Jump to content
Christian

It gave me a corollary

Recommended Posts

I've never actually read Akira - to be honest, I'm a little reluctant to start doing so as I don't have room in my gaff for the big phone book collections.

 

 

I have the Marvel-Epic editions....37 slim issues. I want those phone books, though. Akira looks better in black and white.

 

In the back of the last issue, there were stories with the characters by different writers, including a lady Myoko story by Wazza Ellis.

 

The best line from his story..."They put a hole in my head a millimeter wide and 60 years deep."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
also, Nausicaa. I think you'd dig the political ideas behind the story, Christian. it has to be one of my favourite scifi/fantasy epics.

 

Can't believe I forgot to mention this - far and away my favourite of the manga series I've read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never been able to get into Manga, it just doesn't appeal to me. There was a Manga cartoon on Cartoon Network, Jimmy:Boy Detective or something. It was about Japan's greatest detective getting poisoned by a cult and turning into a little kid. I did really like that.

 

See, I don't think I'm a "typical" comic book fan.

I don't like most sci-fi or fantasy stories.

I think people would be surprised to find out that I enjoy superhero comics, because my reading (and my writing) is usually always non-genre, slice-of-life.

That isn't to say that I don't enjoy stories with fantasy elements in them, but it has to be a certain type of fantasy.

I buy all these sci-fi, horror, or fantasy anthologies (big, thick ones) to get a Neil Gaiman short story, and end up reading the Gaiman story and putting the book away because the rest of the stories in the book don't appeal to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like super hero books but I don't really like much sci-fi or fantasy as far as books are concerned.

I'm pretty much the opposite.

 

I buy superhero books because there are so many of them, and a few are good at any one time. But the genre as a whole doesn't turn me on.

 

I buy a lot of Star Wars, but it isn't ideal science fiction, a bit too juvenile for me. But Dark Horse is doing a good job on the SW books at least, and they are entertaining. I just wish more SF books were being done so I'd have more to choose from. The Battlestar Galactica books had potential, and I've enjoyed Star Trek books in the past. I wish someone had done good Babylon 5 books, though most of those that I've seen have been disappointing. (It may be that B5 isn't the most readily adaptable SF around.)

 

Really, the best SF would be from SF novels and short stories, since televised and movie SF is almost always lame in some way or another. I think Harlan Ellison SF would work especially well in comics. Dune would work, too. I think Ray Bradbury's work would adapt well. Asimov I'm not so sure of, but he's done so much that some story or another of his would probably be suitable. And there are so many other SF authors who've written really good stories that would benefit from a new audience.

 

I can get into fantasy, but it depends on the fantasy.

 

I can get into manga here and there but haven't gotten into it wholesale. Perhaps if all those manga titles in the previews were up on the shelves of the stories, I'd get into more of them, but I don't like buying a pig in a poke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ray Bradbury has at least one collection of his short stories adapted into comic books.

Harlan Ellison is a big fan of comics. He had "The Dream Corridor" at Dark Horse Comics for a while, which were adaptations of some of his stories.

The thing about Ellison and Bradbury is that both of them have very little that comes close to actually being considered sci-fi. Rocket ships and trips to Mars are about the only sci-fi elements to be found in their work. In fact, Ellison has written essays on the subject, saying that it's bullshit to call him a science fiction writer because he has (I'm guessing the figure he listed, it was very low) 4 stories that could actually be considered sci-fi. Bradbury fits much neater into the magical realism or Fantasy catergory than science fiction.

Probably why they number amongst my very favourite writers, hell Ellison probably is my favourite, even though I don't usually read or enjoy sci-fi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By my criteria, which apparently is more inclusive than your, Ellison has written a fair amount of science fiction. I don't accept that sci-fi has to be Asimovian hard stuff to fit the definition.

 

Four stories? How do you get such a small number??? Four books, do you maybe mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ray Bradbury has at least one collection of his short stories adapted into comic books.

Harlan Ellison is a big fan of comics. He had "The Dream Corridor" at Dark Horse Comics for a while, which were adaptations of some of his stories.

The thing about Ellison and Bradbury is that both of them have very little that comes close to actually being considered sci-fi. Rocket ships and trips to Mars are about the only sci-fi elements to be found in their work. In fact, Ellison has written essays on the subject, saying that it's bullshit to call him a science fiction writer because he has (I'm guessing the figure he listed, it was very low) 4 stories that could actually be considered sci-fi. Bradbury fits much neater into the magical realism or Fantasy catergory than science fiction.

Probably why they number amongst my very favourite writers, hell Ellison probably is my favourite, even though I don't usually read or enjoy sci-fi.

 

That's stupid.

 

What started out as you talking about how you were unlike most comic book readers because you didn't like sci-fi slowly devolves into you explaining that two of the most famous sci-fi writers of all time didn't write sci-fi.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hmmm... You, sir, are full of . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those were his own words (although I guessed at the number, like I said). He said a very SMALL figure.

I forgot that Ellison used to write actual books back at the beginning of his career. He was quite an awful novelist. I'm sure he realized this and that's why he became one of the few writers whose work has all been short fiction since that time.

His novels were science fiction. It's hard to judge any of the rest of his works as "books", since his stories are all so diverse within each collection.

Harlan Ellison has a huge problem with this need to classify books in genre for simplicity and publishers' sake. I agree with him.

I know some writers are proud of their output of only hard sci-fi or epic fantasy, and I do group certain writers into genres (such as mystery fiction).

Ellison doesn't consider himself any genre of writer. He's dabbled in different genres for certain stories throughout his career. Ellison is very hard to classify. His work falls into the genre of Ellisonian. I hope to be called an Ellisonian writer someday too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I should go off on you like Harlan Ellison would? Go to a signing and call Harlan your favourite science fiction author and see how he reacts. He'll bite your fucking right off!

 

"two of the most famous sci-fi writers of all time"-Yeah, that'd be something like being named the smartest kid in the retarded kids classroom, wouldn't it?

Ernest Hemingway is one of the most famous literary talents in history, let's give him applause! And this guy over here is one of the most famous sci-fi writers around....let's give him money for the ride home on the short bus.

Maybe you should also do some research about the terms Mr. Ellison uses for fanboys who use the term "sci-fi" when referring to respected science fiction writers? You probably wouldn't like to hear what he has to say.

I believe Mr. Ellison slapped the last fan who called his work "sci-fi".

 

Let's look at the term, shall we? hmm, SCIENCE Fiction. What does the term science mean to you? Is an alien scientific? Maybe in your febrile world. Is a man on Mars science? Well, perhaps, if you took the time explain the atmosphere and composition of the Martian planet for your readers. There is a reason for a term, you know. I could very well write a story about a dragon flying through space with a humpback whale and call it "science fiction", but that doesn't mean a damn thing. Harlan Ellison has enough sense and intellect to not even try.

Is "The Deathbird" science fiction? Is "The Beast the Shouted Love at the Heart of the World" science fiction? Are any of the stories in "Gentleman Junkie" science fiction?

Instead of spouting the terms you've heard used by the mainstream press concerning a writer, next time do some research into what the writer considers his own work, because I think he knows quite a bit more than Double Day or some cheap sci-fi fanzine.

In other words, you should probably read a bit more of Ellison's work before taking presumptious, pompous tones around me. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ellison could call himself a two bedroomed house in Birmingham if he wanted to, but it wouldn't make it true.

 

He's a sci fi writer. Sorry. Not an exclusively sci fi writer, sure, but a not-insignificant quantity of his published output could reasonably be described as science fiction. That's enough to qualify him, in my book, and no amount of curmudgeonly grumbling on the subject from Ellison himself is going to convince me otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ellison could call himself a two bedroomed house in Birmingham if he wanted to, but it wouldn't make it true.

 

He's a sci fi writer. Sorry. Not an exclusively sci fi writer, sure, but a not-insignificant quantity of his published output could reasonably be described as science fiction. That's enough to qualify him, in my book, and no amount of curmudgeonly grumbling on the subject from Ellison himself is going to convince me otherwise.

 

bingo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"not-insignificant quantity "

Which is where the problem comes in.

Where does one draw the line?

Isn't this the neat, compartmentalizing of literature by publishing houses that Ellison raves about? I do too! It detracts from the written work.

The majority of Ellison's work is NOT science fiction.

So, because a not-insignificant amount of his work could be classified as science fiction, we should put him in a box with other science fiction writers who live their life for writing science fiction?

Ellison appeals to readers who don't touch other science fiction books.

 

Besides, I see this as calling a Samoan person black. If he tells you "I'm not black, I'm Samoan." Would you tell him, "Sorry. Everyone seems to think you're black, so you are black"?

Harlan Ellison can be whatever what he wants to be and the publishers and fans shouldn't tell him, "Sorry, Harlan. You're a science fiction writer, so get back to writing science fiction!"

 

I have Fantasy elements in a good portion of my short fiction, but I would scoff if someone called me a fantasist, because it's not what I do.

All the respect in the world to those who do write Fantasy, nothing against the genre, but I'm not one of them. I wouldn't know what to discuss with them.

 

This isn't a knock on genre writers, but some writers transcend perfect genres, and only in an anal retentive world should we have to find a cozy little corner of the literary world to stick all of our books.

 

Why doesn't Gabriel Garcia Marquez or Jorge Luis Borges not have to worry about this? They have Fantasy elements in a good portion of their work, but no one groups them with Ursula K. LeGuinn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever...

 

Your fixation on genre is quite illuminating.

 

I doubt either Ellison or Bradbury (RIP) really give a shit what genre they are classified as.

 

We (the royal we) call them sci-fi because they exemplify what is good about sci-fi.

 

Writers never get to determine what genre their work is. That's what we hire critics for.

 

Call your own work "magical realism" if you want a fashionable genre tag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, glad to see you learned how to actually participate in a conversation. You'll only improve from here, it's all about the learning.

 

Is there a reason you marked Bradbury "RIP", as he's still very much alive and cranking out books every year. Let's not bury people before they are ready to go.

 

"Fashionable term"? "Magical realism"? I hope you are not denigrating the names of two of the top writers of the 20th century in Marquez and Borges by calling magical realism "fashionable". If so, you are showing a complete ignorance of the history of magical realism and the importance of it to Latin American socio-political writers.

 

You are also showing a complete ignorance of Harlan Ellison by claiming he doesn't care. His writing is his life's blood, and he cares deeply about every facet of his writing, including what genre you want to shove him into.

In fact, many writers care deeply about their work and what others call it. It's why most of us write. Otherwise, you're a hack.

Some people are proud to be science fiction or fantasy or mystery writers, and that's why they cling to that genre, out of passion for it.

Let a writer define his own work. Show some respect.

 

You call them "sci-fi" because they exemplify what is good about "sci-fi"? Well, if you call made for TV movies good, then you're exemplifying all that is good about "sci-fi". It's a derivative term.

Maybe you meant science fiction?Why the hell do I know more about this genre than someone who claims to read extensively in that genre?

Sure, Harlan Ellison does some damn good science fiction stories, when he chooses to write one. I don't read enough science fiction to know if I'd call him one of the best science fiction writers around. His science fiction stories aren't my favourite examples of his output. I do know that I consider him one of the finest writers of literature, period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spiderlegs

Superheroes piss me off unless they are irreverent or gay or fucked up or all of the above (thus my love of The Authority). Other than my admitted juvenile fondness for STAR WARS, my taste in sci-fi is limited to the 'near future,' dark dystopian tales which are hit & miss in their own right. I can say that you all should read A Prayer for Owen Meany the next time you want to pick up a novel. It might just change your life! Or not...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, glad to see you learned how to actually participate in a conversation. You'll only improve from here, it's all about the learning.

glad i have your approval

 

"Fashionable term"? "Magical realism"? I hope you are not denigrating the names of two of the top writers of the 20th century in Marquez and Borges by calling magical realism "fashionable". If so, you are showing a complete ignorance of the history of magical realism and the importance of it to Latin American socio-political writers.

 

Complete ignorance of which history:  that of the term or of a specific genre you associate the term with?  The term originated in 1920s Germany (it was coined by an art critic to describe a type of hyper-realistic painting) and has been used to describe the work of various writers from Poe to that woman who writes Harry Potter.  Maybe you think the term should only apply to a very specific South American genre: those novels influenced by the blend of realism and fantasy in Andrade's novel Macunaíma (first defined as such in the 1960s by a Venezuelan essayist and critic Arturo Uslar-Pietri).  If that's your opinion, so be it, but I'll just let you know that the term is fashionably being used to characterize realistic fiction with an otherworldly component.

 

 

You are also showing a complete ignorance of Harlan Ellison by claiming he doesn't care. His writing is his life's blood, and he cares deeply about every facet of his writing, including what genre you want to shove him into.

You mean Ellison's not dead?  Personally, I prefer Lansdale.

 

In fact, many writers care deeply about their work and what others call it. It's why most of us write. Otherwise, you're a hack.

 

Believe me, son, you can care deeply about what you write and be a hack.  The two are, unfortunately, not mutually exclusive.

 

Some people are proud to be science fiction or fantasy or mystery writers, and that's why they cling to that genre, out of passion for it.

Let a writer define his own work. Show some respect.

 

Writers can call their own work whatever they want.  It is not, however, a lack of respect that leads to a classification scheme , but rather administrative convenience.    Just ask a book store owner.   

 

You seem to think that the author of a specific work has a say in this classification.  He or she does not:  the classification owes more to the accidents of history and popular  opinion than it does to any author's subjective intent.  If you think about it, it has to be that way, or else how are we to account for hidden intent in art (i.e. the cultural  commentary disguised as sci-fi)?     

 

You call them "sci-fi" because they exemplify what is good about "sci-fi"? Well, if you call made for TV movies good, then you're exemplifying all that is good about "sci-fi". It's a derivative term.

 

No, its not a "derivative term." 

 

Perhaps you misunderstood me, an item can be an exemplar of a set because it is a particularly good example of what the set it characterizes is and can be. 

 

For example, Fahrenheit 451 is a very good example of sci-fi novel--I'm sure there are bad examples out there as well--and Bradbury wrote it (and admits it is sci-fi).  Thus he is (whether he wants to be or not) an example of very good sci-fi author. 

 

Made for tv movies aren't co-extensive with sci-fi, so the logic of your example doesn't follow.  I suppose that there are made for tv movies that are good examples of sci-fi, but I can't think of any right now.

 

 

Maybe you meant science fiction? 

 

Yup, very good, you're getting the hang of this very quickly.

 

Why the hell do I know more about this genre than someone who claims to read extensively in that genre?

 

Because you are an obsessive fan boy with nothing but time on yer hands?  Or was it a rhetorical question?  I hope you are not saying that I myself claim to have read extensively in the genre, as I haven't.  Not a big fan (don't care much for superhero comics either).

 

Sure, Harlan Ellison does some damn good science fiction stories, when he chooses to write one.

 

And then there are those times when they write themselves.

 

I don't read enough science fiction to know if I'd call him one of the best science fiction writers around. His science fiction stories aren't my favorite examples of his output.

 

So what you are saying, in a nutshell is that you don't like sci-fi.  You also don't like superhero stories.  Therefore, people who like superhero stories must like sci-fi. 

 

In other words, you figure that the people who like things you don't like must also like other things you dont like. 

 

Sorry, but your conclusion doesn't follow your premises, at least logically , so the answer is no:  there is no corollary at work here. 

 

I do know that I consider him one of the finest writers of literature, period. 

 

Really?  good for you.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there a reason you marked Bradbury "RIP", as he's still very much alive and cranking out books every year. Let's not bury people before they are ready to go.

Christian: 1

Descartes: 0

Ray Bradbury: Applesauce and viagra.

 

"He'll bite your fucking right off!"

 

This is great; Johnny Mac, please let this go on..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In case you haven't noticed Descartes, there's a difference between the way I respond to your posts and the way I respond to the other Forum members in this thread.

Next time, you'll do bloody well not to interrupt a conversation I'm enjoying with your immature posturing.

We don't get much interesting actual conversations on this web-site anymore. I wonder why?

 

Rogan was bloody well right.

 

OK John, you can lock this thread or let it go on if anyone else still has use of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...