remedy them, but can't afford to be noticed. He becomes L'Mararind's aid, admirer, vice-admiral, intended assasin and successor, and finally, his unwilling co-conspirator and successor. Unwilling to be assasinated himself, he seizes control of the Farlan government. By this time, the sad (for Farla) truth is known to him, but (I love Latin quotes.) "alea jacta est." This is a fine little story with a lovely twist toward the end.

"Time Lag"

Poul Anderson has won both the Hugo and Nebula Awards. Time Lag is a study in contrasts-- evil, greedy invaders against noble, selfless defenders. Chertkoi is a heavily overpopulated industrial planet, drowning in pollution and resource starved. Vaynamo is pristine, with a population sustainable through resource management. Vayanmo is never the less technologically advanced, with the technology's goal as preservation rather than exploitation. Expolitation is the name of Chertkoi's game. It's people conquer other worlds to fuel the industrial fires that smother their world under a cloud of pollution.

The archetype of the Chertoi is the Admiral commanding the invasion fleet. He is matched against the story's view point character, Elva. Elva is the widow of a Vayanmoan noble and prisoner of the Admiral. He is gross, vulgar and uncouth. She is pretty, cultured and well-mannered. He is a love struck boor, hopelessly smitten by her. She subtly endures his presence to manipulate him so that she an return herself and the other captives to Vayanmo in a portrayal that is believable and sympathetic. The invasion is a leveraged takeover in three stages-- a scouting raid, a strategic strike to destroy what little industry the Vayanmo posses, and a full-scale invasion. The title relativistic time lag (fifteen years) gives the Chertkoi time to build their invasion fleet and the Vaynamo time to prepare their reception.

Image cover art under fair use for the review. Contact publisher for reuse.

My text creative commons 4.0