Do any of you guys out there have a copy of the FFIV soundtrack? I have a copy (which I obtained through perfectly legal means, of course, coff coff) but the ending theme cuts off before the end, and it makes me sad. If anybody could help me, I would be made happy, and in my gratitude and jubilation might even be moved to draw you a quick chibi doodle as thanks.
While we're on the subject of FF music, I used to have an mp3 of a fully orchestrated version of the entire opera from FFVI, including all the singing, not just Celes's aria. I'm sure it got lost in one computer crash or another. That sure would be nice to have again too....
Anybody else out there game soundtrack fiends? Man, I dunno what it is, but I love game music!
I FINISHED!
See, since November I've been working on my contribution to Rittenhouse Archives' Marvel 70th Anniversary card set (and if you click the link and scroll down the page, you can see my Rogue one row up from the bottom, on the left!): 100 full-color sketch cards to be inserted into packs. This is only my second card set; my first was Upper Deck's Marvel Masterpieces III, for which I only did 50 (I think?) cards, and only in pencil, so this really required me to step things up a bit. I was majorly stressing about getting them done, but I just scanned in the last batch, and sent off the scans for approval. Tomorrow I'll figure out the whole sending-the-cards-by-Fed-Ex thing, and the only thing left to do will be to wait for approval. (Which ... definitely crossing my fingers there! The bummer is, I have to wait until the set is released to show off my shiny cards--the ones that got approved, I mean. Which won't be until the end of March. Bah.)
Even more exciting, as a reward for getting this project done before the Jan 31 deadline, I'm giving myself the next two days off, plus the weekend! I am going to sleep and sleep....
Bloomsbury is ceasing to supply copies of the US edition of Magic Under Glass. The jacket design has caused offense and we apologize for our mistake. Copies of the book with a new jacket design will be available shortly.
So I wrote a letter:
I am sure your department has been flooded with emails at this point regarding the cover art for Jaclyn Dolamore's new book Magic Under Glass, protesting the use of a white cover model on a book with a dark-skinned protagonist. Please allow me to add my voice to the protest. Such a practice is shameful and misleading; it gives young readers the incorrect notion that only white people can be heroes, that only white heroines can be beautiful, and that non-whites are fated to be relegated to lesser roles merely because of the color of their skin. In short, it is gross and racist and backwards, and you should be ashamed.
Perhaps you don't realize the impact this sort of behaviour has on young people; I am sure many young black, Asian, Hispanic, Middle Eastern--in short, non-white--readers have been put off from reading a book featuring someone like them, because of misleading cover art. In crassly commercial terms, you're losing out on a vast potential market. In more human terms, you are alienating people who should be your allies. Do you believe that white readers won't read a book with a non-white character on the cover? I assure you that's not true. Readers love good stories; the racial heritage of the main character is irrelevant.
After the uproar over the whitewashed cover art for Justine Larbalestier's Liar, one would think you would have learnt your lesson. It is not enough to correct one cover; you must correct your thinking. It is good and commendable that you are publishing books featuring non-white characters. Now, please, stop hiding the fact: shout it from the rooftops, be proud and bold. Learn from your past mistakes, and understand that readers are not going to let racism and marginalization pass unremarked.
Justine Larbalestier: Race and Representation
Reading in Color: An Open Letter to Bloomsbury Kids USA (Good links to other info here as well.)
Jezebel: The White-Washing of Young Adult Fiction Continues
Also a tip of the hat to
You can write or email Bloomsbury at:
Editorial and Marketing office:
175 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10010
Phone: 646-307-5151
Fax: 212-780-0115
bloomsbury.kids@bloomsburyusa.com
children.publicity@bloomsburyusa.com
Here's mine:
(I think you can click to enbiggen, and view the truly nerdy nicknames for my hard drives and folders...)
But this is merely an excuse for me to talk about White Collar, and what an awesomely awesome show it is. I started watching Castle on Hulu because of the Halloween episode, and because of Nathan Fillion, and Hulu has the lovely little "you might also like" widget, and between that nudge and a recommendation from Orson Scott Card's review site, here I am, hooked. I like stories about crime, especially if the hero is a criminal, especially if the hero is a criminal of the suave, irritating-yet-charming, ripping-you-off-and-making-you-like-it variety (c.f. The Lies of Locke Lamora, The Thief and sequels, not to mention the proliferation of charming thieves in the Final Fantasy series), and White Collar has all of the above, plus snappy dialogue, clever plots (much cleverer than Castle, which one does certainly not watch for the mysteries), decent cinematography and editing, with the additional charm of Mr Matthew Bomer's piercing blue eyes and easy smile (although I have to admit I like the FBI agent better). (Was that all one sentence? Yeesh!) It also has one of my favoritest of all favorite things in any kind of story, which is the semi-friendly, semi-adversarial relationship between the two main characters. I will read or watch or generally just devour that kind of character relationship all day long, and the thief-turned-FBI-consultant plus straight-laced-FBI-agent combination is absolutely delightful.
Have you noticed, though? All of USA's original series can be described as "a(n) [adjective] [type of career] solves crimes using his [special ability]."
(Also let's hear it for Hulu! That brain-rotting alien ad campaign of theirs is really accurate; I never really watched any TV until I discovered them, and now I am streaming full seasons of short-lived little-known TV shows [Journey Man and New Amsterdam, if you're curious; both were pretty good!] to ward off boredom while I draw. Yay, Hulu! I have fewer brain cells now than I did last week at this time!)
This presents an interesting problem. Caricature has never been taken as seriously as realism. The history of Western art, with the exception of the dark ages and the 20th century, has always been derived from realism, and the art of the dark ages probably had more to do with the loss of knowledge and craft than with a conscious artistic choice. Caricature might be seen as clever, but except for artists, nobody values caricature as more than a lightweight diversion. Disney moved more towards illustration when he went into features. The all-cgi features have pushed their visuals towards greater complexity (which sometimes clashes with their character designs). Video games have also gravitated towards realism. I believe that this has been motivated by a desire to be taken more seriously by getting closer to what Western eyes value in art. (Emphasis mine.)
But I'm swimming against the tide. Other animators/comic artists look at Glen Keane's rough pencil drawings and weep with envy and awe at the energy and quality of line, but the average audience member just goes, "Buh?" Realism is seen as inherently superior, requiring more skill--even when it doesn't. Mayerson goes on to say: "It's not a problem for comedy; if caricature is thought of as lightweight, then it's perfectly suited to getting laughs. But just as all comedians yearn to play Hamlet, all animators yearn to be taken seriously, if not in terms of subject matter then in terms of respect." (Again, boldface added.)
It's an interesting article, and I recommend you read all of it. He doesn't pose any solutions, and I can't either. Hell, I can't reconcile the tension inside my own head, let alone for all of Western civilization.
I'd love to hear what you guys think.
ETA: From a buddy of mine: "Even realism is caricature. If we drew exactly what we saw the drawing would come out as an information overload: it would be a mess and too difficult to read as a work of art. Every drawing, painting, whatever is made up of thousands of graphic design decisions meant to simplify and caricature the reality we are seeing, so we can turn it into a readable and appealing piece of art." My response: So the artist looks at the world, interprets what he sees, and chooses what to show to the audience in order to create the desired effect. Does that mean that "realism vs caricature" is a false dichotomy?
Sincerely,
Me
And to my friends: here's hoping we all find 2010 a vast improvement. Cheers! *toddles off to have tea with whiskey in*
Longer Version: ... ah, to heck with it. Just read this review. She already said it all.
Merry Christmas to everyone! (And happy birthday to
Any other fic recs are welcome too! I loves me some well-written fanfiction.
Thanks, guys!
Also got a haircut for the first time since July. My hair stylist is the best in the world, and I've gone to her since 1997; she laughed when she saw how shaggy I'd gotten. So now I have this cute little pixie bob (which is apparently a breed of cat. Who knew?). Now today I just have to get caught up on about a hundred and fifty commissions I've got backlogged, because I've been killing myself with these dang Marvel sketchcards. (If you scroll down, that's my Rogue, second row from the bottom, on the left!) But I can do that now, because I have replaced my dried-out markers! (And thus we come back around to the beginning, and end.) How's everybody else doing? Anybody go see Avatar yet? Or The Princess and the Frog?
But I do hate it when TV shows get Kansas wrong.
In a recent Dollhouse ep, when a character is asked where she came from, she responds, "Salinas, Kansas," pronounced "Sal-EE-nas." Now, folks, there's no such place. There's Salina, Kansas, pronounced "Sal-EYE-na," though. (That's one of those "Are you a true Kansan" tests, too--being able to say "Salina" right.) Now, the character in question was not who she claimed, but that would seem to make it all the more important to get it right. What if a true Kansan had been nearby? He would've smelled a rat at once, blowing her cover. Badly done, Hollywood!
Now I'm trying out the first episode of a show called Jericho, set in the little town of Jericho, Kansas. I have no problem with people making up towns in my state--I'm doing it myself, in a story I'm working on. So that's all good. But as the main character's getting close to Wichita ... are those mountains in the distance? That famous mountain range that goes through the middle of Kansas? I know what I said about getting used to scenery goofs, but ... mountains?!
I feel protective of my home state, you know? Do other people feel the same? (Part of me supposes they must; another part isn't so sure.) If you're from, say, Montana, do you freaking hate seeing Montana goofed up and derided in the media? Or Tennesee? Or New Orleans?
Your result for Which fantasy writer are you?...
Orson Scott Card (b.1951)
-21 High-Brow, -3 Violent, 13 Experimental and 1 Cynical!

Congratulations! You are Low-Brow, Peaceful, Experimental and Cynical! These concepts are defined below.
Although primarily known for his science fiction novels, Orson Scott Card is also a prominent fantasy writer. His suite of books known as The Tales of Alvin Maker are among the finest examples of how fantasy can combine page-turning narration with a discussion of deeper moral messages. The books are set in an alternate world where, among other things, the French Revolution never happened, which has made America look quite different than in the world we're familiar with. Apart from showing a different political map, the world of The Tales of Alvin Maker features functioning magic, the European settlers of North America bringing various forms of folk-magic with them to their new home. Here they confront Native Americans, who also use magic, but of a slightly different type. The protagonist, Alvin, is a seventh son of a seventh son and as such has great magic powers at his disposal. Much of the series comes forth as an attempt to discuss the birth of the US and celebrating its virtues without shunning away from the mistakes that have been made.
Card is one of the most appealing story-tellers alive today and has the ability to combine his light and easy prose with experimenting with what fantasy can be, by bringing up subjects such as racism and slavery, by using alternate world settings and last but not least by letting the "small world" of family-life (complete with sibling envy from those who weren't born with the ability to do magic) have a prominent place in his stories.
Card is also one to propagate against violence, but without falling into the trap of being unrealistic or romantically pacifist. The question of who should be reading Card, those who want to be entertained or those who want to be challenged is easily answered: They all should!
You are also a lot like Katharine Kerr.
If you want some action, try Lian Hearn.
If you'd like a challenge, try your exact opposite, China MiƩville.
Your score
This is how to interpret your score: Your attitudes have been measured on four diffent scales, called 1) High-Brow vs. Low-Brow, 2) Violent vs. Peaceful, 3) Experimental vs. Traditional and 4) Cynical vs. Romantic. Imagine that when you were born, you were in a state of innocence, a tabula rasa who would have scored zero on each scale. Since then, a number of circumstances (including genetical, cultural and environmental factors) have pushed you towards either end of these scales. If you're at 45 or -45 you would be almost entirely cynical, low-brow or whatever. The closer to zero you are, the less extreme your attitude. However, you should always be more of either (eg more romantic than cynical). Please note that even though High-Brow, Violent, Experimental and Cynical have positive numbers (1 through 45) and their opposites negative numbers (-1 through -45), this doesn't mean that either quality is better. All attitudes have their positive and negative sides, as explained below.
High-Brow vs. Low-Brow
You received -21 points, making you more Low-Brow than High-Brow. Being high-browed in this context refers to being more fascinated with the sort of art that critics and scholars tend to favour, while a typical low-brow would favour the best-selling kind. At their best, low-brows are honest enough to read what they like, regardless of what "experts" and academics say is good for them. At their worst, they are more likely to read what their neighbours like than what they would choose themselves.
Violent vs. Peaceful
You received -3 points, making you more Peaceful than Violent. This scale is a measurement of a) if you are tolerant to violence in fiction and b) whether you see violence as a means that can be used to achieve a good end. If you aren't, and you don't, then you are peaceful as defined here. At their best, peaceful people are the ones who encourage dialogue and understanding as a means of solving conflicts. At their worst, they are standing passively by as they or third parties are hurt by less scrupulous individuals.
Experimental vs. Traditional
You received 13 points, making you more Experimental than Traditional. Your position on this scale indicates if you're more likely to seek out the new and unexpected or if you are more comfortable with the familiar, especially in regards to culture. Note that traditional as defined here does not equal conservative, in the political sense. At their best, experimental people are the ones who show humanity the way forward. At their worst, they provoke for the sake of provocation only.
Cynical vs. Romantic
You received 1 points, making you more Cynical than Romantic. Your position on this scale indicates if you are more likely to be wary, suspicious and skeptical to people around you and the world at large, or if you are more likely to believe in grand schemes, happy endings and the basic goodness of humankind. It is by far the most vaguely defined scale, which is why you'll find the sentence "you are also a lot like x" above. If you feel that your position on this scale is wrong, then you are probably more like author x. At their best, cynical people are able to see through lies and spot crucial flaws in plans and schemes. At their worst, they are overly negative, bringing everybody else down.
Author picture from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Orson_
Click the link for license info.
( Cut for spoilers, 'cause you never know )
So, was it a problem of expectations? What gives with the hate?
(
How soon is "soon"?! Can it be this winter so we can have a Sherlock Holmes/Wolfman/Solomon Kane trifecta of period action movie awesomeness?
She's not asking for handouts, not even asking that you buy a copy of her book: just asking that you spread the word, so that it can reach the same audiences that made Pride and Prejudice and Zombies and Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters successful.
Myself, I'm adding MP&M to my wishlist and hoping I get it for Christmas; it sounds fun, and vastly better than the other two!
Can't stop the signal, guys!
(via
I really wanted to like this book! It is a magical Regency-cum-Gothic-cum-Victorian-epic, and the Regency and magic are two great tastes that combine for extra-super-awesomeness! Just think of The Enchanted Chocolate Pot or Mairelon the Magician! (But then, Patricia Wrede is an excellent writer, and her books have just the right mix of period manners, enchantment, and adventure.) Mrs Quent, however, failed to grab my interest; the narrative voice, a sort of inferior Jane Austen pastiche, did not enthrall ... and the author spelled "magic" with a "k" on the end.
Yes, it's a mere pecadillo next to having boring characters and a plot that hasn't started moving at all within the first twenty pages (I told you I'm not patient), but it's one of those minor little things that just drive me up a wall! "Magick," indeed! It's sort of like in the latter seasons of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, when Willow's magic became "The Magicks," capital letters audible. Please! Get over yourselves! Magic doesn't need to be made more special-er with all those high-scoring letters from the Scrabble game! "Magick" is not more magical than "magic" is; nor is "majick" or "majyk" or "majyck" or whatever other goofy misspellings pompous fantasy authors are coming up with these days. Harrumph!
So now I'm on to the next book in the stack from the library haul, The Bone-Doll's Twin, about which I've heard very good things.***
*a pseudonym for Judith Tarr, whose book Queen of the Amazons, about Hippolyta and Alexander the Great, I read with a great deal of enjoyment.
**another pseudonym, this time for Mark Anthony. It's of interest to me that both books have blurbs on the covers implying that these are debut novels, when in fact, both authors have been published multiple times before. Why do that? Are people more likely to buy debut novels than novels by established authors?
***Well, Orson Scott Card recommended it on his site. Turns out he also recommended Mrs Quent, though, which gives me a little pause. Just because he's a great writer doesn't mean he has awesome taste in books...?
Also also, no new episodes 'til January?! NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! Well, at least it gives me time to make all my deadlines without distraction!
In sum: great episode. Thank you once again, Supernatural, for ripping my heart out of my chest and stomping it into a squishy goo.
Also, you made me love Sammy for the first time since ... ever. Well done, show!
Love and kisses,
Me
P.S.
When John says, "I am," and Kate takes his hand, I just die, it makes me cry every time, the whole ending of the movie is awesome. This is probably further proof that I am a.) not normal and b.) an enormous softie, but this movie does it right. It's all running jumping (climbing trees?) blowing stuff up (the chase through the city is unintentionally hi-larious--or maybe not unintentionally), with the romance between the two leads being little more than an afterthought, and yet it works. Is it the high strings of aching sorrow and destiny fulfilled on the soundtrack? Is it having the weight of three whole movies (+ the show if you feel like retconning that in) behind this moment? I don't know, but it is just exactly the sort of thing I can't get enough of.
