[Half watching "The Great British Baking Show on PBS" which I find sort of comforting, even though I can't eat anything that they make. I can't eat grains, the gluten causes severe IBS due to an autoimmune disease. Gluten basically tears my intestines apart and won't digest. Also, I ended up with a yeast build up which poked holes in my instestines, and made me ill (aka leaky gut). I'm better now. But I tend to stay away from yeast. Coconut Flour though works in a pinch -- some day I need to figure out how to make coconut flour bread. As a result, I'm not overly impressed by baking. ]
Oh, not a bad article on
Do Novelists Have to Be Politically Correct?.
This is actually a topic that has resulted in some rather heated debates on livejournal in the past. My own view is of course not. I don't believe art should cater to people or be safe. The artist should be permitted, within reason of course, to speak his or her mind. To express themselves. Where I draw the line is the deliberate and harmful exploitation of others for your own personal gain. If your expression destroys someone else's life than yes, it's probably good idea not to do it. (Example - Child pornography. Video Games depicting various ways to rape women and get away with it - (and yes, this exists, sorry to say, and yes, I wish I didn't know about it too), using someone else to create the art - ie at their expense. Defamation and libel - exposing someone else's life without their consent to further yourself). But that's not the same thing as political correct art, which is just "offensive". And let's face it all art is offensive to someone, or it's not ground-breaking or memorable art.
For example? I found the books
Me Before You by Jo Jo Moyes and
American Psycho by Bret Easten Ellis highly offensive in places. But I'd defend to the death their right to publish those books and yours to read and enjoy them. (Haven't read the book that the article is discussing, nor do I want to. The Stockholm Syndrom is not a story trope that I can stand. I don't like that story trope. I find it cringe-inducing and offensive. But some people love it.)
1.) What I just finished reading?
Eh, a bunch of X-men comic books. Making my way through various issues selected for a specific story/character arc. I have a weakness for the wounded male trope, and the progression from boy scout to tough guy/badass. I think that's what appealed to me about Spike. Or one of the many many things, rather. I also like strong, take charge characters. I don't know, don't quite understand the craving myself. It's a story binge. I do that.
At any rate --- I wished I picked something that was easier to follow. The X-men like all long=running serials with multiple artists/creators who keep changing, tends to be unevenly written and plotted all over the place. To say the story is convoluted is an understatement. It sort of shoots out in fifteen different directions and has a cast of thousands. It would be easier just to follow Jamie Lannister's arc in Game of Thrones.
This isn't helped by the fact that each new group of writers has a tendency to ignore what happened before, just so they can tell their own plot. Often twisting the characters and continuity to serve well whatever idea they have in their heads at the moment. IF they, for instance, have a story in mind that requires a currently dead character -- they'll bring the character back to life to serve that story. (Characters don't tend to stay dead in long-running serials.) So if continuity, logic or consistency are important to you -- comic books will drive you crazy.
It's best not to try to read all of it. And just read a few specific writers. And enough of the character's arc to see where it's going.
I've picked a controversial character to follow: Cyclops. Who half the fandom hates, because like all fandoms, it's rather judgemental of controversial, darkly conflicted, ass-hole characters. While I tend to find them rather fascinating to read about.
Anyhow so far, I've read the following:
* The Wedding of Cyclops and Phoenix - which was told via Professor Xavier's point of view, and rather well done. No action, just a nice character piece.
* Mixed Blessings - a Thanksgiving issue set around the X-men playing football, having dinner, and Jean proposing to Cyclops (Scott Summers) after years of fighting side by side. It's also rather well-done and more of a character piece.
* Operation Zero Tolerance - this collects various issues that crossed-over, X-Force, Cable, Wolverine, X-Man, Uncanny X-men, X-men, and Generation X. Like most cross-overs, it's uneven. Some issues are better than others, some writers and artists better than others. And of course all of it is in the eye of the beholder. I found X-force issues hard to follow and with one too many frustrating subplots that had zip to do with the story. Generation X - also had too many subplots, but interesting art, I like Chris Bacchalau's style. The best by far and most evenly written were the X-men and Wolverine issues - which stuck to the main plot, did not go off on absurd tangents, and developed the characters while introducing interesting new ones that added to the theme and story. At any rate, I rather enjoyed it, with some quibbles.
* Uncanny X-men - Ages of Apocalypse - the issue where Cyclops disappears after merging with Apocalypse and Aftermath. Both of theses issues were rather weak and all over the place. Too much going on, too many characters, too busy. A problem with team comics - often you end up with too many people in the book. Sort of like the Avengers movies - too busy.
* First and Last issue of the Search for Cyclops - good, gets across quite well, the emotions of each character involved, focused, and theme/plot well done. The first one - depicts a grieving and frustrated Jean Grey and Nathan Summers, grieving Scott's presumed death and not quite believing he's gone. While Scott wanders in the desert, with his nemesis taunting him in his head and overwhelming him with dreams and nightmares of the nemesis' past. Imagine being possessed by an ancient demon. Who shows you how small your life is, and how inconsequential. And trying to hold it in, not letting it get out, so it can destroy everything. Nice metaphor for demons - we all have them. That critical, nasty voice in our heads that sheds a dark light on everything in our lives and exaggerates our failings. Scott Summers - is a fairly insecure character, who has held everything inside. Prior to merging with Apocalypse - he shared a psychic rapport with his wife, that was forged in life. The merger severed that rapport. He did it to save the world. The last issue, shows Nathan (Scott's son, who he sent to the future to save the boy's life, and has returned older than Scott) and Jean finding Scott, and with team-work managing to release the disembodied spirit of the evil demon (Apocalypse - an ageless entity who lives for warfare and destruction. Believing true change comes from total destruction) from him and killing it. Except, Scott has been tainted by it. Changed. As Apocalypse henchmen tell his son, "You know that anyone touched by Apocalypse, can never be pure again. They are tainted and changed."
It's a nifty way for the writers to change a major character and shake up the story a bit. Also in this issue, the plot is character driven and continuity is maintained.
* Uncanny X-men - the issue that comes after this, involves Cyclops traveling to see his dad Christopher Summers, Corsair, a space-pirate. They have a father-son chat on a camping trip. Also pretty good, highlighting some of the changes in Scott's personality.
* Then there's the Genosha arc with Magneto - which is quite horrible and skippable. Bad art. And the story is all over the place. I only sampled three issues - but bad, and repetitive. Does however get across, Cyclops anger at how it never ends, and his obsession with stopping it.
* New X-men by Grant Morrison - I started with Vol 4 - or the end of the arc. Having already read the beginning back in 2001-2002. It's better than remembered. Does tend to go off on tangents. But what is interesting about this arc and rather innovative --is Morrison and the artists go for a hyper-reality feel. The kids are ugly. Their mutant abilities make them look like monsters or side-show freaks. They obviously can't fit in. They aren't pretty or in great shape like the main team. They also look like kids and act like kids. The adults are struggling, in their 20s, having seen far too much death and destruction -- and while they are supportive of Xavier's vision that humans and mutants can co-exist, they are questioning it a bit. Cyclops is distant, forming tentative friendships with darker, edgier, and more wounded team-mates/teachers, Wolverine, Emma, and Xorn. Unable to confide in or talk to either Xavier or Jean, who previously had been the two people that he was closest to. The story is darker and some respects more character focused. Beak, a truly gross character (featherless chicken head and a man's body) and Angel (an African-American girl with butterfly or Fly wings) have a romance and she ends up pregnant. It's awkward and the sex is clumsy. I've never seen anyone do this in a superhero comic book before - only the more prestigious graphic novels.
There is a sort of dumb sub-plot about a drug named Kick, which reminds me of meth. But other than that, good stuff.
The story comes to a head -- when the kids, high on Kick, riot, and two kids die as a result of using the Kick drug. Angry, four of the female telepaths who were under tutelage of Emma Frost - get vengeance by telling Jean Grey that Emma has been having a telepathic affair with her husband. This is a rather interesting sub-plot. Scott asks Emma for help regarding his marriage and issues, and she takes it a step too far, engaging him in what amounts to a telepathic love affair. He never actually kisses her physically. He cheats on his wife in his head or his thoughts. Considering Jean and him used to have a psychic rapport and shared thoughts, feelings and did it in their heads -- you can see why this would be viewed as a major betrayal in Jean's head. It's also ironic, because Mastermind seduced Jean in more or less the same manner in the past - seducing her in her head. Emma however has fallen for Cyclops/Scott, and sees his dark thoughts as normal, natural, nothing to be ashamed of, ordinary. He doesn't fell safe at the Xaveri's or with Jean since Apocalypse. He feels guilty. She tells him he's okay, and not worry. Meanwhile Jean is manifesting the Phoenix energy and ...for a while it looks like that is going to cause her to go all dark and die again, except that's not what happens. In a nice twist, it's Xorn who ends up killing her. Xorn who Cyclops prevented from committing suicide and who has become Cyclops friend.
The arc unfortunately unravels and goes off the rails with a silly AU story, that occurs when Cyclops decides to leave the X-men, and Emma. We see a horrible future, where Phoenix resurfaces and saves it by going back in time and getting across to Cyclops, telepathically, to live and not give up and continue with the X-men. It doesn't quite work and could have been handled better.
Next - "House of M" - which changes everything yet again and results in an even edgier and tougher Cyclops. I've already read Whedon's Astonishing X-men, don't feel a need to rebuy or re-read it. Got rid of most of it. And skipped Warren Ellis take on it.
Reading and watching serials with a critical eye can teach you a great deal about character development, plotting and story arcs. What works and what doesn't and how important it is to stick in character and not write yourself into a corner. Serial writers are notorious for writing themselves into corners - because hey shiny cool plot-twist! Then, whoops, now what do I do? Joss Whedon did it on Buffy, and GRR Martin did it with his Game of Thrones series (that's why he's stuck and can't get this latest book out). Whedon, in contrast, just plowed through and said screw continuity, I'll do what I want, which you can sort of get away with in the supernatural soap opera comic book genre/medium, not so much in the fantasy novel genre.
2) What I'm reading now?
Life After Life by Kate Atkinson - a good example of a writer putting style, plot, theme, and an time period over her characters. The author clearly doesn't care all that much about developing the characters...I'm about a third of the way through, and I still have no idea who these people are nor care all that much what happens to any of them. Most of the action happens off stage.
( spoilers )3.) What I'm reading next?
For the other book club, my friend's book club, the non-fiction book,
Boy's in the Boat - about the working class male rowing team that won the 1939 Olympics.
And of course, "House of M by Brian Bendes".
In between maybe a romance novel or mystery novel.
I read on average six books a month, often two at a time. One at night, one on my commute. And I read fast, when I want to.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
