Orson Scott Card – Children of the Mind

children of the mind.jpg
‘Children’ is an appropriate word in the title. As for the ‘Mind’, not so much. Card’s finishes his quadrilogy – which started with two classics – on a ridiculous low. It’s not that the novel is bad, but that the flaws are brand new. Card succumbs to all the flaws he avoided when he first started.

Why did the two books split up? Considering how much Card had to say in Speaker for the Dead, it makes sense. His intelligence and complex philosophy still shines through. Instead of shining through storytelling, it’s one essay after another. Sometimes it’s inside the characters’ heads. Sometimes they ruminate and we get the whole thing, uncensored and unabridged. If this was part of a style, fine. It’s not. Rather, it’s a collection of notes – events, ruminations, extended dialogues that all should’ve been trimmed down.

The quadrilogy has philosophical weight, but in the end these novels aren’t pure philosophy. There is an engaging story beneath them about saving the world and what it means to be human. The constant ruminations are like a decent guitar solo extended for 10 minutes. One or two profound phrase is okay since it helps us focus on the themes. When there are whole paragraphs where nothing happens, that’s when you know the editors were dead.

If Card is so against destroying other species, why are the editors extinct? This is a flaw I encounter a lot when reading works by unpublished writers. They’re confused, not sure entirely what their story is about and afraid the audience won’t get them. The fear is justified considering how everyone loved Fight Club for the wrong reasons. So they fill their stories with character thoughts and speculations.

When I get these stories fresh from the oven, I don’t mind. Nobody has gone over them to trim the unnecessary stuff and what should remain as notes. A story doesn’t come fully formed from our minds. We must write it down, see how it looks like on paper and then play around with the pieces. You don’t really know how your story works until you actually write it down. If I read a story where half of it is notes the author should’ve kept to himself, that’s fine. They needed to write this to get the information out of their heads, to acknowledge it exists.

When I read a story filled with notes by a published author, I get angry. Card doesn’t show ideas. He doesn’t even let characters’ personalities filter them. Philosophies are the main characters now. The novel is filled with philosophical conversations and ruminations, and it’s all so disconnected from the story.

Philosophical essays contain ideas, but fiction is how we imagine them taking from. We need literature because that’s how we imagine the effect philosophies have on our live. I can write an essay about how everyone should have assisted suicide easily available for them, but through fiction I can imagine how such an idea might impact society.

The danger of piling philosophical conversations and ruminations in your novel is this. If they overpower the story, they lose connection. We no longer see the ideas in action, so we no longer see the importance. A good story doesn’t just give me insight into an idea, but makes me care about it. By having an emotionally engaging or thrilling story, I get emotionally invested and see the importance of the idea.

The philosophical conversations have no element of humanity in them. They rarely inform us about the characters or their big worldviews. Watching them is like watching a discussion on CMV-Reddit. You see the ideas isolated from a person dissected, analyzed and evolved. That’s fascinating, but that’s not a story. Moreover, CMV has an abundance of people. This novel written by one person. It’s really one long monologue in disguise, which is a shame. A monologue by a person – especially a talented writer like Card – could’ve been fascinating.

Children of the Mind isn’t an unrestrained novel. It’s a novel without purpose that jumps from topic to topic but in the end goes anywhere. We shouldn’t kill other people. We should try to understand people. Haven’t we heard this all before? Wasn’t it more convincing when characters were either morally grey, or when we saw the weight of heroism? The absence of Ender makes his character duller. Without him to show us the weight of his virtues, everyone just opens up a fanclub.

Everyone also acts like douchebags towards each other. Suddenly 21st-century internet lingo caught on and characters swear. Dirty words don’t offend me, but their sudden appearance is odd. Even more similar to stereotypical internet talk is how many dialogues go. So much belittling, being sarcastic and condescending you have to wonder why these people are doing with each other. Nothing actually happened between this novel and Xenocide, so when did everyone started swaggering like Tarantino?

The basic idea behind the ending couldn’t have been better. It ties the novel directly to the first one, but it’s still anticlimatic. Besides that tie to the first novel, nothing actually happened in that ending. The conflict was solved, events happened but no conclusions reached. The people of Lusitania may feel better and may be able to expand their colony, but I’m in the same place.

Children of the Mind gets by only because it’s a part of the Ender Saga. There are interesting ideas, but Card is trying hard to push himself when he ran out of things to say. It even lacks the occasional outrageous moment of Xenocide. That novel was empty, but you could trim it to a decent novella. A kind editor should’ve told Card that he’s writing a story, not a hodge-podge collection of conversations with self, ruminations and the occasional encounter with aliens. At least the first two books are constructed well enough they stand on their own.

2 children out of 5 minds

Advertisements

Kill la Kill

Kill_la_Kill_poster
Kill la Kill is an exercise in absurdity. Forget everything you heard. Don’t try to analyze symbols that exist only to be cool. Kill la Kill is an anime with an absurd premise that seeks only to make things more absurd. At some point, people fight using rulebooks and shooting bills.

Randomness has been a common feature of comedy. Use it too much, and it stops being random. After all, if anything can happen then nothing is surprising. Kill la Kill isn’t random. Rather, it operates from a set of symbols and keeps finding ways to take them further.

vlcsnap-2016-01-11-00h07m38s143

In fact, it’s because it has a set of symbols that it’s so unique. Originality is connecting two distant things. Kill la Kill was born when the director noticed how similar ‘fashion’ and ‘fascism’ were. The whole thing relies on connecting clothing to dictators who laugh maniacally and want to dominate the world.

It should’ve been obvious for us now. After all, uniforms are a big deal in militaries which are dictatorships. No one did it before, not like this. It’s true that it’s not explored very deeply. The main villain wants to take over the world mostly because it gives Ryuuko something to fight, but it works.

The series is absurd because it has its own style, and keeps finding ways to add more to it. That’s why Nui Harime is so surprising and at the same time is so fitting. She fits with the series’ obsession of clothing, but until then we haven’t seen a cute fashion girl.

vlcsnap-2016-04-02-14h34m13s23

The heart of the series, though, is in the characters. For all of the pictures of Ryuuko scowling, Kill la Kill is a hilarious comedy. Good comedy comes from funny characters, not funny punchlines. By making sure every character is a joke, they manage to make every situation funny even when they’re ridiculous.

It’s a difficult approach. Your characters can easily become one-note. They can become a joke or even a punchline that simply repeats itself. But the characters aren’t embodiment of jokes. They are ideas pushed to the extreme. The joke of Gamagoori isn’t that he screams a lot, but his ridculous devotion to discipline. Again, the show uses ideas as an inspiration point that affects everything

There are also a lot of them, and so there is a lot of room for varied interaction. The ideas these characters represent constantly bounce off each other and clash. They’re also pushed to the extreme in a way that makes them all close-minded. So the interaction never changes anyone. Rather, we two buffoons completely sure of themselves refusing to admit they’re wrong.

The series also has no filler interaction. There isn’t a single line of generic dialogue. Everything the characters do and say is modified by their personality. It’s not even a case of voice actors putting a lot of effort. The writing itself makes sure you can recognizee the speaker. This is why the characters feel so alive and real, even though they got blasted with missiles and don’t die.

vlcsnap-2016-04-02-14h34m34s211

They’re not psychological portraits, of course. They’re mythic, embodying some ideas with grandeur. Yet, for all its lack of realism it feels more real than most anime. That’s because in real life, people react to things in ways that are uniquely them. So no matter how much you exaggerate, having this trait is the most important.

Since the characters feel so alive, the anime actually has effective drama. It’s shocking at first, but the serious moments are touching. They’re also pushed to the extreme, of course. Mako’s eyes become a faucet but it doesn’t make them any less effective. The series establishes that these are living beings. Since they feel real, so is their drama. After all, a rock falling from the sky isn’t emotionally engrossing. A living person falling is tragic. When it’s someone we know, it’s even more.

The variety and pure nonsense of this cast actually becomes an integral part of the plot later on. While the story of conformity vs. uniqueness is shallow, it uses the right symbols to bring it to life. It might be divorced from reality, but a story of a bunch of crazies fighting to keep their silly personality intact is relatable. It’s easier to believe it when the people fighting for uniqueness are as unique.

vlcsnap-2016-04-02-14h36m39s196

The irony is that the only character who goes through a major change is Satsuki. She’s at first a symbol of conformity and The System, later to reveal she has different intentions and then to admit her methods were wrong. I’m not sure whether it was meant to shed more light on the ideas. It’s a little too disconnected. Still, it’s a good example of how flexible it is.

The visuals are also a big deal. The amount of sexual fanservice has been blown out of proportions. The art style is closer to the Western caricature than traditional anime. Characters are often blobby and in weird shapes. The women have figures, but they’re mostly just there. Shots that emphasize their sexy build are rare. Many bodies are only vaguely female.

Besides transformation sequences and a few suggestive shots, the series ignores nudity. It’s there. Some people sport their abs and you can get a decent idea of Ryuko’s figure but that’s it. Anyone looking for hot shots to screenshot will be disappointed.

Everything else about the art style is brilliant. The expressive character design is a given. It’s the environment and action scenes that are more unique. Nothing is literal in this world. Every environment expresses the atmosphere, but is never meant to be taken literally.

vlcsnap-2016-04-02-14h37m47s110

This may some like a problem for those who care about precise details. If you care about precise details, read history. Fiction isn’t reality but an expression of human thought. The scenery of Kill la Kill is physically impossible, but is important for the immersion. That’s because humans don’t take in precise details. We take in certain cues that make perceive our environment in some way.

The action is the same. It’s rarely a case of tactics. It’s cool people swinging their weapons and uniform while color flashes. It’s a lot of fun but I’m surprised the Porygon effect didn’t surface. Besides the lump of exposition around the middle, it’s the only weak spot. Sometimes it’s too much, the colors flash and move and things explode and the only result is a headache. Kill la Kill is mostly good at controlling its nonsense (which is why it’s so impressive). A few action scenes are the only ones where its style works against it, doing more harm than good. It’s a small case.

The anime also sometimes feel a little too long and overloaded. It’s never enough to ruin it, but by the final battle the series has less steam than before. As good and epic as it is, it’s not enough. The series pushed things to the edge so much that they didn’t have much for the end but a huge lump of fibers.

Still, the flaws are tiny and barely worth talking about. Kill la Kill is the essential anime about beating people up and saving the world. There’s no reason to watch long shounen anime that never end when you have this. Even One Punch Man, which was a lot of fun looks tame and silly by comparison. It’s a series worthy of the hype, and I hope the fandom will keep it popular for a long time.

4.5 glorious Mako speeches out of 5

 

 

George Orwell – Why I Write

why-i-write
George Orwell is a towering figure in writing. He defined how we think of totalitarianism, and created a language that’s a tool to demonize any regime or opponent. That’s ironic, because this demonization is one thing Orwell avoided. He’s an unavoidable author whose status is almost mythic. He’s a symbol.

Authors rarely become symbols. The activity is too solitary and unexciting. Orwell is one of the few famous writers who clearly wrote with hopes to improve the world. A lot of fiction is personal, even the satirical. Catch-22 reads more like a person trying to find humor in his military experience, rather than hoping the generals will read it and change their modus operandi.

The importance of the first essay relies more on the fact Orwell wrote it. It shows the human beneath the writing and the terms he invented. His four main motives are interesting, and I have a hard time thinking of another one. It’s more interesting to read how Orwell was a lonely nobody in the beginning. The writing is a little jerky, feeling as if Orwell is afraid to let everything out. He’s uncomfortable writing such a personal thing. There’s also an air of self-criticism, which is important for any serious intellectuals.

The second essay about the English culture/people is a problem. Too much of what Orwell writes is personal observation. It’s interesting and well-written, but nothing really verifiable. You have to take Orwell’s word for it. Since it’s a political piece, it’s harder to take that leap.

At least Orwell never demonizes anyone. He recognizes Hitler was the enemy back then, but there’s no joy or bravado in that idea. We need to defeat the enemy because he sadly exists, but that’s nothing to celebrate.

I’ll refrain from commenting on Orwell’s economic ideas, since I’m completely ignorant in that subject. You have to start somewhere, and Orwell is a decent beginning. He’s blunt that he’s in favour of Socialism. Again, his critique of Capitalism never descends into demonization. The essay doesn’t elaborate too much on the difference between Socialism and Capitalism, but Orwell gives the impression that he has sound reasons for his opinions.

One problem that happens over and over in that essay is Orwell’s calling some facts obvious. Phrases such as “anyone who understands” or “anyone who had eyes” and so on appear frequently. They’re not next to obvious facts. Maybe they were obvious back in the day, but in modern times you’ll have to look in history books to make sure Orwell is making sense.

The third essay is just a description of hanging. The prose is fantastic. There’s no point to it other than make the scene come alive, and Orwell does it. The prose is simple, with no stylistic quirks. It also has no bullshit. This prose was wooden in 1984, yet here it captures the sense of ‘this really happened’ that all realist authors aim for.

The last essay is not only the best, but should be spread around. Orwell’s criticism apply to every language. Complex language is overrated, especially when you’re dealing with ideas. If the purpose is to make readers understand you clearly, your words shouldn’t be a dense forest.

Complex sentences may work in fiction. Tone and describing sensory information is something authors do all the time. Fictional prose always borders on poetry. When you’re writing essays or talking about ideas/politics you need to be clear. You want to send a specific message, not something vague that can mean different things depending on the person.

There’s no reason for an intellectual person who understands his ideas to bury them. Words can be used to transmit ideas, or to blur them. The examples Orwell gives are a headache, and the way he transforms a Biblical passage into ‘intellectual language’ is hilarious.

He’s wrong about jargon, though. Jargon exists so the writing will be cleaner. Jargon takes a complex idea and sums it up in one word. These words are often obscure because people who use them often are passionate about their field and discuss these ideas constantly. Some even have subject-dependent meaning, like how ‘texture’ has its own meaning in music.

Of course, some people can use it to cover up not saying anything. You can feel your music review with ‘harmony’, ‘texture’, ‘idea’, ‘time signature’, ‘octaves’ and you still won’t be able to explain why The Beatles are so good. The way to test these people is to ask them what a certain jargon word means. An intelligent person will be able to explain it.

I’m glad Penguin Great Ideas put all these essays in one accessible book. Why I Write is an attention-grabbing title, and all of these essays help understand who Orwell is. Two of them are too personal and would only matter for writers or fans of Orwell. The last essay is a must-read no matter who you are. We all use language, after all.

3.5 politicians out of 5

Psycho-Pass

psycho-pass-poster
Criminals who babble philosophically will always be present in fiction. It’s an acknowledgement that mere sadism isn’t enough. Even if a person is a sadist, there is more going on than plain cruelty there. If we can answer what makes a man start fires, maybe we won’t need fire extinguishers. Too often these stories are too fascinated with the idea of the underdog taking revenge at society. He may lose, but awareness that he’s wrong doesn’t make it any less of an escapist fantasy.

The person’s actions should follow his worldview. If they contradict that, then this contradiction must be addressed. People are messy so of course they will contradict themselves. If they do so in the story, it’s because the author made it so. If he made it so, he needs to connect it. Don’t put contradictions where they don’t belong. People don’t always contradict themselves.

vlcsnap-2015-11-03-17h36m35s210

There’s a scene where Makishima gets into a fight and we see he’s a professional. It’s like before he went to star in Psycho-Pass, he stopped at Naruto and learned the ways of the ninja. I was supposed to be impressed, though. Not only is Makishima pretty and can predict people’s actions, he’s a champion at MMA.

It’s hilarious. It reminded me how Lisbeth solve an equation in the middle of the climatic fight. It’s so easy to give your character skills. You just look up the cheat codes, write the lines that say “add 50 points to Melee Skill” and you’re done.

Just because your character is skilled at a lot of things doesn’t mean the author is skilled. Character skills are often substitutes for personality. Makishima is your stereotypical Pseudo-Philosophical Villain. Forget about how the series quotes a lot of books. None of Makishima’s speeches are related to his actions.

All of his actions involve death and destruction. He gives people who want to hurt others the means to do so. When Makishima does something of his own, it’s also to cause hurt. The dominating theme is hurting others. He gives them the freedom to hurt others, but that’s as far as it goes.

vlcsnap-2015-11-03-17h35m13s221

For freedom to be a theme, it needs to be expressed in different ways. The only freedom people gain is to hurt others. The violence is more varied. The characters include a bullied man, a girl sucked in her art and a person who loves the thrill of the hunt.

Makishima is not very differernt from the Jigsaw Killer. Despite talking about appreciating life, his traps were so dangerous (some can’t be complete without somebody dying) that it’s obvious he doesn’t value these people’s lives. Makishima babbles about freedom and the prison of the Sybil System, but he’s fine with killing an innocent person. There’s no worse way of ripping freedom from someone than killing them.

It’s all shock value without substance. The result is entertaining at first, but goes downhill fast. The anime goes south when it expected me to stare at a helpless, half-naked woman begging for mercy and take the villain seriously. It’s not dark, because true darkness is understandable. A villain whose motives we can comprehand and find reasonable is scarier.

If Makishima tells people to live free or die, how much of a choice is it?

What a shame. The series never chose whether it was a thoughtful story or a wild, exciting one. Either of these would’ve been fine. Being pretentious is the valley between the two.

The other side of the horseshoe fares better. The Sybil System is questioned, but it never becomes a strawman. The System is totalitarian, but it’s not an evil regime bent on oppressing everyone so the protagonist will have something to fight. Every system of government comes to power because it benefits someone.

The System doesn’t just benefit the Rich & Powerful. It benefits the simple people. The society has order, but it’s good order that leaves a lot of room for joy and wonder. Creativity may be restricted, but creativity isn’t everything. The artist may want to draw violence and the rocker wants to tell everyone to fuck off. Some would prefer to have a steady job and enough money to go for drinks with their friends.

The System also presents an alternative moral system to current society. We live in a society that praises people for getting money, having a lot of sex and being physically fit. Somehow all these promises of sex and money don’t prevent the high rates of suicide. So Sybil is not very friendly towards outcasts and has less room for creativity, but what if it’s a price worth paying for mental health?

vlcsnap-2015-11-03-17h37m23s36

It’s a society where you see advertisements for ways to improve your mental health. Everyone is talking about their Hue and Psycho-Pass. If you think this is going too far, then take a look at our own society. We do the same only for physical health. Physical health is a giant industry of protein shakes, gyms and promises of social status.

No system exists without its outcasts, and Sybil has its own. Only how it casts out people isn’t so different than ours. We rage against models who aren’t stick-thin, as if being fat is a moral offense. Later, we’ll hang out with sexual harassers just because they’re charismatic. Sybil is harsh to the mentally ill, but forgets about the actions.

For a    series where mental health is a big issue, it’s surprising how lacking it is in character development. A flashback tries to develop one character. All it tells us is that she used to play guitar. Why did she take a different road than her friend? Why are their worldviews so different?

vlcsnap-2015-11-03-17h38m02s156

Akane gets some development, but she’s an archetype they play with rather than a psychological portrait. Ginoza is slightly better, but everyone else spits exposition without modifying it. There’s a wild card, a bisexual analyst, a cliched noir dude who remains tough and an old geezer. Their personalities clash more than your average detective story, but there aren’t even hints towards a psychology they didn’t have time to develop.

Psycho-Pass has interesting ideas and a pretty fun story, but it has Makishima. It’s a pin in the tire that let all the air out. The ideas are too undeveloped and there aren’t enough of them to make up for this. It’s not a case of a series that’s too short, but a series that focuses on the less interesting parts.

3 dominators out of 5