Magnificent Malevolence

Magnificent Malevolence  attempts to evoke the spirit of C.S. Lewis's  The Screwtape Letters by laying out the grand agenda of the Lowarchy over the past half-century. It's an impressive goal, but also a notable departure from Lewis's focus on an individual tempter and patient. Another difference is the format--as the subtitle declares, this book is written as a memoir, rather than letters. While this makes sense with today's genre preferences, I feel the author missed a chance to introduce further conflict within the story.
The book was well-unified, with intriguing, sometimes controversial interpretations of recent events. But even when I disagreed with the author, I felt he raised valid concerns with contemporary American culture. However, the book fell short in the most important area: the tone.  Although The Screwtape Letters has a very dark, gritty tone, there are also moments of levity and irony when the reader realizes flaws in the demons' arguments. Magnficent Malvolence takes itself so seriously that the darkness threatens to suffocate readers. It rates a solid three stars, but I'd recommend As One Devil to Another by Richard Platt for someone looking for a modern perspective on devilish correspondance
I received this book for free from Kregel Book Tours in exchange for an honest review.

Nightmare in Silver

Okay, so I'm not coming up with a clever title for this review, but that's because Neil Gaiman's title was  so brilliant. I mean, what story could live up to that promise?
It came pretty close. Okay, I'm still not scared of the Cybermen, but considering that the top three scariest monsters on the show, in my opinion, are the Weeping Angels,  Vashta Nerada, and Silence, the Cybermen didn't stand a chance. They are definitely much more of a threat now, with the instant-upgrades ability and universally comparable-ness.
My biggest concern with the episode was Angie and Archie. Okay, I like kids, I love seeing the Doctor interact with kids, but I don't think they added anything to the story. In fact, they seemed kind of bratty. You threaten your nanny, get taken to a futuristic planet, and wander off to be turned into zombies.  There was a cut scene explaining why  they weren't just sent back to the TARDIS to nap--Gaiman's twitter confirmed it--but I'd kind of like to know why myself.


Let's see, what else? The Mr. Clever vs the Doctor was good, kudos to Matt Smith for high-quality acting. Clara did a good job mobilizing the soldiers as well, but...well, I have a whole separate post about Clara's mystery and why I don't feel it's working.

And a Wreath of Gold: thoughts on the 50th Anniversary of Doctor Who

This article title says it all, really: Is Enough Being Done for the 50th Special?

As far as we know,  the  "special" is one hour-long episode, filmed in 3D that will be aired on TV and released in some theaters for those who do not have 3D television.  David Tennant and Billie Piper's returns have been confirmed, as well as the character of Katie Steward, canon immigrant and daughter of the Brigadier.  Big Finish is producing a multi-doctor audio adventure called "Light at the End of the Tunnel;" there are also comics and short stories being written for all the Doctors, but I'm focusing on the TV events.
In my opinion, a fiftieth anniversary for a TV show should have certain aspects in common with a 50th wedding anniversary: looking back at favorite moments and setting the stage for new adventures.

In a perfect world, this would involve bringing back iconic characters from previous series--the Brig and Sarah Jane Smith immediately spring to mine as ones most fans, NuWho and Classic, have probably heard of, if not seen. Unfortunately, that is not an option. The Brig's death was mentioned in Wedding of River Song, and followed up on in Power of Three with the introduction of his daughter.  I am excited to see more of Katie and feel this is an appropriate way to celebrate the character and the actor's legacy. However, I'm not sure how I'd want them to reference Sarah Jane Smith.  Because the Sarah Jane Adventures'  primary audience was younger kids, the character did not die with the actor--the last episode ended with a montage of clips and the caption "and the adventure continues...forever."

On one hand, I really, really, want Sarah Jane's son Luke to come back. I was even (fruitlessly) pulling for him as the next companion for Eleven after the Ponds' departure.  His involvement would not only honor  Sarah Jane's long history in the show, but has more basis than Kate Stewart's sudden appearance--he actually appeared in Journey's End and Stolen Earth, so even those who haven't seen the Sarah Jane Adventures would have something to refer to. The problem is, it's pretty hard to involve him without risking a "Say, what's your mom up to?" In that case, we'd get either a glossed-over explanation, or they'd acknowledge Sarah Jane's death, as well as Elisabeth Sladen's. I don't want that--I'd be a mess again, and the Doctor wouldn't take it well either. If they did have the character die, I'd want it to be the focus of its' own episode, with all the Sarah Jane Adventures characters....who am I kidding, that'll never happen.

Likewise, I have mixed feelings about bringing back past Doctors. It can be done well--Time Crash was delightful--or can make a mess of the plot.  I'm not too concerned about them aging--just add some technobabble about time differentials, throw a lampshade over it  and move on with the story.  But having only Ten come back? Seriously, all the other living actors (except Eccleston) said they were available. If age was an issue, only use McGann. Or cast them in different roles with one or two quirks like the Doctor they played. And then Eleven could be like, "Everyone looks strangely familiar;" Big Finish used the same tactic in their 40th anniversary special Zagreus.

As for monsters, I think the Zygons are interesting and have a lot of potential, so I'm not too worried about that.  But I think I'd be more comfortable if we had more specials, instead of just the one.  I guess one way to explain my feelings is to look at the season four finale and the End of Time.  Both--especially the former--are the closest things to anniversary specials/reunions the new series has currently produced,  and they did a fair job of it.  I think some of the characters got the short shaft in the season finale, but the plot had a viable reason for them to end up together, and there were some good interactions between those who had not previously met.

And now for the highly controversial SPOILER of John Hurt's role:
Seriously, stop reading  if you don't want to be going crazy until November 23



So, you have surrendered your sanity?
Onward....


The actor has said he plays a "part of the Doctor" in a  "kind of trinity" that involves David Tennant.  Some sources have extrapolated that Hurt will be an incarnation between McGann and Eccleston,  and this Doctor, not Eight, ended the Time War, but was forgotten afterwards.
WHATTTT! No. No no no. McGann is the mysterious Doctor, the one who we will never  really know. We do not need another Doctor in that position.  Not to mention how it would mess up the numbering of the NuWho Doctors--would Smith be Eleven or Twelve?  It...it just...no, no no, it's too gimmicky.  I refuse to accept this rumor.

Victorian Values: The Crimson Horror

Okay, first of all, I have a confession to make: I really don't care for the Paternoster Gang, so their presence in this episode didn't exactly thrill me. I mean, I think Vastra's got some great insights into the Doctor's character,  and Strax is rather amusing, but the whole Victorian inter-species lesbians thing feels gimmicky at times.  And you can all yell at me for this if you want--I'm already stressed out enough with finals that it won't make my days much worse--but I have moral objections to homosexuality and bestiality.* Not to mention that my elementary-age brother likes to watch with me, and I don't want to explain why a lizard is calling a normal girl her "wife."  As individual characters, they're okay, though I'm not sure how Jenny learned martial arts in 19th-century London--did we really need a helping of Action Female?

I think this was meant to be the Doctor-lite episode of the series, but I'm not sure how well it played out. The Paternoster Gang did a good job of getting to the action, but Clara didn't really seem to jell in her roll. Okay, so anyone could get dipped in prehistoric venom and be put out of commission for most of the episode--it happened to the Doctor too--but I thought that Ada had a much more interesting connection with the Doctor, protecting him from her mother, calling him her "monster"--which brings back the Hide quote about "every lonely monster needs a companion." I kinda hoped the Doctor would stick around for a while and make sure she was okay.

And finally, the ending was funny and I'm looking forward to seeing Eleven with more kids--seriously, he's wonderful with kids--but did nobody consider that the pictures of Clara could have been faked? Even if the kids were convinced, Clara could have done a better job of throwing them off the track. And seriously, would their dad believe them anyway?

*in speculative settings, near-human races don't count, but certain humanoid ones would.  So in LOTR, elf/human,  human/hobbit, would be normal, but human/orc would be bestiality.

Flags and Fantasy

Several weeks ago, I came across an online opinion piece with the subtitle "Where are all the American fantasy characters?" A few weeks later, my favorite blog posted a brief discussion of it, but I still feel like I should explore some of my own reactions. If you don't have time to  read the whole article, his argument can be summarized in two sentences--

The problem is that most of our Fantasy isn't written by Americans about American culture and values.Even American Fantasy writers write like they're British. 

Apart from his capitalization of  the genre--English major pet peeve--I fail to see the problem with this situation. Yes, my favorite writers/producers are British--Lewis, Tolkien, Moffat, Neil Gaiman (though he currently lives in Wisconsin) and Jasper Fforde--but is there a problem with that? It's not like their characters go around eating scones and singing "God Save the Queen" every ten pages, even when the events primarily take place in "our" world. As for American values--er, I don't think we're doing so hot in that area either. Look at our economy, look at our crime rate, look at how causal we are about truth--modern (secular) American values are nothing to celebrate. And so many of the values celebrated by the best speculative works--self-sacrifice, friendship, strong leadership--should be INTERNATIONAL values, not merely British or American.
As for "even American fantasy writers write like Brits," my response is partially "so what?" and partially "you don't understand the genre. He mentions George R.R. Martin as a famous American fantasy writer, but dassifies him as primarily British for using a medieval-European setting. Seriously? America doesn't have hundreds of years of history to draw from--the oldest we can reliably refer to is the 1600s, which isn't old enough to have a mythic atmosphere, and records from further back are scarce, not to mention possible accusations of plagiarism from native peoples.
For "American fantasy," the article mentions two examples: Twilight and the Hunger Games. At least he acknowledges the poor quality of the former--but I'm still not sure the Hunger Games has the world-building of other famous series. Yes, it would be nice to have some American fantasy writers, but can we just keep looking for GOOD fantasy in the meantime?

Flags and Fantasy

Several weeks ago, I came across an online opinion piece with the subtitle "Where are all the American fantasy characters?" A few weeks later, my favorite blog posted a brief discussion of it, but I still feel like I should explore some of my own reactions. If you don't have time to  read the whole article, his argument can be summarized in two sentences--

The problem is that most of our Fantasy isn't written by Americans about American culture and values.Even American Fantasy writers write like they're British. 

Apart from his capitalization of  the genre--English major pet peeve--I fail to see the problem with this situation. Yes, my favorite writers/producers are British--Lewis, Tolkien, Moffat, Neil Gaiman (though he currently lives in Wisconsin) and Jasper Fforde--but is there a problem with that? It's not like their characters go around eating scones and singing "God Save the Queen" every ten pages, even when the events primarily take place in "our" world. As for American values--er, I don't think we're doing so hot in that area either. Look at our economy, look at our crime rate, look at how causal we are about truth--modern (secular) American values are nothing to celebrate. And so many of the values celebrated by the best speculative works--self-sacrifice, friendship, strong leadership--should be INTERNATIONAL values, not merely British or American.
As for "even American fantasy writers write like Brits," my response is partially "so what?" and partially "you don't understand the genre. He mentions George R.R. Martin as a famous American fantasy writer, but dassifies him as primarily British for using a medieval-European setting. Seriously? America doesn't have hundreds of years of history to draw from--the oldest we can reliably refer to is the 1600s, which isn't old enough to have a mythic atmosphere, and records from further back are scarce, not to mention possible accusations of plagiarism from native peoples.
For "American fantasy," the article mentions two examples: Twilight and the Hunger Games. At least he acknowledges the poor quality of the former--but I'm still not sure the Hunger Games has the world-building of other famous series. Yes, it would be nice to have some American fantasy writers, but can we just keep looking for GOOD fantasy in the meantime?

The Swimming Pool in the Library: Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS

Now that's just showing off!

I've been looking forward to this episode since the title was announced. Even in the classic series, the only episode to really explore the TARDIS interior was Invasion of Time--other episodes have given quick glimpses of certain rooms, such as the wardrobe or secondary control room, but it's far past time for a proper look inside our dear friend. And the episode delivered!
Never mind the plot for a while, let's see what we found....swimming pool, observatory, the Eye of Harmony (much better done than the TV movie), a room full of memories--who here screamed COT! when they saw it?--and this fantastic, huge library with Gallifreyan encyclopedias in bottles and a book on the Time War. Why the latter is in English is a slight mystery--I've heard theories that River wrote it, which is kind of interesting, given her role as a professor, but I also like the theory that Nine wrote it as a confession of sorts after the War, in which case the English would be because he couldn't bear Gallifreyan at the the time...anyway, PRETTY TARDIS IS PRETTY!
As for the plot, my biggest issue with it was the implication that the Doctor would threaten to destroy the TARDIS for Clara's sake. I buy the Doctor being protective, especially with someone he's already lost twice, but blowing up the TARDIS for her? Not so much. So I was very pleased when he announced it was all a bluff, since it didn't make that much sense to me. As for the rest of it, it was pretty cool, and I liked his discussion with Clara about her other? selves--presumably that will come up again later.
Overall, I really liked it--8  or 9/10