204 thoughts on “Pixel Scroll 4/21/17 Pass The Pixel On The Left Hand Side”

1. Double 7s!

2. Get out of there at once! The pixels are coming from inside the scroll!

3. Anthony M here. I liked your bolded section – checking boxes. That’s a good term for it.

4. Couple of mistakes in that CNet Woz piece…

   “Even though California already has a Comic Con — the massive event in San Diego”
   “a Comic Con”? Hell, there’s at least four other significant ones I can think of in Southern California alone. And, y’know, it’s about 500 miles by car to San Diego; I think you might be able to get support for one of dem Comic Con things in the Bay Area.

   “Last year marked the first time Silicon Valley hosted its own Comic Con”
   Not counting, y’know, the several years of the also in the San Jose Convention Center Big Wow con…which was bought by the group putting on the Woz con. We’ll also leave out APE; Alternative Press Expo.

5. [selection of checkbox complete]
   [post tracking sequence initiated]
   [tracking….]

   [set post_rank to “sacrificial fourth”]

6. I was thinking about going to the San Jose Comic Con this weekend but I was a slug and didn’t launch in time so I’m going to a cider festival instead.

   I did manage to get my publicity done in time and was actually at the printer paying for it when the power went out, resulting in a massive multi-hour blackout that brought much of San Francisco to its knees today. Kind of a west coast snow day.

   There’s also a SF Comic Con in September. Neither is as grand as the SD one, but they’re not bad.

7. Second fifth!

8. (13)
   Amused that some of it was shot on a Red Line train, somewhere under L.A. And there’s one scene in what looks like the L.A. River channel.

   (17) when we got a new phone system at work, we got to watch our phones boot up.

9. (15) Oh, ugh. Chris Carter’s episodes were by far the worst things about the X-Files revival. Not happy about him being given another chance to wreck the show.

10. (2) I bought a subscription to the New York Times crossword recently, and in addition to doing the 2017 puzzles, I’ve been working my way through the archives starting in November 1993. In the 1993-1994 puzzles, the Hugo Awards have come up multiple times. I don’t think I’ve seen them mentioned in the 2017 puzzles yet though. So, maybe they’re entering the common lexicon in one context and exiting it in another?

    (Doing crosswords from 23 years ago is kind of mindbending because you have to sort of mentally go back in time to get the “current” events references. It’s like spending an hour or so a night back in the Clinton Administration.)

11. DOuble fifth!

12. Why don’t the researchers just get consent? Even if it is not legally required, it seems like the obvious right thing to do.

    Woz con- if you don’t like the cons out there, start your own?

13. (7) NEIL GAIMAN, BOX CHECKER.
    In my ideal world, nobody would feel the need to hide their gender or sexuality in order to be accepted, to avoid being discriminated against.

    Until then, I’m all for more stories that show it’s o.k. to be different. Humanity in all its diversity, that’s what I want.

    (There’s a whole palette to choose from, why limit yourself to just Straight White Men?)

14. P J Evans: My phone does that, too. Right now, I’m sitting in a chair with a terminal open and a screen-sharing app and two co-workers and three consultants, and wishing, really really wishing, I could watch a machine boot up. Instead, we’re working on one of the very few machines I can’t get a console on. My mind is breaking.

15. In my ideal world, nobody would feel the need to hide their gender or sexuality in order to be accepted, to avoid being discriminated against.

    Until then, I’m all for more stories that show it’s o.k. to be different. Humanity in all its diversity, that’s what I want.

    (There’s a whole palette to choose from, why limit yourself to just Straight White Men?)

    In my defense, there were a few problems:

    1) In the story, Angel is already aware Cyclops was mad at him when he thought he had a crush on Jean. Now Cyclops apologizes to him, because he thinks he was wrong about that.

    Considering that he knows Cyclops was ALREADY mad at him when he thought Angel had a crush on FEMALE Jean, what would make him think it was a good idea to tell somebody – in the year 1602, remember – who already has a reason not to like him that he was homosexual?

    2) This was not a story about how Angel was gay and we should all accept that. This affected the plot literally not at all. It added nothing, and took away some of the story’s intelligence.

    3) If you’re going to do Marvel 1602, and try to do updates of the characters in ways that would realistically fit into that setting, by all means, bring in any characters you want too. Just make sure their appearance and presence makes sense in the context of your story.

16. (9) “Stephen King adaptation Pet Cemetery” – I’ll have to look for that version. The one I’ve got is labeled Pet Sematary. 😀

    @Charon D: (publicity and power outages)

    Count yourself lucky. Some years ago, I was ordering business cards at an Office Depot when there was a power failure. I left to discover that a small plane carrying four people had crashed on the road maybe a hundred yards away. It had run out of fuel, and as I recall, there were no fatalities and perhaps not even any serious injuries. I did end up having to get inventive to get home, as the plane was in the way of my usual route, but perhaps I should just be happy I hadn’t left the store a few minutes earlier.

    The kicker? The email address on the cards I’d just ordered was at a “deathfromtheskies” domain, and the username referred to a certain animated beagle’s nemesis.

17. @Rev Bob … nice coincidence! I hope it’s due to my inherent optimism but I automatically assumed my business cards would be extra lucky since the power died while I was paying for them.

    I did have some paranoia flashes later on when people were spreading fake rumors and I was torn between fact checking and phone battery preservation.

18. (7) Right now I’ve come to the point that anyone using certain shibboleths (like ‘virtue signalling’ in this instance) gets dismissed immediately. Nothing good will ever come from any piece that uses such phrases.

    Makes me think a bit about Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language” where he points out that use of such shibboleths is a sign the writer is not thinking.

    Also:

    Let us sit upon the ground and Scroll sad Pixels.

19. Who’s reading Hugo Best Series finalists? I am! 😉

    The first Peter Grant/Rivers of London novel was great in audiobook! I just started book 2. Okay, there’s a little too much London history for me (now with a side of Jazz infodumping), but I’m really enjoying this series. I’m only a couple of chapters into book 2, but unless the series goes off the rails, I’ll probably keep going till I eventually catch up. I’ll have to take breaks to squeeze in some other audiobooks here and there, though.

    I started Rosemary and Rue a few days ago, though I haven’t had much time for ereading, so I’m not far in. But so far, I like it! The shift from the Prologue to Chapter 1 surprised the heck outta me and upped my interest level right off the bat.

    These are very different books/series, so far, if I’m not being foolish to say this when I’m only a couple of chapters into the October Daye book. But there are a couple of good things they have in common. I like the world building and their respective takes on urban fantasy, which, granted, I don’t read much of (examples: the rivers stuff in the Peter Grant books; the partial-fae stuff in the October Daye book). Also, I like how (at least, so far) the protagonists aren’t ultimate magical bad-asses. Sure, Grant will progress as the series progresses, but I like that one book in, he’s not already Sorcerer Supreme, whew. And yeah, I’m only a couple of chapters in, but I like that Daye isn’t (so far) super-magical and over-powered; she’s more like a fae underdog.

    /bookramble

20. Mart,

    (7) Right now I’ve come to the point that anyone using certain shibboleths (like ‘virtue signalling’ in this instance) gets dismissed immediately.

    It’s pretty much the best phrase to describe it. It made the story worse and was completely gratuitous; either Gaiman, an excellent writer, for some reason thought that dropping this little bombshell near the very end of the last issue of the series in a borderline nonsensical context was a good idea, or (the more likely reason, at least to me) homosexuality was a pet issue of his and he wanted to go out of his way to let people know that he was Totally Cool with it.

    If the former, it’s just poor writing. I think it’s more likely it’s the latter, and that’s going under the virtue signalling banner (it’s poor writing too, but in this case I doubt Gaiman really cared so long as it didn’t collapse his story completely, and it didn’t. He had a point to make and he was going to find a way – any way – to make it).

    Call it checkbox marking if it makes you feel better.

21. Anthony M: This was not a story about how Angel was gay and we should all accept that. This affected the plot literally not at all. It added nothing, and took away some of the story’s intelligence.

    This is not in your defense; this is digging a deeper hole for yourself.

    Does a character being redheaded affect the plot of a story? Does a character having a Scottish accent affect the plot of a story? Does a character having blue eyes affect the plot of a story?

    In almost all cases, no. So what you are saying is that stories should never mention haircolor or eyecolor unless they affect the plot — or for that matter, stories should never mention a character’s gender unless it specifically affects the plot in some way.

    Surely you can see how ridiculous it is for you to claim that no story should include any information about a character unless that information specifically affects the plot.

    And yes, given that you use the phrases “virtue-signalling” and “checkbox marking” in a non-ironic manner, you’ve pretty much destroyed your own credibility from the start.

    Has it never occurred to you that one of Gaiman’s characters happened to be gay simply because a significant percentage of the human population is gay, and Gaiman wrote his story to reflect the actual human population?

    No. I’m sure that it didn’t. 🙄

22. This is not in your defense; this is digging a deeper hole for yourself.

    Does a character being redheaded affect the plot of a story? Does a character having a Scottish accent affect the plot of a story? Does a character having blue eyes affect the plot of a story?

    You either didn’t read or didn’t understand what I wrote.

    Since you’re clearly not interested in listening to what I have to say, having already decided I’m a homophobe, have a nice day.

23. (7)

    It was a way of telling the reader that he cared less about them than about making himself look good to the right people….

    Speaking as a visitor from the 17th Century, I am profoundly grateful to such among your pamphleteers who employ empty inkhorn terms, as “virtue-signalling” and “box-checking”; it is a way of informing this reader that he careth less about the story he revieweth, than he doth making himself look good to rattle-pated, clotpole knaves and boobies.

24. Okay, okay. Just one last thing, I promise, then I’ll leave:

    Has it never occurred to you that one of Gaiman’s characters happened to be gay simply because a significant percentage of the human population is gay, and Gaiman wrote his story to reflect the actual human population?

    No. I’m sure that it didn’t. ?

    Despite the monster under the bed stories you might have heard, I was indeed not so blinded by my hatred of the gay population nor my rage at Neil Gaiman to neglect to consider this possibility. After I calmed down from my Smaug-like wrath caused by catching sight of a gay guy in the comics, I did try to think of why.

    Here’s the thing: This is not a red-headed scenario, or a blue-eyed scenario.

    This was obviously structured near the end of the book as a dramatic reveal. Gaiman clearly considered it significant that Angel was gay. This was a fact about him that *mattered* – not to me, mind. To him. Gaiman.

    And – people seem to want to ignore this, but it bears repeating – telling Cyclops made no sense. None. Angel is even offered an opportunity, sitting right in front of him, both to keep his secret and keep Cyclops off his back…and instead he reveals his deepest secret, a secret that in 1602 could potentially be enough to get him ostracized or blackballed from his new community, to the one guy who is *most likely* to want to use it to hurt him.

    There was NO REASON AT ALL FOR THIS.

    And finally – Angel was not gay in the original X-Men comics. Gaiman changed it. While other updates for characters make at least some sense, it does seem rather difficult to find the connection between being born in 1602 and being gay.

    To pretend that adding this in doesn’t spark any sort of questions, isn’t meant to make any sort of point, even though he actually changed a character’s sexuality around specifically to wring out this particular scene, which doesn’t need to exist at all…

    …Well, maybe Neil said “Hold on guys, there are no gay guys here! I better try to represent, you know, just for realism”.

    Or maybe had a reason in mind when he made the change.

    And even THAT doesn’t necessarily harm the narrative, but he handled it in such an incredibly poor, ham-fisted way I couldn’t believe it.

    So he doesn’t get a pass from me. I’ll let others decide if it’s my horrible right-wing bigotry informing my opinion or not.

25. Imagine being so freaked out by the concept of homosexuality that the mere presence of a gay character will ruin a story for you. And that when you have a bunch of superheroes in a fantasy Jacobean setting, a character being gay is just not realistic.

26. Speaking as a visitor from the 17th Century, I am profoundly grateful to such among your pamphleteers who employ empty inkhorn terms, as “virtue-signalling” and “box-checking”; it is a way of informing this reader that he careth less about the story he revieweth, than he doth making himself look good to rattle-pated, clotpole knaves and boobies.

    *Sigh* I sent off my last comment, saw this one, and decided to write this up quick before I left; as I add this section in via edits, one other person has already come in to ignore everything I’ve said (for example, I didn’t say the presence of a gay character was unrealistic, I said it was stupid for a gay character in the year 1602 to out himself to somebody he already knows has a reason to dislike him) and accuse me of being a bigot in as many words. Good stuff.

    I didn’t use the phrase box-checking, Mike did.

    I did indeed use the phrase virtue signalling, but again, everybody has gotten worked up as if I threw out that word and then neglected the rest of my case, which is simply not true at all.

    Now I’m certainly open to the possibility that I was only seeing what I wanted to see because I have such a reflexive disgust and revulsion towards gays, subconscious though it may be.

    But nobody seems interested in actually responding to what I really said, but they sure are interested in announcing how they aren’t interested in what I want to say. The one person who tried to respond to me so far twisted the point I made so thoroughly I find it hard to believe he was making a good faith effort.

    And NOW I’m gone.

27. Pingback: Marvel 1602 and the Wet Fish Slap Redux - SuperversiveSFSuperversiveSF

28. @Anthony M

    Congratulations, you’ve reinvented the demand for Chekov’s Lesbian. Yes, your fallacy is so common that it actually has a name.

29. And – people seem to want to ignore this, but it bears repeating – telling Cyclops made no sense. None. Angel is even offered an opportunity, sitting right in front of him, both to keep his secret and keep Cyclops off his back…and instead he reveals his deepest secret, a secret that in 1602 could potentially be enough to get him ostracized or blackballed from his new community, to the one guy who is *most likely* to want to use it to hurt him.

    There was NO REASON AT ALL FOR THIS.

    I actually have the Turkish language edition of Marvel 1602 sitting a few feet away from me.

    I’m sure I could go through and make quite a long list of character behaviour which doesn’t make sense in terms of the social and cultural environment of early 17th Century England.

    But it’s a 21st Century comic book, written by someone with some empathy for his readers, so maybe I won’t bother.

30. Anthony M: I didn’t use the phrase box-checking, Mike did.

    He used it ironically, because of your accusation of “virtue-signalling”, which frequently comes hand-in-hand with “box-checking” — two of the Puppies’ most overused dog whistles.

    It’s stunning to me that you’re actually so far down the Puppy-kennel-hole that you believed Mike was using it in a straight, non-ironic sense.

     
    Anthony M: I did indeed use the phrase virtue signalling, but again, everybody has gotten worked up as if I threw out that word and then neglected the rest of my case, which is simply not true at all.

    “Virtue-signalling” is an accusation of dishonesty. You have accused Gaiman of including a gay character for dishonest reasons — despite having no proof of any sort that this is actually the case. Your “case”, as you call it, in no way proves “virtue-signalling” or “box-checking”. That’s just coming from your over-fertile imagination and willingness to cast aspersions on Gaiman’s writerly motivations to suit your own political agenda. 🙄

31. Re: Anthony M. – “And NOW I’m gone.”

    I hope he didn’t let the door hit him in the ass on the way out. Good riddance to the dunderheaded buffoon.

32. @Anthony: Just to understand: You are complaining about two things right?
    I) The timing of the reveal was in your opinion wrong and illogical. At a different time, to a different character (not someone who doesnt like him – a priest duringf confession would have been OK?)
    II ) That it doesnt affect the story.

    Is this a fair summary?

    If yes, then its the second one that people disagree with. Simply because there are many, many things in basiccly every novel, that doesnt affect the story at all. There are books (like Cenus Taker) that have more stuff that affects the storyline, and books with less. Some stuff affects the story more and some just offer fluff, world building, colour or a sense of time passing (Im looking at you, Dark Forrest!). Why a reveal of being gay is different then an affection for beautiful pens or a catchphrase is – sweet christmas! – not clear to most here.

    TBS: If someone using the phrase “virtue signbaling” (or – more general not in your case- the phrase “The left wants us to…”) I immideatly stop reading, because the writer left the world of arguments and entered the world of ranting imho.

    (And notice how I didnt say anything against no. 1? Because there is nothing to say against No 1 on principle . It may be a fair point, havent read the book).

33. @Kendall

    I’m with you in liking that Peter Grant (PC, not boycott) doesn’t become instantly all-powerful. One of the things that often turns me off long UF series is the tendency for the power escalation of the main character to get a bit silly. I think that starting Grant off as a total naif and – crucially – not just having someone plotsplain everything to him in chapter 3, instead letting him slowly explore the worldbuilding, makes for a good viewpoint character.

34. I’ve always thought Werner being attracted to the entirely imaginary John Grey made that scene even more poignant than it would have been otherwise. Scottius just lost the girl he loved, but Werner lost a person who didn’t exist in the first place. So it certainly added something for me.

    (For people who haven’t read it, the context here is that the Jean Grey of this setting spends most of the series cross-dressing, because it’s 1602 and she’s at a boy’s school. Then she dies, as versions of Jean Grey are wont to do.)

35. I’m surprised that their has been no comment on the new Michael Bishop collection. To me this is a massive cause for celebration. I see Bishop as one of the major figures in American Science Fiction. His short stories especially repay many readings, and his “Frankenstein plays baseball” book, “Brittle Innings” was brilliant even to someone who wouldn’t know which end of a baseball bat to hold!

    I am British and don’t really know if he is well regarded in America, or is he just seen as a marginal literary figure ignored by mainstream fans?

36. Anthony M:

    “Since you’re clearly not interested in listening to what I have to say, having already decided I’m a homophobe, have a nice day.”

    That you are a homephobe is quite obvious for everyone to see. If saying that makes you leave, I’m happy to see you go.

37. Kendall: Who’s reading Hugo Best Series finalists? I am!

    I’ve got all 6 Rivers of London books from the library just sitting here now, waiting for me to dig in. And after that, all 6 Craft Sequence books I got on that $12 Kindle special (they are still an incredible deal at the current price of $18, $3 per book). I’m really hoping that I’ll love both series.

    The other 4 series were on my nomination ballot, and I’ve read all the novels in them. I’d love to have time to do a re-read, especially of October Daye and The Vorkosigan Saga, but that’s just not going to happen, with all the other Hugo reading I have to do.

38. @Kendall,

    ‘Moon over Soho’ (Rivers of London #2) was IMO weaker[1] than the first novel, so if you’re still enjoying the series, you are in for a treat.

    [1] I felt Aaronovich telegraphed the final twist a bit too obviously.

39. @Mark, Kendall
    I haven’t consciously thought about that particular aspect, but when you say it I agree that it’s a strength with the books. It both makes the story more “realistic” (if that can ever be said about UF…), and makes Peter viewpoint more interesting as he gradually uncovers the magic of the world.

    Another thing I like about the books is Peter’s view of police bureaucracy: He’s perhaps not quite a fan, but he understands it, he understands the need, and he works within it instead of trying to be a lone hero in constant strife with Internal Affairs. And since there was some complaints about there being too many “white dudes” on the series shortlist: I think this makes the books very European, and makes them something else than what you’d get from an American (white dude or not) writing the same sort of books.

40. (1)

    the 1990 Worldcon bid I chaired was also annihilated in the voting…..

    Sorry, Mike. Brighton 1987 was my first Worldcon (indeed the first con I ever attended, as I was brought in by the publicity – I decided to see what it was like by buying a day membership for the first day, and enjoyed it so much I took my scheduled train 200 miles home, threw some clothes into a case and travelled back the next day (I worked for the railways then, so I didn’t have to pay for the trains!), found a hotel for £50 a night (my credit card limit was £250 then) and stayed the rest of the con). Naturally I voted for the nearest next Worldcon site and I’d never been to Holland at that time….

    Actually, I think Confiction was the Worldcon I’ve most enjoyed of all the ones I’ve attended (1987, 1990, 1994, 1995, 2005, 2014 and hopefully 2019 – can’t make this year) – it was the way you could meet people from all over in the year after the Iron Curtain came down, Russian fans selling rouble coins as souvenirs to finance their stay, chatting with the Romanian Minister of Culture and Sport (a fan who brought a bus load of fans to the con), the chair of the Bulgarian parliamentary committee that was drawing up the new constitution…. I was a volunteer on the Green Room crew and remember turning up on the first morning in jeans and t-shirt with another newbie to be greeted with “The Minister of Culture and the Deputy Mayor of The Hague are arriving at the front door at quarter past one for the opening ceremony, can you go and meet them?” – we managed to convince the powers that be that it might be more politic to send someone who could actually speak Dutch!

41. (8) AROUND THE SUBWAY IN 25 HOURS.

    It’s my understanding that the George Mitchell in that article is the father of Filer Petréa Mitchell.

42. @Johan P

    Yes, definitely. Peter Grant is a trained policeman who was clearly prepared for a slightly staid and boring career, and just because he encounters ghosts and stuff is no reason for his character to suddenly go all maverick cop and start punching out his superiors. The fairly grounded nature of his character is one of the things that I like about the books.
    Another is that his reaction to magic is to Science The Shit Out of It. Whether the magic in the books is actually subject to rules or not, it’s a pleasingly nerdy reaction to assume that it does and try to work them out.

43. Rev. Bob wrote:
    (9) “Stephen King adaptation Pet Cemetery” – I’ll have to look for that version. The one I’ve got is labeled Pet Sematary.
    …and in a moment of dyslexia i read that as “Pet Seminary”.

    [DogStalk]

44. JeffWarner on April 22, 2017 at 2:52 am said:

    …and in a moment of dyslexia i read that as “Pet Seminary”.

    And that just gave me a not-entirely-welcome flashback to John C. Wright and “The Parliament of Beasts and Birds”.

    (Having a pithier title wouldn’t make it a better story, sadly.)

45. (7) Now I want to read a story using the concept of Chekov’s Adjectives. Maybe take an existing book and remove all description unless it directly affects the plot (Ala Garfield Without Garfield).

    (16) Years back, I was in a book club that discussed this book. It was then that I realized I had, most probably, done studies using her cells. I am still not sure how I feel about this.

46. @GSLamb

    A story where all characters are platonic* solids?

    (*All relationships would be non-romantic)

47. @JJ: (Craft Sequence for $12/$18)

    I notice that your link goes to the series of individual books, which is indeed $18, but it’s worth noting that the $12 compendium is still available.

    Speaking of series pricing, your comment prompted me to check something I had in a wishlist, and I’m glad I did. I’ve had a book on there for about four years, and it turns out to have spawned a few sequels. Furthermore, the original trilogy is available as a bundle – not an omnibus, but a set of three separate books – for much less than they are separately: $4.99 each, or all three for $6 total. There’s a small discount on the second trilogy, which appears to focus on different people in the same setting, and the second volume of a third series (once again featuring the original main character) is up for preorder.

    The series is UF, and the initial MC can negate the supernatural within a ten-foot circle. Weres and vampires become human while they’re in range, spells don’t work, and so on. Hence the name of the first book: Dead Spots, by Melissa Olson.

    In other happy news, I discovered that I’d missed the release of two more of Alex Berg’s “Daggers & Steele” fantasy police procedural books – bringing the series to eight so far.

    My Mount Tsundoku is now suffering what I can only describe as a reverse avalanche. 😀

48. 7.5 Hey I’m an item again!
    8) I wonder how many other subway systems this would be an interesting challenge for. London, certainly. There is also a little computer game called “Mini Metro” which is a transport network design game

49. Whoa, thanks for pointing that out, Rev. Bob!

    Not only are the first 5 books of The Craft Sequence still available for $12, the 6th book, which will be released in September, is currently available at a massive discount for Kindle pre-order for $3 — so $15 total for the 6 book set*!

    * I endeavour to ensure that the information I present on this website is accurate and current. However, I do not warrant or guarantee, and take no responsibility for, any errors, omissions, misleading information, random SJW credential pictures, second fifth links, or avalanches of Mount Tsundoku which may occur.

50. Iceman is totes gay tho. Get the right one, Neil!

Comments are closed.