Author: Andrew Wheeler

REVIEW: “Jerusalem” by Guy Delisle

REVIEW: “Jerusalem” by Guy Delisle

Everyone has their niche, their two inches of ivory that they work over so closely with a fine-haired brush. Some niches are larger than others — project manager, superhero artist, war apologist, social novelist — but they all bind, more or less, around the edges. Some artists fight against that niche, and some embrace it.

Guy Delisle is a cartoonist — originally Canadian, though resident in France for some time — whose niche is creating books about the strange foreign cities he finds himself living and working in. First was Shenzhen (see my review), about time spent working as an animation supervisor in that Chinese city. Then came Pyongyang (see my review), in which the same job took him to that very odd, constricted North Korean capital. And then there was Burma Chronicles(see my review), by which point Delisle had transitioned to a full-time long-form cartoonist, and was accompanying his partner (a Médecins Sans Frontières administrator) to the capital of the country that wants the rest of us to call it Myanmar. (Somewhere in between, he also published two books of unsettling, mostly sex-role related cartoons — Aline and the Others and Albert and the Others — which I also reviewed.)

Delisle’s work typically has a crisp, clean line — as one would expect from an animator working in France — with a good eye for detail and enough description and narration to allow the drawing to be simple; he doesn’t try to cram everything into either words or art.

Recently, Delisle’s wife was posted by MSF to Israel for a year, and so, eventually, that experience turned itself into his most recent book, Jerusalem. It’s larger and more diffuse than those previous books, over 300 pages long, and filled with lots of small stories about Delisle’s and his family’s life in a Palestinian neighborhood in East Jerusalem. (And that location is the first manifestation of what will be a major concern of Jerusalem: borders, both physical and mental, and how they interleave themselves, through walls and checkpoints and bus routes and roads and prejudices.)

Jerusalem doesn’t grapple directly with the legitimacy of the Israeli state, or of its treatment of Palestinians (or, conversely, with the actions of Palestinians and others against Israel), making it feel a bit politically naive at times. (Reading it in tandem with Sarah Glidden’s How to Understand Israel in 60 Days Or Less — see my review — would be interesting; Glidden was in Israel for a short time, on a tour, specifically as a tourist on a heritage tour designed to make her intensely pro-Israel, and intensively questioned the Palestinian situation, while Delisle lived in Israel for a year, mostly among vaguely pro-Palestinian expatriates, and lives the physical discomfort of the occupation without engaging with it on a theoretical level.)

Delisle’s job — besides writing books like Jerusalem — is a house-husband; he had two small children during that year, and just taking care of small children (even if they are in day-care part of the time) is massively time-consuming in ways that it’s hard to describe. When you wake up with a toddler, you get through the day somehow, and then wonder, at the end, what you actually did during the last sixteen hours. So Delisle isn’t as free to move around this year as he was in Shenzhen and Pyongyang — but, then again, those were shorter trips, so he had more time to immerse himself in Jerusalem (and, before that, in Burma), more time to live in those places rather than just passing through them.

Jerusalem is a discursive, rambling book, equally about daily life as an expatriate in East Jerusalem and the physical problems of just moving around so militarized and controlled a country [1] as it is about Delisle’s continuing attempts to sketch and draw and work on his cartoons when he has time away from his young children. It’s a long, looping story, circling back to those same few concerns — time to sketch, physical access, which day things will be open — and is more obsessed with time (the right day, the right time of day, enough time to do something while the kids are in day-care) than one would expect. Throughout, Delisle is an interesting and thoughtful guide to Israel, showing us the things he did and saw and thought, and what it was like to live in that place for that time. I expect some people will be unhappy at Delisle’s take on the Israel-Palestine situation — people on either end of that argument, because as much as he engages with it, he’s somewhere in the middle — but that’s an occupational hazard when you create books about your time in odd, contested, unlikely places. Delisle is always honest, and shows us what he sees and feels: you can’t ask for more than that.

[1] His partner was posted in Gaza for most of this trip, and the one crossing into Gaza is more tightly controlled than any other gate in Israel.

REVIEW: “Emperor Mollusk Versus the Sinister Brain” by A. Lee Martinez

Martinez has been writing humorous SF novels for close to a decade now, all of which have looked like fun to me, but Emperor Mollusk versus the Sinister Brain is the first one I managed to actually read. It’s the SFnal story of a world-conquering squid from Neptune (a super-genius squid from Neptune) in a very comic-booky universe, where every planet in the solar system has an indigenous race with their own high technology.

Emperor Mollusk narrates his own story, starting well after he’s conquered Earth (for its own benefit; he’s a very benevolent tyrant) and mostly focusing on his battle with a new would-be conqueror, who may be even smarter than he is. It’s quick and zippy and colorful and amusing, filled with quips and explosions and last-minute escapes and triple reverses and more high-tech gadgets than all of the Bond movies put together.

And if I even wanted to do a serious critical take on it — and who would want to do such a thing to a book like this? — I read it too long ago to remember any of the pertinent details. Emperor Mollusk is fun, and smart about its generic materials, and thoroughly amusing. I’d be very happy to read more by Martinez if this is the way he usually works.

darkandstormy_5013-5625430

It’s Writing, Captain, But Not As We Know It

darkandstormy_5013-5625430The annual running of the bad prose has come again, with the winners of the Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest announced Monday. (Yes, that page is apparently official, even though it looks like something that crawled out of 1996, and not before dying, either.)

In honor of the “dark and stormy night” feller, the judges of the Bulwer-Lytton contest every year choose the most lousy opening sentence they can from among a myriad entrants. This year’s winner was:

As he told her that he loved her she gazed into his eyes, wondering, as she noted the infestation of eyelash mites, the tiny deodicids burrowing into his follicles to eat the greasy sebum therein, each female laying up to 25 eggs in a single follicle, causing inflammation, whether the eyes are truly the windows of the soul; and, if so, his soul needed regrouting.

And it was extruded by one Cathy Bryant of Manchester, England.

Since there are always more bad sentences, there are also category winners. Those of genre interest are:

  • Fantasy: “The brazen walls of the ancient city of Khoresand, situated where the mighty desert of Sind meets the endless Hyrkanean steppe, are guarded by day by the four valiant knights Sir Malin the Mighty, Sir Welkin the Wake, Sir Darien the Doughty, and Sir Yrien the Yare, all clad in armor of beaten gold, and at night the walls are guarded by Sir Arden the Ardent, Sir Fier the Fearless, Sir Cyril the Courageous, and Sir Damien the Dauntless, all clad in armor of burnished argent, but nothing much ever happens.” from David Lippmann of Austin, TX
  • Science Fiction: “As I gardened, gazing towards the autumnal sky, I longed to run my finger through the trail of mucus left by a single speckled slug – innocuously thrusting past my rhododendrons – and in feeling that warm slime, be swept back to planet Alderon, back into the tentacles of the alien who loved me.” from Mary E. Patrick of Lake City, SC

(via Publishers Weekly)

willie-joe-back-home-by-bill-mauldin-1058592

REVIEW: “Willie & Joe: Back Home” by Bill Mauldin

willie-joe-back-home-by-bill-mauldin-1058592This book — collecting the cartoons Mauldin created for syndication from July of 1945 through the end of 1946 — cannot be fully appreciated by just reading those cartoons. Luckily, Willie & Joe: Back Home also includes a long, in-depth introduction by Mauldin’s biographer Todd DePastino (Bill Mauldin: A Life Up Front, which I reviewed in a round-up of comics-creator bios), which explains exactly how, in those cartoons, Mauldin was systematically dismantling all of his good will and success from the war years by doing the one thing an editorial cartoonist must: fearlessly telling the truth as he sees it, afflicting the comfortable and comforting the afflicted.

Post-war America didn’t want to hear what Mauldin had to say; it was ready to turn back to isolationism, crony capitalism, racism, and a casual disdain for most of the rest of the world. But Mauldin had America’s ear after his hugely popular and fearlessly honest Up Front war cartoons, and he was going to keep saying what he had to say as long as he had that ear, no matter what. It didn’t last that long, and it ruined the career he had at the time — Mauldin could have made a fortune, and settled into a long and very comfortable life as a mildly left-wing all-American cartoonist, if he’d bent with the wind — but it’s a glorious thing to see with the proper background.

The worst thing, for a modern eye, is how obvious and uncontroversial many of Mauldin’s points seem now: yes, the FBI really should have worried more about lynchings, and war profiteers were bad, and education is a good thing. So Back Home would not be nearly so impressive without DePastino’s introduction — you need to see what Mauldin was fighting against to realize how hard he was fighting.

Mauldin’s art was as strong as his writing here, too: the early cartoons here especially have a loose, flowing line and lots of ominous, slashing blacks. But it’s the subject of the cartoons — and what that implies about the world in which those things had to be asserted loudly — that has the most impact here. Back Home is a fine book by one of the 20th century’s best cartoonists, and an important historical document — as much as, if not more than, his more famous wartime cartoons.

Review: “Why We Broke Up” by Daniel Handler, Illustrated by Maira Kalman

Review: “Why We Broke Up” by Daniel Handler, Illustrated by Maira Kalman

Handler has written for younger readers before: under his pen-name Lemony Snicket, he’s written one long, excellent middle-grade series (A Series of Unfortunate Events) and several one-offs, mostly of those ostensibly for even younger readers than that. But Why We Broke Up is a novel aimed at teenagers, a YA novel rather than a middle-grade, and it appears under Handler’s own name, both of which feel important. Why We Broke Up is also told in first person by a character in the story — the novel itself is a long letter that she writes to her ex-boyfriend to accompany a box full of the detritus of their relationship — and in an emotionally colored, immediate voice much more like Handler’s adult novels (particularly his first book, the similarly teenager-focused The Basic Eight) than like the cool, detached, almost nihilistic voice of Lemony Snicket.

Minerva aims Why We Broke Up directly at that ex-boyfriend, Ed, in the way that angry ex-lovers always do. She’s young and unsteady and intensely wounded by what Ed did — what that was, we don’t learn until late in the novel — and digging through the wreckage of their lives to grab each memento and stab it back at him, hoping to hurt him the way he hurt her.

Min suspects, though — as we readers do — that he won’t be hurt the way she was; that he doesn’t have that capacity. Min and Ed were at opposite ends of high-school life: she was a foreign-movie-loving, semi-outcast underachiever, while he was a thoughtless, beloved basketball star. How could they have anything in common to begin with? How could they ever get together?

Why We Broke Up tells that story — what they found in common, how they spent their time, how they fell in love. And, then, how Ed screwed it all up. Handler seamlessly creates the voice of a real young woman — as he did in Basic Eighty, though Min isn’t nearly as screwed up as Flannery — and tells his story entirely through what she tells Ed (and, through him, us).

Why We Broke Up is also heavily illustrated — there’s a full-page painting by Kalman to begin each chapter, plus some smaller pieces as well — but those are entirely illustrations; they show the things that Min is writing about (and throwing into that box) rather than telling the story in a direct way. Kalman’s art has a loose, quick quality about it that fits well with Min’s headlong letter-writing; they both feel like things done immediately to express immediate emotion.

Why We Broke Up has the immediacy and emotion of a broken heart; it’s a thoughtful and heartfelt story of two people who just didn’t connect the way they should have, and what that meant for one of them. Even if you’re no longer a teenager, you might well appreciate Why We Broke Up if your heart was ever broken. (Also, it has a great back-cover line-up of quotes from fine writers talking about their own heartbreaks — my favorite is from Brian Selznick: “I knew I had to break up with Ann Rosenberg after she chose a teal dress for the prom. I had never heard of teal. Also, I was gay.”)

Locus Awards for 2012

I think I have too many RSS feeds in my reader; I keep getting behind and then leaving things unread to deal with “later” — but then there’s too much new stuff I haven’t even looked at, which pushes “later” much further than I’d like.

That’s all prologue to the fact that these awards came out some time ago, and, if I’m going to blog about them at all, I should do it more quickly. Nevertheless, here’s what’s happened recently in award-land:

Locus Awards for 2012
Locus magazine, the newspaper of the skiffy field, has polled its frighteningly well-read readers yet again, and these are their choices for the best of the year past:

  • Science Fiction Novel: [[[Embassytown]]], China Miéville (Del Rey; Macmillan)
  • Fantasy Novel: [[[A Dance with Dragons]]], George R.R. Martin (Bantam; Harper Voyager UK)
  • First Novel: [[[The Night Circus]]], Erin Morgenstern (Doubleday)
  • Young Adult Book: [[[The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland in a Ship of Her Own Making]]], Catherynne M. Valente (Feiwel and Friends)
  • Novella: Silently and Very Fast, Catherynne M. Valente (WSFA; Clarkesworld)
  • Novelette: “White Lines on a Green Field”, Catherynne M. Valente (Subterranean Fall ’11)
  • Short Story: “The Case of Death and Honey”, Neil Gaiman (A Study in Sherlock)
  • Anthology: The Year’s Best Science Fiction: Twenty-eighth Annual Collection, Gardner Dozois, ed. (St. Martin’s Griffin)
  • Collection: The Bible Repairman and Other Stories, Tim Powers (Tachyon)
  • Non-fiction: [[[Evaporating Genres: Essays on Fantastic Literature]]], Gary K. Wolfe (Wesleyan)
  • Art Books: [[[Spectrum 18: The Best in Contemporary Fantastic Art]]], Cathy Fenner & Arnie Fenner (Underwood)
  • Artist: Shaun Tan
  • Editor: Ellen Datlow
  • Magazine: Asimov’s
  • Publisher: Tor

Congratulations to all of the winners, and especially to Catherynne M. Valente, for a very impressive three wins in one year.

A Helpful Note re: “Redshirts” Review

Humorous self portrait by John Scalzi, who pre...

There seems to be an idea floating about in the ether that my review of John Scalzi’s new novel, Redshirts (posted late yesterday) is negative, and that I don’t like Scalzi’s books.

Both are untrue. Redshirts didn’t strike me as laugh-out-loud hilarious, as it has been billed [1], but it’s a pleasant, quick entertainment — and Scalzi is reliably entertaining, which is why I keep grabbing his novels as soon as I see them. None of those books has been perfect, though, so when I’ve written about them the most interesting (and, I think, useful) tactics have been to poke at the bits that don’t work as well. [2] Writing otherwise — focusing only on the things a book does well — is certainly enjoyable for the author, but I don’t think it’s as effective for everyone else in the world.

My reviewing mode tends to be more negative than positive, I know, but you really can tell when I actively dislike a book. Take, for example, my reviews of two of last year’s Hugo darlings: Mira Grant’s Feed and Connie Willis’s Blackout/All Clear.

That’s what it looks like when I strongly dislike a book. (And, for an example of what it looks like when I keep reading a writer even after I realize I hate his current work, see P.J. O’Rourke’s Don’t Vote: It Just Encourages the Bastards.)

Redshirts, on the other hand, I basically liked — the “codas” at the end, in particular, are really good stuff. If I’ve driven any readers away from it by not stating that it’s the funniest thing since the invention of the seltzer bottle, then I do apologize. You may well find it substantially funnier than I did; at least four SFnal luminaries have already done so.

[1] Which was sad for me; I wanted to read a book as funny as I was told Redshirts was.

[2] Though I have definitely reached the point where noting that Scalzi is not interested in carefully building up his worlds from close readings of Nature and his flying slip-stick is entirely beside the point; he’s not that kind of writer. Come to think of it, I usually make fun of that kind of writer as well.

REVIEW: “Redshirts” by John Scalzi

REVIEW: “Redshirts” by John Scalzi

It is simply impossible to declare a novel “not funny.” Humor is so personal that all any person can really do is declare whether he laughed or not.

And so I’ll say this: John Scalzi‘s new novel, Redshirts, has four quotes on the back cover (from luminaries Melinda Snodgrass, Joe Hill, Lev Grossman, and Patrick Rothfuss), all of which make a point to note how funny this book is. On the other hand, I didn’t laugh or smirk before page 120 out of 230 pages of the novel proper [1], and, even after that point, there were only a couple of wan smiles and some light chuckles. This reader must then humbly submit that Redshirts did not strike him as funny as it did the blurbers, and that will inevitably color the rest of this review. Please set your expectations accordingly.

I’ve read all of Scalzi’s novels to date, and grumbled about all of them, which proves something, I suppose. (Probably about me, and probably nothing good, either.) I’ve come to realize that I’m engaging in the common but fruitless effort of wishing that Scalzi was a different writer — or that he were interested in writing different kinds of books — than is actually the case. He clearly has it in him to write “serious” SF of weight and rigor — the mostly-successful novella The God Engines (see my review) shows that, as does his best novel, The Ghost Brigades (which I covered in a more cursory manner) — but it’s also becoming clear that he doesn’t want to be a “serious SF writer,” that he’s more in the vein of Keith Laumer, James H. Schmitz or H. Beam Piper, writing zippy novels set in mildly generic universes with wisecracking heroes who always win out in the end. (I didn’t review his first novel, Agent to the Stars, but I did also cover Old Man’s War, The Last Colony — and then a follow-up on the Old Man’s War-iverse in general — The Android’s Dream, Zoe’s Tale, and then last year’s Fuzzy Nation, so the really devoted reader can trace my history of looking for things in Scalzi novels that I should not expect to find there.) Thus, Redshirts — a novel set in a deliberately generic medium-future setting, with plenty of elbows to the reader’s ribs and references to SF media properties that we are all already familiar with [2], that almost but not quite turns into a giant fuzzy-dog story along the way — is exactly the novel we should have expected from Scalzi, and the reaction to that novel (it’s already hit the New York Times bestseller list) bears that out.

Which is all a long way around saying that Scalzi’s work is deeply resistant to criticism (if not entirely invulnerable to it) and that I, personally, am not well-placed as a critic to do justice to Redshirts in the manner it deserves. (Which would either be an excoriating attack on its flabby second-handedness — though that would also be entirely missing the point; it’s second-handed on purpose — or a loving appreciation written either entirely in Klingon or in quotes from famous TV sci-fi shows, a la Jonathan Lethem’s “The Anxiety of Influence.”)

Redshirts is a slobbery sheepdog of a novel, eager to show off its good nature — it’s a quick, easy read, full of snappy dialogue delivered by characters without too many attributes to confuse the reader and delivered, for the most part, in little-described interior spaces, so as to keep the narrative from being cluttered up by action or description. It’s set in a very Star Trek-y future — very original series Trek, to be precise, for maximum audience identification with the premise and the least amount of friction for Scalzi’s few twists in the tale.

The year is 2456, and the Federation Universal Union has just assigned young Ensign Andrew Dahl to the flagship, Enterprise Intrepid, where he soon learns that junior and low-ranked crew members — whom we know as “Redshirts,” though Dahl doesn’t — die at an unusual rate, and because of exceedingly unlikely events, during “Away Missions.” Dahl, and his fellow not-terribly-well-characterized Ensigns [3], do not want to die, and so they try to figure out why this is, eventually turning to the creepy loner Jenkins (who lives, alone and hidden, in the Jeffries tubes cargo tunnels deep within Intrepid), who has a theory So Crazy that it just might be true.

That theory is amusing, and would be even more amusing at about 2 AM in some convention party, anytime in the past forty years. But it doesn’t lead — in my opinion, of course — to anything really funny afterward, just another succession of scenes of not-well-characterized people shooting mildly-witty dialogue at each other in some more undescribed rooms for another hundred pages until the novel ends. The first half of Redshirts isn’t frightening or ominous enough — and God Engines is proof that Scalzi can do really ominous danger-on-a-starship, when he wants to — and the second half isn’t as big or funny as it should be, either. (It resembles, more than anything else, a rewrite of one particular Star Trek story.)

Redshirts is content to be amusing and pleasant, rather than digging any deeper. It is not a failure in any possible sense of the term, but it may leave some readers wanting more, particularly if they’re long-time SF readers who have seen Redshirt‘s Phildickian premises used more evocatively and subtly by other writers. If you just wondered what a Trek redshirt might have thought about his predicament, and aren’t expecting much, you will enjoy Redshirts. If you hoped for a more complicated, interesting answer to the predicament of high-casualty crewmen, I’d suggest instead looking for the excellent (and mostly ignored) novel Expendable by James Alan Gardner.

[1] There are also three “codas” — related short stories — which add another 90ish pages to the book. They’re in different modes, though, and none of them are funny — none of them seem to aim at being funny, either. They’re the best writing Scalzi does in this book, and that plus the example of God Engines implies that Scalzi is deliberately tuning his novelistic output to a particular market.

[2] My reaction to the use of these as “jokes” is approximated by this T-shirt.

[3] Scalzi eventually has a clever in-universe explanation for this; Redshirts is quite cleverly designed to be precisely the way it is, though one must wonder if spending that much energy emulating mediocrity is really worthwhile.

Review: The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer, adapted by Seymour Chwast

Review: The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer, adapted by Seymour Chwast

Yes, that credit does have the faint whiff of “by William Shakespeare, additional dialogue by Sam Taylor” to it, but it can’t be helped. Anything needs to be adapted if it’s going to work in another medium — which is a big “if” — and having it done by one person, who then lays out and draws the thing himself, is about as pure an auteur case as you can get.

And it’s not as if most people encounter The Canterbury Tales in their pure form, anyway — when I read them, way back in college years, my class was atypical in using an edition with Chaucer’s original spelling and grammar, but even we read an abridged version. The full-on Early Modern English Canterbury Tales has been primarily for scholars for generations now, so any time it comes close to a mass audience — which is not that often — you’re looking at an adaptation.

Chwast does Chaucer well with his adaptation of The Canterbury Tales — he does have them riding motorcycles, but otherwise doesn’t modernize the occupations or the world — these stories are still told by a Pardoner and a Franklin, a Clerk and a Reeve and a Manciple, and take place in their own times and places. Chwast does use modern spelling, and clearly uses only a fraction of Chaucer’s text, but he keeps enough to give the sense of Chaucer’s world, obsessed with religion almost as much as sex or honor. (Maybe it’s not all that different from our own, after all?)

Chwast came to graphic novels late — this is his second, after an adaptation of Dante’s Divine Comedy — after a long career as a noted graphic designer and illustrator. And his Canterbury Tales is well-designed, but not as overly designed as I was worried it would be. Chwast’s line is stiff and illustrative, giving all of his pages the look of bas-reliefs; his panels aren’t windows into a world of story but clearly pictures, drawn and placed just so.

This is admittedly an odd book — an adaptation of a classic most readers never think about, into a format most serious readers still scorn. It’s certainly quixotic, but admirably so — Chwast clearly enjoys Chaucer, and wants to share his love with the rest of us.