Google Voice + Gmail Calling?

Internets! I need your help!
I use Gmail a lot, and just signed up for a Google Voice account, which has me thinking: I'm currently paying somewhere around $70-80 a month for my cell phone (which I use for home internet  as well), and I'm wondering if it would be worth dumping AT&T entirely and going over to Google, putting some of the money into getting internet at home (which is becoming increasingly needed) and getting a cheaper pay-as-you-go cell phone or jailbreaking my iPhone to do something similar.
A couple of questions for those who've used / done this sort of thing.
- How is Google Voice, and how do people use it? As a hub for any number of phones that you might have, or as a dedicated phone line? How's the quality?
- Can Google Voice be linked to Gmail?
- Can I concivebly jailbreak my phone and get a cheaper phone plan (small number of minutes, no data) with another phone company, or would it be worth buying a cheap pay-as-you-go phone and keep the iPhone as an iPod with a couple of apps on it? - Security-wise, what are the concerns?
Currently, I spend around a thousand a year on my phone. It's been a good investment for me since I got it about a year ago, but at the same time, if I can consolidate bills down to something much lower (or down to nothing, as Google Voice is free) that would be much more preferable, especially if I have wireless that can replace it? Given that my iPad and laptop would be a far more preferrable web browser than the tiny screen on my phone.
With the introduction of my iPad to the household, I've been using my phone differently - fewer games, more productivity and reminder applications (shopping lists, writing log, dictionary check book, etc, in addition to the text messages and phone calls that I get. The iPad has begun to handle most of the heavy duty writing (not that I did much writing on my phone), games, newspaper reading and when I can, web browsing.

How I Blog

I have been blogging since the spring of 2003 or 2004 (I can't remember exactly when I started), but I really began serious writing about it for only a couple of those years, running and writing for a couple of different and diverse blogs out there. Writing online is a good thing, I'm finding, and if it is something that is incredibly easy to get started. Because of that, there are a lot of bad sites out there, from people who started doing pretty much what I started with, and I wanted to share what I have found that works.

Come up with a plan.

The first major step towards creating something that will be of public interest and a resource is knowing exactly what you are intending on writing about. This blog isn't really devoted to anything in particular: I cover a wide range of popular culture, from books to films, but I also touch on history of several areas (Military, Space, etc), or political commentary. It's decidedly not like my other blog, Carry You Away, which is devoted to various types of music, and while I'm not as active with it, I've maintained a very different sort of focus for it. I read a lot of book and music blogs over the course of a day, and the thing that some just can't step away from is what they're focusing on: books? Movies? Music?

But beyond the topic, the big goal is to fully understand what (or who) you are writing for. Coming up with a small strategic plan, which helps to lay out where you want the blog to go in a week, in a month, 6 months and a year, will help steer the focus of the blog, and thus approach your material in a prepared fashion, rather than off the cuff. This is especially important for sites that depend upon revenue to keep running, through ads and so forth. Growing a blog to gain a significant audience is especially good for reviewers, because A) People will respect and look to you for opinions while B) you can do a good service towards whatever community that you are writing for. Moreover, people tend to cluster based on their interests, and communities exist for science fiction, military history and music, and being able to write for these groups helps everyone by putting a good, polished opinion out there with sound reasoning.

Write well, don't write good

Grammar and spelling is important to writers. Once you understand what you are working towards, you must be able to articulate your opinions in a clear method in which you can address the topic at hand. In the case of a reviewer, you are talking about why a product is a good one, which comes down to two parts of the equation: what are the parts that make it worth spending money on, and what is not good? In the midst of that, you begin to speak towards elements of plot and style, characters and everything like that. When looking at literary theory and analysis, you will want to have a good background in what you're writing about: know your subject, read background material and come up with an argument that makes sense. In all cases, concrete evidence and sources are essential. In talking about a good book, I'm likely to do more than simply say that I liked the book: what specific instances make the book a good one, what element of history supports your argument. Gut feelings are good, but things to point to are even better.

Beyond writing well, it is also good to edit oneself. I have long since broken the habit of writing up a blog post in the actual window: entries and reviews are typed up in a different window, with a spell check, and with at least a read through to change things here and there. This extra effort goes a very, very long way. As someone at ReaderCon noted during a panel: “If you submit work to an editor, and they consistently find that they don’t need to change much, they’re likely to go to you again.”

Don't be a fanboy. (Or girl)

This falls more towards the annoying sites that I’ve come across, but whether this is towards a specific subject, author, publisher or reviews in general, don't be completely positive with everything, and try and write about more than one or two subjects: diversify. This comes in two forms: subject, and specific instances.

The blogs and sites that I like the most have a wide variety of material on them, and they can bring some of those things together over time in their arguments. I've largely passed on sites that shill a single type of book or film, simply because there's only so many times that I can read about X, Y and Z. While I'm a huge Star Wars fan, there's a lot of things wrong with the series, and a lot to nitpick. Specializing is one thing, overdoing it is another.

The same goes for any author or publisher. There are several authors that I've read extensively on, and reviewed, and while their material is good, it's not perfect, and it's better to point out these things, to be a bit critical, to avoid becoming someone who simply gives everything an A and moves. It destroys credibility, but it also weakens the review if there are things that the reviewer misses.

(This same sort of over-grading applies to graduate school and education in general, and it's something that is very, very annoying.)

Write a lot. Then write some more.

Now that you have your direction, you have your topics, and you're taking care to review things carefully, the final step is to keep plugging away with content. This is where I have issues with most reviewer blogs, because of the sheer volume of books that are reviewed by a single person. A variety of content is good, mixing reviews and analysis, because it demonstrates that there is a synthesis of what you are reading with commentary based on the same (or similar) subject. More content generally means more people coming in to see if you've written something new, and the big sites such as io9 and SF Signal upload a lot of content throughout the day.

When I blogged extensively in the music world, I saw a definite uptick of hits when I write every day for the site - the same is true for this page as well: more posts = more readers. If it's not practical to write every single day, regularity is key. I know that I check into Post Secret like clockwork on Monday morning after the page has been updated. People fall into habits, even with things like Google Reader and RSS feeds.

The point of all this isn’t to feel magnanimous about my meager efforts writing, but because it’s something that I’ve come up with over the past seven years through a lot of trial and error. I have only come to begin writing professionally in the past year or so, and in that time, I have met a lot of people who are in the same position that I am in – people with big aspirations. Hopefully, we will all reach that point someday. In the time being, writing is like any profession: it takes a lot of work, effort and persistence.

On Reviewing

Over the past year or so, I've begun to read and write more critically about various books, television series and films, which alternatively gets people interested in some of the things that I am reading, but also drives my friends nuts by picking apart everything that is supposed to simply entertain. The bottom line is, my brain likes to see how things work, how they fit together and what makes things work. I view literature, music, motion pictures, photography and so forth; as art, and accordingly, they are often a series of fairly complicated elements that come together to create the final product that evokes emotion and thought. This is what makes things interesting, and looking alternatively at the flaws and perfections within each piece is what I find interesting.

Reviewing is far more than just writing down what you like about any given book, television episode or movie. While a lot of reviews are made up of what the reviewer likes, it's often a lost cause because everyone has their own individual tastes and appreciates things in their own way. The real trick comes in looking at the characters, the world building, the problems that cause the story in the first place, and the characters' reaction to said problems. The second level often comes when a reviewer looks to the overarching themes and tone of the story that they are looking at.

When I read a book, there are a couple of things that I tend to keep in mind as I read. The first is that I'm not a teacher, reading a homework assignment that the author has turned into me. This is largely because I don't have a good eye for what really constitutes good writing, so often, an author's writing style doesn't figure into things, unless there is something really strange about it. Grammar, spelling, and other technical things just don't come onto my radar, because when I'm reading, I typically focus on the thing that will make the book really stand out for me: the story.

The story governs everything. A story, simply, is a challenge that arrives to confront the protagonist, disrupting their life and causing them to reevaluate their life or examine things differently as a result. This is a pretty basic element of reviewing, and the evaluation here is looking at where the character reacts to the problem in a way that might be somewhat realistic, based on their environment.

While I tend to review a lot of science, fantasy and other speculative fiction, realism is the thing that I look for. While elements of the story might be fantastic, the book or motion picture is written for an audience who live in the real world, and are typically looking for realistic actions on the parts of the characters. Art is created within the contexts of its surroundings. Thus, I find it harder to excuse a book that really acts illogically or unrealistically, whether it's in the reactions that the characters have towards each other or their own surroundings. The mark of a good book is whether an author can properly balance the fantastic with the real, all the while creating something that the audience can relate to.

The actions of the characters and the problems that they face are elements that the audience can likewise relate to. The best works of science fiction and fantasy are ones that can connect to a large audience over numerous generations, either because there is a common connection between generations, exhibited in the themes of the stories, or the story is basic enough for a large number of people to really relate to it. Fiction is a way to look at the world through a different context. Stories take the problems that people face, and place their characters in similar instances. Science fiction and fantasy are especially good at this sort of thing, because they can take modern problems and really twist them out of context for a reader to see things differently.

Once the story is finished, the next step is to write down a sort of analysis of the piece - how did the story, characters and themes interact with one another, and do they work in a way that entertains, interests and provokes thought from the reader? There are a number of brilliant books out there, but often, the writer misses the entertainment point of the book. Ultimately, a good book is something that will be all of the above, and will make you want to re-read it, and buy copies for all of your friends. Precision is needed for a review, and throwing out terms like 'Great' and 'Brilliant' are things that are done far too often - the great books are few and far between, the rare gems that come rarely, but really make an impact. The really good books are far more numerous, and in all cases of reviewing, a reviewer must be accurate and precise with his/her words.

But, in the end, it does come down to one simple point: is this a book that you liked enough to read again, and something that your friends would like?

Review: The Mirrored Heavens

David J. Williams' debut novel came out back in 2008, but it came to my attention after I wrote up piece on military science fiction for io9. In it, I looked to an argument that military science fiction generally avoided some of the root lessons and causes of warfare, which helps to dictate how the actions and world around the characters would play out. Williams’ books were recommended by a couple of readers as a good example of this sort of storytelling and world, and I was eager to see how his books lined up with what I had been hoping to see in a military science fiction book.

The Mirrored Heavens is a fun, action packed read. Taking place in 2110, a terrorist act, perpetrated by an unknown group, the Autumn Rain, destroys major construct in space: the Phoenix Space Elevator, shortly before it is activated. Constructed following a Cold War between the United States and a Eurasian Coalition, the destruction of the space elevator throws the main actions of the story together. U.S. counterintelligence agents Claire Haskell and Jason Marlowe, move to seek out the origins of the attack, while several other characters move through the story to their own agendas, culminating in a fairly exciting conclusion.

What works exceptionally well is Williams’ approach to the story is the surrounding back story and world building that helps put warfare into context. Throughout my studies, I’ve found that warfare is not an isolated event, even it is generally treated as such in fiction and in film; it is a complicated and convoluted process of politics, public figures, implementation of policy and foreign relations, before any of the bullets begin to fly. Williams, with a degree in history from Yale, seems to understand this, and has begun his trilogy (followed by The Burning Skies and The Machinery of Light, which is coming out soon) with a strong start.

The Mirrored Heavens is a thriller from start to finish. Williams adds on the action from the get-go, and rarely lets up from there, blending in military science fiction and cyberpunk together to form a pretty unique, high-octane vision of the future. There were points where I just blew through the book. Williams' short, to the point writing style really suits this sort of story, and it really moved things along. Throughout, the actions in the story are well articulated and clear, something that I've seen some writers stumble with. Moreover, the action in the book ultimately does help to support the story, pushing each storyline along bit by bit.

The action is both a good thing and a bad thing, however. While it does serve the story well, The Mirrored Heavens is the literary equivalent of a video game (and it comes as no surprise that Williams worked in the video game industry before turning to writing). At points, it overwhelms the story, and looking back, I have a hard time pulling out a detailed summary of what happened over the course of the book, simply because there is so many lasers, guns and missiles that there were points where I had to put the book down to find something else to do, to clear my head and try and make sense of what was going on. Taken as a whole, the story becomes very clear at the end, but that is of little help prior to that point. Ultimately, the book simply feels unbalanced, with more towards world building and action, and less on the story at hand and character building to fill in, and I'm hoping with the sequel, The Burning Skies, that there'll be a bit more in the way of that. That being said, the book has a significant leg up once you reach the end, and find that everything that has been read through really comes to a fine point, one that really leaves the reader looking for more, and fortunately, there are two further books in the trilogy to read through to get into Williams’ universe. What I really liked the most about this book, however, was the attention to the world building. At the back of my copy is a chronology of events that lead up to the book, reminding me much of George Friedman’s book: The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for the 21st Century. There are similar approaches to how geopolitics will shift over the next century, and where Friedman’s book takes the somewhat academic route, Williams takes the far more entertaining one, set in a futuristic world with spaceflight and cybernetics, and ultimately does what Friedman’s book should have: entertain, and present a somewhat plausible view of the future.

What also really helped was some of the background information present in the book’s appendix, such as the sequence of events, glossary and character list, but in addition to the information in the book, Williams has put together a fantastic website, which functions not only as a promotional item for the book, but also a reference one as well. Both books share a similar message: the future will hold a number of changes, mostly unexpected, and that nations will act in their own interests, even if that means causing a certain amount of chaos in the world to achieve their goals. William’s future is much the same: rogue interests in a government act in their perceived best interests, seeking to take charge where others have failed, leading to what is set up to be a fantastic storyline overall.

At the end of the day, Williams has created a fun book, and a promising start in the genre. While there are certainly a couple of issues that I took from the writing and storytelling, they are more than made up with in the end result: an entertaining, well thought out science fiction/cyberpunk/military SF thriller that really grabs the reader and doesn’t let go until the last page. The Mirrored Heavens is certainly a book that will appeal to the Military SF crowd, but also the video game one, and met with most of my arguments in my article from a couple of months ago with a punch to the head from one of the Razor/Mech teams from the start.

Tools of the Trade

Facebook has had an awful week, with rollouts and several blotched interviews with employees about the future of the website, with how the site is handling user information. While at points, I've been somewhat worried about what is going on with some of the changes, it's really no different than any other element of the internet, going back to when I first starting building websites online: there is nothing private on the internet. With that in mind, it's important to remember that Facebook is a tool, one that is highly popular, useful, and still very new, but when using it, it should be used as such.

The internet is a place that has absolutely revolutionized how we interact with people around the world. Personally, I work for a graduate school through Norwich University, which deals exclusively through the internet as a way to deliver its content to students enrolled in the various programs that we provide. Speaking as a student who's been through the Military History degree, the online aspect wasn't a huge barrier for me, and ultimately, for other students who go through the program, because the school has refined its methods and found the best way to deliver the content that makes up a graduate degree. And, having gone through the program, I can attest that because it's an online school, it's not an easy thing to do.

Things such as iPhones, Twitter, Facebook, the Angel Learning Platform, hardbound books, and so forth are all tools that are designed (or come to be designed to meet an end) for some purpose. Oftentimes, I've heard people talk about how useless it is to tweet, to be connected to an iPhone, and to spend one's time indoors reading all the time. While it's true that in a number of instances, online resources can be incredible time wasters, they can also be vital for networking, communicating and learning with any number of topics and subjects.

I've been largely leery of twitter, up until a couple of months ago, when I began speaking with several authors and websites through it. Not only did it open several possibilities, I've found that it's a fantastic, informal way to speak with people I might not have been able to speak with, and it allows me to spread what I write as well to those people, who might not ordinarily read my blog, or remember to. At the same point, where I've found that it's a fantastic way to keep in touch with some people, it's likewise a good way to spread news, stories, webpages and videos, like any good social media application should do.

Tools are tools, and the nature of online sites really makes it unclear as to what something is supposed to do. A hammer is supposed to pound nails into things, a car is supposed to transport a person from point A to B, in varying amounts of style, and a website is supposed to promote, create or make money. Facebook is doing just that, and it's doing it well. While I'm disturbed at the sheer amount of unleashed greed and disregard for any sort of ethics behind some of the business practices that Facebook seems to be moving in, it makes perfect business sense for what they're doing: as a business, they need to make money in order to keep the lights on, pay their employees and continue to innovate.

I don't know what the legal obligations are in place for the site to keep people's information secure. It seems like it would make good business sense for them to keep a lid on a lot of things, because with major news organizations and even Congress looking into what they are doing, that doesn't help business, and in the Darwinian world of commerce, something better, like Diaspora, which is touting itself as a startup that will be an open sourced, locked down alternative to Facebook, will take over and go from there. At the same point, users need to realize that Facebook is a sort of tool that allows for connections, and that inherently, they want to make as many connections between users, businesses and items as possible, and opening up information, with that context, makes a lot of sense.

It goes to show that whatever you put online, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's a safe haven. MySpace, Livejournal, Wordpress, Twitter, Facebook, Meebo, Friendster, and the whole lot of it, can be overcome and in all probability, someone else will see it, and they might not be people you want seeing that sort of thing, whether it's a boss, girl/boyfriend, parent, relative, or random other person who has some interest in you. The bottom line, for me, is that it shouldn't go online. Period.

When I heard some of the news coming down the pipeline about Facebook, I was more than a little annoyed. I was almost ready to wash my hands of it, walk away and not look back, but looking at what I use the site for, I would have a difficult time doing that: I use it to talk to people, to share information and to promote my own writing and articles when published, and I have no issues with that. It's become a dominant form of how we talk to each other, and the recent news serves as a good reminder that large businesses don't always have the user's interests at their heart. So, with a little more care online, plus an adblocker, I realize that I really don't care that Facebook sees and shares that i'm a fan of Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, Sherlock Holmes and Carbon Leaf - the information is there for people to see, and the information that's not there, isn't.

Thar She Blows

The recent eruptions from the Eyjafjallajökull volcano this past week has caused havoc with European air carriers, bringing everything to a virtual stop. Something along the lines of 60,000 to 80,000 flights have been disrupted, stranding passengers and cargo in place, having a huge effect on the economies of numerous countries. And to think, this is a pretty minor eruption, with a historic record of followup eruptions that have taken place after the first ones in surrounding Volcanoes.

Volcanoes are one of the world's most powerful forces of nature, literally fire from the Earth itself, a force that has proved to be incredible devastating throughout planetary history. During my college years, I minored in geology (a trait that I seem to have inherited from my father, who is a professional geologist), and it remains a field that I continue to find fascinating, beautiful and awe-inspiring. In 2005 and 2006, I travelled to the American Southwest with the geology department for two separate trips to study the regional characteristics in the beds of rock below the surface of the Earth.

While most of my geologic interests centered around sedimentology and stratigraphy (studying sedimentary rocks, and interpreting the conditions in which they were laid down, respectively), there are some parallels with studying igneous rocks and the larger structures that are formed in the presence of volcanoes. Walking in and around volcanoes is an awe-inspiring thing to do, and it's an experience that I would really like to repeat sometime in the future.

Volcanic activity occurs when molten rock from the Earth's mantle pushes its way up into the crust and onto the surface. There are three general methods in which this is presented: shield volcanoes, cinder cones and stratovolcanos. There are a couple of other out there, but those are the general types. The formation of each respective volcano depends greatly on the surrounding environment in the crust in which it is formed. There is a key element that helps to dictate the type of volcano that erupting magma forms: Silica.

The explosive nature of a volcano depends greatly on the viscosity of the magma, which in turn determines the gas content within the magma. From Princeton University: [Viscosity is the] resistance of a liquid to shear forces (and hence to flow). In a nutshell, this means that something with a high level of viscosity will have a higher resistance to flow: it's thicker. Something with a low viscosity will have less resistance. The move viscous something is, the better it is at releasing gases trapped within the magma. The more gas within magma, the more explosive potential within a volcano.

This is why features such as the ones that created Hawaii constantly erupt with little disruption to anyone outside of the lava flows: the gasses within the magma allow for it to escape, and as a result, there are a number of very smooth flows of molten rock that spreads out from the origin, resulting in what is called a shield volcano, because of the shape that it forms. Here, the magma is classified as Mafic, which has a lower silicone content within the minerals that compose the flow - the resulting rocks tend to be rich in pyroxenes and olivines, and are darker in color. The other major class of volcanoes is the Stratovolcano, which form over major subduction zones, such as what you would find ringing the Pacific rim. The magma here tends to be classified as felsic, with a much higher silicone content, which is more viscous in nature and allows for more gas to be trapped within. These volcanoes tend to be very tall, with high peaks composed of alternating flows and debris from prior eruptions. Cinder cones tend to be found on both types of volcano, and are usually one-time events that build mounds of basalt to some impressive heights.

File:Krakatoa eruption lithograph.jpg

The Stratovolcanos are the ones that are problematic, because they have effects that stretch far beyond their immediate vicinity, as we've been seeing with Eyjafjallajökull in Iceland, and more notably, with the Krakatoa eruption of 1883. This was one of the most violent eruption (About 13,000 times the strength of the Hiroshima atomic bomb) in human-recorded history, and had profound, long term effects on global climate. Following that eruption was a marked drop in global temperature (1.2 degrees C, according to Wikipedia). Eruptions of this nature do far more than throw out lava from the vents: pent up energy within the magma builds, then explodes, vaporizing rock and throwing up a massive plume of ash, debris and dust. Larger particles come down the quickest, given their mass, and the further from the volcano you go, the smaller the debris. The dust thrown up in an event such as this rises and moves to the Stratosphere, where it can be carried around the globe. This pumps other gasses into the atmosphere, which in turn helps to deflect sunlight from the planet, allowing for a cooling event to occur. The dust and gasses in the atmosphere has the added effect of filtering out sunlight, leading to some spectacular sunsets.

Another notable event was the 1816 'Year without a summer', which had in turn been caused by the eruption of Mount Tambora the year before, which is likewise one of the most powerful eruptions in known history, at roughly four times the Krakatowa eruption. In this instance, a massive global cooling occurred, affecting the Northern Hemisphere by destroying crops and precipitating a famine. Here in Vermont, snow fell each month of the year, and the eruption would have an affect on the planet's climate for years to come.

Most of the major eruptions in recorded history have been relatively minor, with explosions of Krakatoa and Mount Tambora occurring long before the advent of modern society and globalization. The dust that is thrown up into the air by the explosion is very fine, and has the ability to completely ruin mechanical engines, resulting in the grounding of air traffic around Europe, and soon, most likely Canada. Keeping in mind that this was a relatively small and localized eruption, imagine what will happen when there is another eruption on the scale of one of those eruptions. In that instance, we will have quite a lot more to worry about than stranded passengers.

The Weather Outside

It's finally snowing again in Vermont, and we're expected to get up to a foot in some places. Not necessarily central Vermont, which has lost a lot of its snow and taken on a spring-like atmosphere, something that will hopefully be changing. Meanwhile the rest of the country has gotten all of the snow that should rightfully be Vermont's, with feet of snow at a time, exhausting the budgets of state highway departments two months into the year.

With the snow came, from conservative pundits, a quick outcry as to how the storms invalidated the theory of global climate change, on the grounds that if there is snow on the ground, clearly, there can't be any sort of warming in the atmosphere, and that the liberal lies concerning man's impact on the planet have been unraveled by the white stuff on the ground. Just as quickly, liberal commentators slammed, and rightly so, the thinking behind these fairly short sighted arguments.

There are a number of different theories when it comes to how the climate of the world has interacted with humanity in the past ten thousand years of our existence. Scholarly evidence points to irrefutable evidence that the planet has indeed been heating up - both the atmosphere and the oceans (which are a major component to the Earth's atmosphere), and that this trend largely fits with the rise of industrialization around the world. By and large, there is an assumption that these two figures are inextricably linked together. This may or not be the case, but it does present a compelling notion that humanity is indeed responsible, at least in part, for some of the changes in the atmosphere. Numerous scientific groups from around the world look to general circulation models (which attempt to mathematically link the atmosphere, the oceans and life of the planet into a representation of the world) to help see what is happening in the world. While their methods differ, there is a general consensus that humanity has contributed to CO2 in the atmosphere in a way that is likely to raise global temperatures between .05 and 1.5 degrees Celsius. (Brian Skinner, Stephen C. Porter and Jeffrey Park, Dynamic Earth: An Introduction to Physical Geology, 5th Edition, 518) While a single degree doesn't seem like a lot, and is even welcomed by some (I can't begin to say how many people I've heard say that they'll welcome Global Warming with each new snowfall each year) that sort of rise in temperature does more than just heat up the planet. With increases in temperatures, minute changes within atmospheric patterns occur - increased evaporation from water sources in turn leads to more precipitation elsewhere, which in turn has an effect on other areas, which in turn has its own effects in other areas. This is why the term Global Warming has been shifted in recent years to the more politically correct sounding Climate Change - not necessarily for politically correct reasons, but simply because Global Warming does not cover the entire story. Global Warming, in a way, is a component of Global Climate Change.

While wide-scale reporting of the weather did not really exist for much of the world prior to the Second World War, leading to only recent accurate data, other sources of information can be found within the geologic record. Global Warming and Climate Changing events are nothing new within the Earth's history, and numerous locations around the world help to pinpoint what happened in the past. On each continent, large formations of Limestone, topped with glacial deposits, point to long periods of warming periods, followed by global cooling events. Ancient ocean bed deposits littered with drop stones provide concrete and tangible evidence that these sorts of events happened time and time again, over the courses of thousands of years. With the most recent indications pointing to new elements of climate change, and with the possibility of humans speeding up what might be a natural process, the real question becomes, not what we can do about it, but what can we do next?

When looking through the geologic column, it becomes readily apparent that these sorts of changes occur often, and that the planet's climate has changed drastically throughout the billions of years of its existence. On both sides of the liberal and conservative arguments, there exists a certain stupidity and simplification to the issue at hand. I don't necessarily think that human society should be vilified for essentially doing what life generally does when left to its own devices: expand and make it easier to reproduce, or that we should blindly close our eyes to the changes that are clearly happening in the world. Where there is snowfall in Washington DC - In the middle of winter, I might add, there are countless other problems around the world as global weather patterns shift. Our atmosphere has a fickle attitude, and our memory only extends so far, but we have become comfortable with what we remember and what we are used to.

What I dislike the most is the timing of much of the arguments against Global Climate Change, with allegations towards respected scientific bodies, resignations and the recent row with the sudden weather, and the entire theory of climate change has been thrown into question, with TV pundits talking back and forth, and instant polls from viewers being broadcast as real news. The notion that human-made climate change is certainly open to debate, but there is irrefutable evidence that the planet’s temperature is rising. The idea that the polling data taken from average Americans is put toe to toe with decades of scholarly, peer reviewed evidence is just ridiculous. I would hardly expect any sort of average person to understand the science and workings behind how our climate works, not to mention the analysis of such a study, and when said viewers are fed information and doubt from the media, the comparison is even more ridiculous. I, as someone educated in geology and scientific method, can hardly understand the implications and vast nature of such science.

What scares me the most is that the television pundits who go on screen and doubt the existence of such a phenomenon or before a wide scale audience at a convention to dispute such claims most likely know that what they are doing is playing to the fears and uncertainty of the public to fulfill some larger agenda that they might have: whether it’s demonstrating climate change legislation as a sort of over-reach of the Federal Government or of elite liberalism gone wrong. And in reaction, the left overreacts, making fun or coming across as arrogant in their rebuttals, rather than explaining the background of the science involved with such a concept. In the end, it just helps to fulfill the images of both sides of political thought, all the while just adding to the hot air around the world.

The problem with all of this is the dismissal of scientific method, and it demonstrates that much of the mentality and feeling that existed under the Bush administration still exists within a large segment of the United States. There seems to be an irrational fear of academics, of learning and of knowledge, in favor of someone’s gut instincts and what they can see. The principles behind science are sound: any sort of phenomenon can be replicated and tested, but the thinking behind sciences seems to elude much of the population, something that is then exploited when something out of the ordinary occurs, such as the storms that have blanketed the United States recently.

In the meantime, I wouldn't mind if the weather patterns would shift back to normal, so I can get a proper winter back to the places where it can be appreciated.

(In the time that I wrote this last night and the time that I posted this, we got a foot of snow.)

The Mini Countryman

Earlier today, MINI released pictures and information for the upcoming new Mini Cooper, the Countryman. The 3rd model from the company, which includes the Mini Cooper and the Mini Clubman. This one is a little more rugged looking, and is an addition to the 'Crossover' market, which falls somewhere between the sedan and smaller SUVs. On first glance, I rather like it.

This addition looks to make a lot of sense for MINI and BMW. The small hatchback market is a somewhat limited one, and this, along with the Clubman, helps to open up a couple additional markets. The vehicle looks to be a bit bigger, more practical, with more space. I love my own Mini Cooper, but I also realize that it's pretty well suited for what I use it for - I usually only drive myself around, and I don't need a ton of space, usually. I've found, over the past year or two, that most cars fit a certain lifestyle or use - some are better at things than others. I might ridicule the SMART Car, but honestly, while living in London, it would have been the perfect car for what I did - small, easy to park and safe, because nobody is driving more than 30 miles per hour in the city. Contrast that with the highways here, it's very out of place.

Mini has quite a lot going for it with this, and I suspect that it will be a really good car for them. The brand as a whole has a sort of quirk factor to it, with the Mini, going for the younger, hipper audience, and as that group grows up a bit, so to, the Countryman seems to have done the same thing. I like how it came out - it's a good looking car, more so than the Clubman, which I really dislike. The company did a really good job with updating the image of the car by making it a bit larger, but keeping the overall shape and key features. Where the Mini Clubman looks stretched, this version looks well proportioned, much more in line with the new MINI.

MINI Countryman

What I'm really impressed with is MINI's brand, with both how they've been able to market it, and expand it. The Cooper is an iconic car, and BMW did well to update it with the current model from the old one. They have their quirks, to be sure, but it's a solid, fairly reliable car. In the 30,000 miles that I've had it, it's only had to go in twice for major repairs: the transmission and more recently, a wheel bearing. The other things that have cropped up: replacing windshield wipers, oil changes, brakes, tires, etc, have been pretty expected issues, none that have really impacted how the car has driven. It's pretty reliable, but beyond my own experience with the car, the company is working to expand their market and really develop what the car will look like, and along with that, change their respective audience, and thus expand their brand to new people. It seems to be working - Mini has been around for almost a decade now, and it doesn't look like it's going anywhere.

As a MINI driver, I'm sold. I'm not necessarily ready to go out and buy one right when it comes out, but I think that it's something that I would consider if presented with the opportunity. I love my own car - it's a delight to drive, and I'm not planning on getting rid of it anytime soon, but someday, I might need something that's a little more practical. I'm very happy that Mini will likely remain an option.

RIP, Waldenbooks

On Tuesday, our local branch of the Waldenbooks franchise closed down for good. Undoubtedly, there will be a number of customers that will be coming to the mall in the next six to twelve months asking whoever rents out that spot where the bookstore went, but there you have it.

Borders, which owns Waldenbooks, decided late last year that they were going to close down 200 of the smaller mall locations around the country. Two in Vermont - Berlin (My store) and Rutland, were both on the cutting block, although the Borders express in South Burlington will remain open. I'm guessing that this is a bit of a complicated position for Borders - the recent financial crisis added to the already piling issues that brick and mortar face: declining sales in light of competition from online retailers, not to mention absolutely inefficient business practices on the part of how Borders runs their stores, something I've ranted about before.

Still, with all my issues about Borders aside, I will miss working there, and the store itself. I began work in the fall of 2006, where I worked at the Kiosk, and continued to work through the winter and next fall as a regular employee, before leaving to work at Norwich University. I returned late last year after a friend left, because I was hit with a bit of nostalgia for the store and working there. While that didn't last long, it was nice while it lasted. I've long been a customer at this particular branch, even before I went to work there. The selection for what I was looking for, mainly science fiction, was always top-notch, and when I began to work there, I met a number of people who I likely wouldn't have met normally, and like camp, I've managed to hold onto a good group of close friends.

Looking back at my time there, I've often told myself that if I'm ever going to be in a position to make a television show, I'll write something about here. There was endless problems with customers, other employees (there was always drama of some sort) and from all that, quite a lot of humor and laughter. Romance books were something that could easily be thrown across the store at an annoying co-worker, but also the slow times, after all of our duties were done, chatting with people for a couple hours in-between customers. There are a lot of good memories there, which I'll remember over the bad times that I've had there (and there were several). Hell, I'll even miss some of our crazy regular customers who were really out there.

Plus, the bookstore was a source of a lot of books for me. We made sure (when we could) that the comics and Science Fiction and Fantasy section was well stocked, special ordering books that we knew would move out the door, kept it well stocked and neat, and offered a good selection of other books as well. There's a bunch of stores in the area, such as Bear Pond Books, Rivendell Books and the Northfield Bookstore, but they just don't have the same selection. I'll stop in when I can, but I just won't make a point to stop by and browse, because my friends won't be there either, as I'd often do over the past couple of years.

So, farewell, bookstore. I'll miss giving you money in exchange for feeding my habit of books, and while my wallet and bookshelves won't thank you, I'll miss the fun times that never will be, and the friends that I made there.

To Geek or Not To Geek

A couple days ago, the New York Times ran a short article that cited Dr. David Anderegg as saying that the terms Geek and Nerd should be banned, in response to another article about the need for 'Cool Geeks'. This is a subject that I hold very near and dear, being a self proclaimed geek.

Like GeekDad on Wired.com, I believe that the New York Times somewhat misinterpreted Dr. Anderegg's argument, although it seems that it could have been better worded. I dislike the notion of banning any type of word, and I don't believe that calling somebody 'Nerd' or 'Geek' is nearly the same level as a racial or homophobic slur. But even to that extent, the idea that words should be banned because of the connotations that surround them is one that seems misguided at best. The constitution outlines the limits of the freedom of speech, but to me, this isn't necessarily a legal argument, it's one that is governed by social convention. Any sort of slur is at the height of rude and unacceptable behavior, and it is along these lines that this should be solved, not necessarily in the courtroom.

This, I think is what the point of Dr. Anderegg, who's written a book on the subject. The first article that the New York Times ran, New Programs Aim to Lure Young Into Digital Jobs notes that "But not enough young people are embracing computing — often because they are leery of being branded nerds." And that is a perfectly valid argument. While I've noticed that geek stuff is getting cooler all the time, from the black rimmed classes to obscure things, the connotations associated with being labeled a 'geek' or a 'nerd', ones that aren't good. I've come across a number of people over the past couple of years who are shocked at my admission to being a geek, but also try to talk me out of it. "You're not a geek!" has been a pretty common thing, and however helpful the suggestion is, it does show that there is quite a bit of a problem in the public image: ie, something right out of the 1970s, at the height of uncoolness.

Benjamin Nugent, in his 2009 book American Nerd: The Story of My People, does a fantastic job in uncovering some of the root origins of the stereotype of geekiness, and to just what a nerd is. (You can read an excerpt here. Much of the stereotype is perpetuated by a couple of things: the public persona as reinforced by mainstream media, either through television shows or newscasts, and through the actions of people who are, well, nerd-like. There is no shortage of the extremely stereotypical single, slightly (or overly) overweight, unemployed guy living in his mother's basement who's playing video games because he's inept in social situations.

This is the big, underlying point that needs to be understood - it's not the words that need to be changed, it's the behavior that reinforces the need for the words that needs to be better understood, in most cases. As the first article notes, there needs to be more 'Cool Geeks" as the economy changes and advances with technology. Part of that, I think, is providing better role models, in both the media and in person. There's some good things going on, and I believe that the overall trend is changing, if slightly. Shows such as 'The Big Bang Theory', 'Dollhouse' and 'Stargate Universe' both have a number of good examples of geeks in their prime element, while the information age allows us to study things to our heart's content, whether that is science fiction, automobiles or music.

What doesn't help, I think, is the general attitude towards learning and knowledge that the country suffers from, and was embodied in the prior Presidential administration, with an attitude that a straight shooter going by his gut is far better off than someone who takes the time to study and examine a situation. This isn't necessarily a political thing at all - I see this far more as a sort of embodiment of larger, ongoing trends. However, when the current administration is headed by someone who's posed with a lightsaber and as Superman, hopefully there's something going right when it comes to this sort of thing. (Come to think of it, McCain, during his first run for president, also posed with a lightsaber.)

The problem isn't just that there's a perception that geeks aren't cool, there's just not enough geeks and nerds out there who are totally comfortable with the distinction to wear it loud and proud, to overcome that particular image. We're comfortable in our own little niches, from online sites of like-minded people and fans to social groups. One of the solutions is that we need to be out and about more with our passions - this is one reason why I absolutely love the 501st Legion - through our communities to set an example for the kids who avoid what they really like because of the negative perceptions associated with it. But there is also a larger issue of someone who's knowledgeable just doesn't seem cool, and for the life of me, I have a hard time understanding why. I often can't fathom why people go out of their way to avoid learning, escaping to a life of dull repetition that's brought on by the wires and lights in a box. More than ever, we need geeks in the world, or at least the parts that make us good. Geeks are, and will be more popular than you think.

I Like That Old Time Rock 'n Roll

As the decade has begun to close with the end of the year, there have been a number of 'Best of the Decade' lists in the music blog world, and a number of them have gotten me thinking about music over the past ten years. Since the start of the decade, I would consider these past years as some of the most formative in my own tastes in music, especially during my years in college. During that time, the entire music industry has been changed, for better or for worse, and with these changes has come new opportunities, sounds and experiences for musicians and fans alike.

My own taste in music has varied over the past ten years, from radio top 40 hits to Indie-Rap and I'm very eager to see what comes next. Looking back, I found that it would be almost impossible to put together any sort of comprehensive list for the last ten years, simply because there is too much music, it is too varied, and there is far, far too much that I haven't listened to. While computers have become paramount in the way that music is transmitted, shared and listened to, I can't help but wonder if it's harmful to the overall music scene.

Looking back over music of the 1960s and 1970s, the music is easily recognizable, memorable and classic. Looking back over the decade, I'm not sure that I can find a comparable number of bands that match not only the quality of the hits of prior years, but ones that have the same presence. With other years populated by bands such as the Beatles, Rolling Stones, Jimi Hendrix, Elvis, Eric Clapton and more, revolutionaries all in their own way, the past couple of decades have much bigger shoes to fill.

The formative years of Rock and Roll have been filled with epic tales of musicians gone crazy: smashing up hotel rooms and instruments on stage, getting arrested on stage, all the while pushing the limits of free speech and taboo topics to entertain the masses, who ate it up with relish. And, the music was good too - music labels, I think , didn't quite know how to deal with all of the new sounds and styles that were coming out from aspiring musicians: all they could do was control the direction, like pointing a fire hose, hoping that the water inside was just right.

Since that time, music has become more refined. We've settled down, figured out what works and what sounds just right. Advances in technology, from the introduction of computers and editing programs allow musicians to put together a fantastic sounding album, cheaper, quicker and to an incredibly wide audience than ever before. Young people, ever the bright start of the music industry, have been freed, recording demos with cheap recording equipment and access to MySpace, and have the chance of finding an audience amongst the numerous people out seeking for new sounds, and even more obscure bands and singer/songwriters.

My music interests have ebbed and waned over the past ten years, starting with listening to 107.1, WORK FM (Now FrankFM, a Classic Rock Station) a Top 40 station, which effectively brought my music tastes to '90s alternative/grunge. I didn't get that much into listening to anything outside of that before a couple years into college. A friend of mine at the time, later girlfriend, now ex, introduced me to indie-rock, styles along what was heard in Garden State, which further influenced what I listened to. Artists such as Alexi Murdoch, The Decemberists, Spoon, Nick Drake and others entered my playlists. From that point, I began to listen to more - not only to new artists that were coming out, but also to bands that I'd grown up listening to: the Beatles, Gordon Lightfoot, Fleetwood Mac.

In listening to the old and new, there's an incredible amount of influence that is held by artists from long ago, especially by newer artists. Folk-rock has undergone a huge resurgence among the hip, from artists such as Alexi Murdoch, Iron & Wine and Bon Iver growing in popularity over the past couple of years - in no small part, no doubt, to commercial placement of their songs in television shows and commercials.

While the music is fantastic - I count all of the above to be some of the best artists of the decade, but at the same time, I've become very weary and wary of the independent market for music, because of the sheer drive to feed the hipster masses by going completely out on a limb and doing something patently outrageous, but in a calm, civil sort of way. In a way, the kids who go out and record come up with some interesting stuff, but they don't toe the line like musicians of old. The music that we have today, independent and commercial (although that distinction is flat out ridiculous in and of itself - all music is commercial) is sanitized, watered down and just too appropriate. Maybe I'm just listening to the wrong types of music, but a lot of bands just don't have that raw energy and bite that the '70s brought us.

We don't have our Hendrix, our Lennon or our Jagger - instead, a lot of our front men are put together by their publicists, who put them up on a pedestal for their outbursts, poor judgment or incredibly noble deeds (I'm looking at you, Amy Winehouse, Britteny Spears and Bono). But in a way, they become products in and of themselves, sold to the public through the spin on their actions, rather than the popular judgment of their actions unguided by the invisible hand of a major marketing company. In a world where news is paramount, and any news is good news, it seems that the rash actions of the people we admire are more constructed, rather than heat of the moment rashness. I have a feeling that those individuals, who've built up their personas in the time before facebook and MySpace, will be longer lasting. Even the persona of avoiding a personality, or just trying to be different by wearing mismatched clothing, acting the awkward soul in a way to appeal to more fans who make it out to see them.

Don't get me wrong, there's a huge difference between the personality of a band and the music that they play, but over time, how much of a band's persona becomes intermixed with their music as a whole? In an age where the choices of music and bands is akin to water from a fire hose, the strive to be completely unique by adopting a certain persona for a band just seems shallow, fake. There are very few bands out there right now that I would label as being truly unique, focused on their music and presenting a fairly honest image all at the same time. At the end of the day, while there is plenty of selection - good selection - I can't help but wonder if these musicians will really stand the test of time, or if they will just be lost in the multitude of other hipster artists who get their brief break of fame before realizing that they have to continue the act. At the same time, I wonder how many bands that have been sold to us will last in the long run.

Looking back over the music that I've accumulated over the past couple of years - and I've accumulated a lot - there are certainly bands that I go back to time and time again, while there are even more that I've listened to, and really enjoyed, but who soon become unmemorable. It'll be fun to go back and seek them out in another ten years to see if anybody knows their name and see if their record deal through the strength of their MySpace page and website is really enduring. In some cases? I would bet so. In far more instances, I would bet that a lot of these bands will fail the test of time, only to be resurrected by lone fans with overburdened hard drives. In the meantime, I’ll take that old time rock and roll.

You're Not In Kansas Anymore; You're On Pandora

The moment that Avatar really opened up for me was a massive spaceship travelling towards the viewer, the moon of Pandora, orbiting Alpha Centauri I. While that in and of itself wasn't anything new with science fiction, two things struck me: the first was how utterly real the spaceship looked, and the neat reflection of Pandora in the solar panels towards the rear of the ship.

Avatar is the story of a crippled Marine, Jake Sully, who is given the chance to travel to Pandora and operate an Avatar, a genetically grown Na'vi, a native of the hostile planet. A corporation has begun a mining operation on the planet, and has had some difficulties with the natives of the world. Jake takes to this role like a fish to water, finding that his life in a new body is a liberating one, and soon, finds that he is siding with the Na'vi.

James Cameron's movie set me back on my heels (figuratively) with Avatar. The movie is absolutely stunning in a number of ways, and most likely be one that will be a turning point in the movie industry. Despite an overly familiar plotline - not necessarily weak, just predicable - Avatar was an exciting ride from start to finish, a well rounded Science Fiction epic that should appeal to a very broad audience. Above all, the movie was fun to watch.

For a film that has been in the works for over a decade, it's understandable that there is quite a bit of disapointment over the plot. For all the leaps and bounds that the movie takes, it's something like a new mustang. Very flashy, but with stone-age suspension. The storyline of someone spying, going native and turning against their own kind is something that's been used numerous times, and already, there are comparisons to Pocahontas, Dances With Wolves and The Last Samurai out there, and for good reason: that's pretty much what it is, just on another planet. There's not really any reason to believe that this particular storyline is weak - all of the above films have been nominated for Adacamy Awards, with several wins between them. Undoubtably, Avatar will be nominated for a number as well.

Still, there is some lingering disapointment that the film didn't try anything rash with its plot. The film's visuals are so far out there that it's clear that everyone's attention was more about the appearance of the film than the story that they were telling. The story is simple, intermixed with narration and a rushed montage that detailed Jake Sully's intigration into Na'vi society in order to better exploit them. Throughout the entire film, you know what will happen next. But despite that, I just didn't care.

Most of that can be chalked up to the astonishing special effects. Consiously, any viewer will know that just about everything that you see is digital. But, from the first couple of minutes, I was just sucked in to Cameron's fantastic world of Pandora. Where the production crew skimped on the story, they made up for it in the look and feel of the world. The jungles of Pandora are incredibly detailed, entire ecosystems that are not only realistic looking, but somewhat plausible. This element of the film lends itself beautifully to science fiction, and I can see why Cameron waited until the technology was just right to make the movie.

Technology is at the forefront of the movie, between the advances to bring it to the screen in the first place, but also throughout the plot. Shortly after Sully awakes, they are brought down to the planet, travelling over an endless jungle, before reaching a clearing. The change is jarring, going from organic to industrial. This theme is at the heart of the movie, and one that our protagonist is caught between. On one side, he is drawn to the freedom of a new body with incredible abilities, while on the other, he is brought back to a shell of a body to serve his superior offices within the company - Colonel Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang) and Parker Selfridge (Giovanni Ribisi). The mining company that represents the large portion of human activities onplanet is destructive, and with that, contains some fairly broad critisizms about our relationship with nature. This isn't a new theme, and indeed, I was reminded of Karen Traviss's Wess'Har series, Dinotopia, and a bunch of other films/novels that do much the same thing. Humans crush their surroundings without regard for the bigger picture, a message that comes at a particularly potent time, with the whole climate change argument continuing, (There's an offhand reference to Earth with a devastated ecosystem) but also with the ongoing financial crisis, with companies seeking to expand their own interests over the bigger picture 'good'. In this instance, the scientists pleas for more time to understand the world is met with laughter and a very simpleminded attitude that 'trees are just trees.'

Despite this, and some of the alien elements that are put into the ecosystem, Pandora and the Na'vi aren't really all that alien. The ecosystem is fairly logical with predators feeding on prey, and the primitive Na'vi society, while happy with their surroundings and existance, seems very similar to any number of 'primitive' societies on Earth, from their social organization to beliefs. There's little wonder that the company is dismissive of the claims, but then again, this is pretty shallow allegory.

Of all the elements that really bothered me throughout the film were some of the characters. Where the plot was pretty bare, the characters are at best archtypes drawn out of the most stereotypical of hollywood characters. There's the uncaring company man, the daughter of the chief, the daughter's love interest, the crusading scientists and the tough as nails marine who disregards just about everything and is spoiling for a fight. There's very little nuance to the people here, and part of Avatar's biggest weaknesses with the plot and story.

That all being said, its well worth seeing, because this film will likely reinvigorate the way people see movies in the future. 3D is here to stay, and hopefully will represent one of the biggest changes since George Lucas put Star Wars out to the general public. The graphics throughout looked good in a way that weren't intrusive to the viewing experience, and allowed me to really sit back an enjoy (or jump, when something appeared to come out of the screen) the film. While this movie wasn't necessarily the best example for paying more attention to storyline over visuals, the principle stands, and I'm eager to see what will happen next with films - I couldn't help but think that Star Wars will look absolutely fantastic with this technology, and adding an additional dimension to the screen allows filmmakers so much more that they can do to entertain the masses.

In short, Avatar is an incredibly fun movie. Visually, it has no rivals - yet - while storywise, it's a little weak, but it gets the job done in grand, Science Fiction fashion.

Top Geek Things of 2009

Now that it's close to the end of the year, it's time to look back, like everyone else and their mother on the internet, on the past year. 2009 has been a fantastic one for all things geek. There have been a number of fantastic movies, books, television shows and so forth, as well as a bunch of things that really didn't come off as well. Here's what I've been geeking out (or complaining about) this year:

The Best:

Moon Moon is easily one of the best Science Fiction films that I've ever seen. Ever. It's been added to a very small list of films (The Fountain, Children of Men, Pan's Labyrinth, etc) of exceptionally conceptualized, produced and thoughtful SF/F films out there. Moon is one of two really good films this year that I really enjoyed and for a number of reasons. The story is fantastic, playing off of common themes with new eyes, it's visually stunning and it's a largely original story, one that's not based directly off of prior works. And, it has a fantastic soundtrack by Clint Mansell.

Star Trek This appears three times on this list, because I'm still largely split over how I feel about it. The best parts of this is that it's a fantastic, visually stunning film, and really does what Enterprise and Nemesis failed to do: reboot the franchise in grand style, with over the top action, adventure, everything that really comes to mind when you think Big Budget Space Movie. The cast, pacing and visuals made this one of the most successful films of the year, and the best of the big budget films that came out this year.

District 9 When it comes to fantastic Science Fiction films, Moon and Star Trek didn't have a monopoly on this at all - District 9, coming out of San Diego Comic Con with an incredible amount of buzz and a good viral marketing campaign showed that there was still a place for an innovative filmmaker armed with a good story. The end result is a compelling take on first contact. Instead of an us against them, or invaders from outer space flick, we see refugees from outer space, with an acute political message that makes this movie even more interesting.

The Curious Tale of Benjamin Button This was an interesting film, one that got a bit of press, but wasn't a blockbuster by any means. The story of a man who ages backwards from birth, one that proved to be a powerful and somewhat heartbreaking love story leaves much room for discussion, but at points, was slow and ponderous. Brad Pitt did a fantastic job, as did the special effects artists who provided the CGI throughout.

The Magicians, Lev Grossman The Magicians was a book that came out of nowhere for me, until a Borders email let me know about it. Picking it up, with few expectations, I was enthralled with Lev Grossman's take on the fantasy world. Drawing much from C.S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia and elements of Harry Potter, this book looks at a boy in a magical academy in a far more realistic sense, injecting a good dose of post-college reality into a field that is often ripe with monsters and epic quests. A quest of sorts is in here, but the buildup is fantastic.

Wired For War, P.W. Singer Wired For War is a book from earlier this year that looked at the developments of robotics in warfare. P.W. Singer takes a long and comprehensive look at not only the state of robots and their use in combat operations, but also looks to how the use of robotics is integrated into wartime planning, and how this impacts command and control structures already in place. From this point, he looks to the future of warfare, where robotics will go through the next decades and what the face of futuristic warfare might look like. It's also peppered with numerous Science Fiction references. I had a chance to speak with and interview Mr. Singer, who was extremely pleasant and eager to talk about his book, and write up several major articles for io9, which was a thrill as always.

The Windup Girl, Paolo Bacigalupi Recently selected as one of Time Magazine's top books of the year, Paolo Bacigalupi's first novel, The Windup Girl is a stunning one. Taking place in the near future, in a world without oil, alternative energy has become paramount, while agricultural firms have put profit before common sense and as a result, plagues ravage the world, except for Thailand, whose isolationist policies hold back the outside world and its problems. The book covers a lot of ground, from governmental policy to corporate greed to bioethics, with a wide range of characters who all fall within a gray area. This book is fantastic, and if it doesn't win a Hugo, there's seriously something wrong with the world.

The Moon Reigns Supreme - 40th Anniversary of Apollo 11 & Water on the Moon This year marked 40 years since 1969, when man first landed on the moon with Apollo 11, and with a successful follow-up mission with Apollo 12. Easily one of humanity's greatest accomplishments and it has been followed up with a number of projects. NASA found and restored footage of the landing and EVA activities, cleaning it up a little. NASA also took pictures from orbit of the Apollo landing sites, down to footprint trails with some stunning work from LCROSS. In addition to NASA's efforts to celebrate the anniversary, there were a number of other things out there. The Kennedy Library launched the website 'We Chose the Moon', which documented, in real time, the Apollo 11 mission. I listened at the edge of my seat, following along with the mission transcript and listened as Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin touched down on the lunar surface. Finally, Craig T. Nelson's book, Rocket Men: The Epic Story of the First Men On The Moon, was released earlier this year to also commemorate the mission, which proved to be a detailed and fantastic read, one that helped to influence my thinking on the lunar mission. The Lunar landing wasn't the only press that the moon got this year - the LCROSS mission launched a component that slammed into the surface and let up a plume of debris - analysis revealed that there is water on the moon - a lot of it. And for all of those people who complained about this, keep in mind the number of craters that are already there.

Last servicing mission to Hubble. NASA wasn't just in the news for Apollo 11; this year marked the last servicing mission for the Hubble Space Telescope, which has been in orbit since 1990. Despite its troubled history, the satellite has returned some of the most fantastic, beautiful and stunning images of the universe around us, and will continue to do so for a couple more years. Space Shuttle mission STS-125 was launched in May, where a new camera was placed onboard and several other minor repairs. The satellite is slated to continue operation through 2014, so don't fret yet.

James May's Toy Stories James May, one of the three presenters on Top Gear, has been doing a limited TV show on classic toys, including Mecano, Plasticine, and eventually, Lego, looking a little at their history and then building something supersized out of them. It's quite a treat to watch.

Fringe I called Fringe one of the worst things last year, but it's turned around for me. Picking up the boxed set, I was hooked. It's a bit cheesy, gory, but a whole lot of fun. Walter, weird science, teleportation and alternate universes make this show a huge joy to watch. Season 2 is proving to be just as good, now that they've locked down a story, and I'm eager to see where it goes.

Dollhouse Dollhouse debuted earlier this year with a short, 13 episode season that started off slowly, but picked up an incredible amount of steam. While it's more uneven than Joss Whedon's earlier show, Firefly, Dollhouse's better episodes help make up for the slack by introducing some of the most challenging moments in Science Fiction, and deal with issues such as the soul, personality and consent, while also offering cautionary tales on the uses of technology. Unfortunately, with the show's cancellation right as it gets good, there's a limit to what can be told, but with plenty of time for this show to wrap up all the remaining storylines, I think that this will become a cult classic.

Battlestar Galactica Where to begin with Battlestar Galactica? It's been a rush over the past six or so years, with a miniseries and four seasons of television and two movies, and like all good things, it had to end sometime. Fortunately, it ended when it was good, and while the finale garnered quite a lot of talk and dismay from some people (io9 listed it as one of the bigger disappointments), I think that it was carried off well, with a rich blend of religious allegory, action and a satisfying ending that few science fiction shows seem to get.

Kings Sadly, Kings was another short lived show that was cancelled before its time. Taking the story of David and Goliath from the Bible and updating it in a modern, alternate world with inter-kingdom politics, faith and destiny. The stories were superb, well told, with a fantastic cast. This is precisely the type of show that should have been on SyFy, especially with their upcoming show Caprica.

Stargate: Universe SyFy's latest show from the Stargate Franchise, Stargate: Universe is possibly the most interesting and compelling installment in the series. Taking the very basics of Stargate SG-1/Stargate Atlantis, this show takes more cues from Battlestar Galactica than it does Stargate. The result is a far more realistic show, with more personal stories and situations that are much darker, and more grown up from the first show.

Landing At Point Rain The Clone Wars thunders on, with mixed results, but easily the best episode that's aired thus far is Landing At Point Rain. Taking influences from Black Hawk Down, Saving Private Ryan and other war movies, the show finally lives up to its title: The Clone Wars. There's plenty of action, less of the stupid lines and fantastic animation that really made this episode one of the most exciting moments in the entire franchise.

The Hazards of Love, by the Decemberists The Decemberists have long dabbled in interesting and wordy music, as well as fantasy, with their last album, The Crane Wife, and The Tain, but The Hazards of Love is their most ambitious attempt at a concept album to date, one with an overarching story of Margaret and William, a town girl and a cursed man, their love for one another and the Forest Queen who conspires to keep them apart. The album is filled with supernatural elements, and seems to draw from Lord of the Rings and traditional mythic stories to put together one of their best works to date. The band in concert was also a treat to see.

Do You Want To Date My Avatar? I'm not all that familiar with The Guild, but Felica Day's clever music video is hands down fantastic.

Dr. Horrible Wins an Emmy Dr. Horrible’s Singalong Blog was one of the coolest things to come out last year, and this year, it received an Emmy, which helps to solidify the web as a growing platform for serious and professionally produced entertainment. Hopefully, its success will mean that we’ll see smaller, independent productions going online and succeeding.

Symphony of Science Symphony of Science is a project that puts noted scientists (notably Carl Sagan) to music by using an auto tuner. The result is a series of music videos and songs that help to convey some of the beauty and wonder of physics though some fairly clever songs. I've been listening to them constantly, and as a sort of electronica style music, they're quite fun, and very geeky to listen to. Best of all, there is plans to make further songs.

Star Wars In Concert One of the most iconic elements of Star Wars isn't just the action and epic story; it's the music that it's set to. For much of this fall, a travelling show, entitled Star Wars In Concert has been travelling around the nation. Unfortunately, it's winding down, but it will likely continue into next year. The 501st was called out at most of the events, and through that, I was able to watch the show. Combining a live orchestra, clips from the movies and narration from Anthony Daniels (C-3PO), the entire evening was a fantastic experience that gave me chills throughout.

Tauntaun Sleeping Bag The Tauntaun Sleeping bag started out as an April Fool's Joke, but the demand and interest was so prevalent that ThinkGeek actually went out and made it. What a fantastic idea - I kind of want one.

Slingers The final thing on this list is Slingers, a short conceptual teaser for a show that's heading towards production. The 3 minute teaser is easily one of the best moments in SF that I've seen in a while and I've been bouncing around, positively giddy at the prospect that this might be made. It's got humor, some interesting characters and a very cool look to the future. Plus, it's a space show, and there aren't many of those around now. It left me seeing more, and I'm sure that we'll see more in the next year or so.

Meh:

Fanboys For all the hype, Fanboys was a bit of a letdown. The cancer story was kept in, but so were some of the immature and cheap laughs that brought the entire film down. It's good for a laugh, and there's a lot that went right with it, but still, I was left wishing that there was more to it, without the frat boy humor in it.

Watchmen Don't get me wrong, Watchmen was stunning. It looked, felt and acted like the comic book that it was inspired by, and the transition to the screen worked fairly well. At the same time, for all the hype that there was here, I'm not that enthused to see it more than once or twice. It's still on my to get list, but it's not necessarily a priority. I think my biggest issue with this is that it's too much like the comic book, and that the drive to make everything exact harmed the overall production. It's less of a movie than it is an homage from the director. Sin City was the perfect comic book movie, this wasn't, and it really should have been. Still, it's worth watching.

Star Trek Star Trek, one of the best, one of the eh, moments of the year. It looks and feels spectacular, but when you get down to it, there's the shoddy science, and an incredibly weak story that pulls the movie along. The story's really not what the film was about, this was a character start for more Star Trek, but for me, story is central to Science Fiction, and this just didn't have it.

9 The trailers for 9 looked great, and there was quite a bit of interest in this. I went into the theater with high expectations, and those were largely met - the film looked spectacular, and it was a fun ride, but the story and characters were pretty lacking. It needed quite a bit of story and character development that was needed, and that harmed the film. Plus, it didn't seem to know if it was a kid's movie or one for an older audience. This is probably something to rent, not to buy.

V The new V should have been great - the cast, producers and network put together a good premise, but with the first couple of episodes sped through just about everything that made the show interesting. The themes of first contact, of a ship arriving over earth with a message for peace contain so much when it comes to religion, science and society, all rich territory that could be exploited, but instead, it's gone past too quickly, with crappy teenage romance storylines. I'll probably not pick up watching again, but I'll see what's going on in the show, in case, by some miracle, it's picked up for a second season.

The Prisoner AMC's The Prisoner was another show that should have been great. The trailers presented a fantastic looking story of psychological stress with a weird desert backdrop, but honestly? I can't tell you what it was about. It was convoluted, unconnected and dull, and while it looked very pretty, and had some decent episodes, it was a pretty big letdown.

Spirit gets stuck in the mud The Spirit Rover on Mars got mired down in a patch of sand earlier this year. Put into operation in 2004, and only intended for a 90 day mission, the rover was still going strong until it got stuck. Hopefully, the boffins over at the JPL will be able to get it out and about once again, although if I remember correctly, the last thing that they were intending to try was to back it out the way it came in. I would have thought that would have been the first thing to have tried.

Google Wave - lights are on, but there's nobody there. Late this year, Google Wave got turned on, and like any major Google product with exclusive access, it was, well, popular. But nobody really seems to know what it's for, and unlike Gmail, which could be used as an e-mail client from day one, its limited access restricts a lot of what you can do with this. People aren't using it like e-mail if it was designed today; it's essentially a glorified Gmail chat window, or a really good business collaborative tool. Still, it's pretty nifty, and I really hope that they can integrate it into Gmail someday.

Worst:

G.I. Joe, Star Trek, Transformers, Terminator & Big Budget Crap I know I've singled out Star Trek a couple times here, but more than ever, especially with far superior, low budget films competing with them this year, we see once again that tons of special effects doesn't necessarily equate to a good film. G.I. Joe landed with horrendous reviews, Star Trek had a smaller plot than a television episode and Terminator: Salvation was a huge disappointment, critically. (I thought it was decent, but nowhere near as good as the trailers led me to believe). My biggest gripe is extravagant use of CGI and an over-reliance on special effects for a dumbed down audience. Among other things, Moon and District 9 demonstrated that a good looking, intelligent film could be done for a fairly low cost, and I know that I'll be going back to those far more than the others. Still, big budget summer movies aren't going anywhere - a lot of these films made quite a bit, and the jury is still out on Avatar, which drops in a couple weeks.

Karen Traviss Quits Star Wars - Twice Karen Traviss was really a shining star within the Star Wars Universe. Her first entry, Republic Commando : Hard Contact, was followed up by several very good novels, with some different and intelligent views on the Clone Wars. Then, there was a bit of a row over Mandalorians, causing her books to come into conflict with the Clone Wars TV series. Since then, there's been a bit of a row about this, and Traviss has left the universe for others, such as Gears of War and Halo, and hopefully, her other works. Karen explains everything here, and makes some good points. She will be missed, however.

Black Matrix Publishing Row With harder times coming around, some publishers found a new revenue stream: aspiring writers who have little common sense. One notable SF ones was Black Matrix Publishing, called out by author John Scalzi recently on his blog, Whatever. While Scalzi had quite a lot of very good advice in his usual up front fashion, there were a number of people who went on the offensive and critizised him as an elitist writer, issuing some of the most ridiculous arguments for why Black Matrix had been wronged. I'm not necessarily involved in either side, but Scalzi presented a reasonable argument. Why is that so hard?

The ending to Life On Mars I really got into Life on Mars. It wasn't as good as the UK version, but it was unique, interesting and divergent from it. While the show basically adapted the original show to a large extent at first, they had an interesting pace and storyline starting up, and far better than the first pilot that was shot, which was just terrible. The creators had a delicate balancing act to follow, and did a very good job with giving their characters their own personalities and stories that diverged from the UK version. Then, the show was cancelled and they ended it, and the last ten minutes of the show just dropped like a rock. Clunky, very, very poor production values that made me wonder if this was all slapped together at the last minute, and quite honestly, it dimmed the entire series for me, especially compared to the brilliance of the UK version. I'll watch the show again, but I'll be doing my best to forget about the conclusion.

SciFi becomes SyFy, nobody cares One of the biggest furies of the year was when SciFi became SyFy, and the internet erupted into such indignation that I thought the world was going to end. Quite simply, the channel changed names to create a stronger brand, not change content, and so far, they seem to be doing pretty well, with Warehouse 13, Stargate Universe, Alice and presumably, Caprica doing really well in the ratings. All of which is good, for the network to expand further and really show that geek is really in right now. While the name looks silly, it's really a superficial change. Now, if they would just get rid of wrestling. Or pick up Slingers for five seasons.

Orbiting Carbon Observatory crashes - Mission Failure This was a satellite that I tracked earlier this year while really watching the space stuff. The Orbiting Carbon Observatory was an expensive one, designed to monitor global carbon levels to get a better idea just how climate change is progressing and providing us with a very good look at just how the environment is changing around us. Ultimately though, part of the nose failed to separate from the capsule, and with the extra weight, the rocket crashed into the south Atlantic.

Heroes continues. Meh. I've given up on Heroes, after the dismal decline in quality, storytelling and characters. They should have stuck with the original plan, and killed off the first season's cast when they had the chance, instead of bringing people back time and time again. The fact that ratings are declining is just stunning to me, especially now that the show is into it's fourth season, and I have doubts that it will return. Hopefully not.

FlashForward Look, if I want to watch LOST, I'll watch LOST. I'm not going to watch a show that's a poor copy of it.

Deaths: Every year, there are a number of deaths in the geek genre/fan community. A couple notable ones were Ricardo Montalbán, who played Kahn in Star Trek: The Wrath of Kahn, Michael Jackson, who's song Thriller places him on the Geek spotlight, Kim Manners (X-Files/Supernatural Producer), Philip José Farmer, author of Riverworld and numerous other SF books, Dave Arneson, one of the D&D co-founders, and Norman Borlaug, who saved the world through science. There are others I'm sure, but it's still hard to see people in the genre leave us forever.

Unknowns

A couple of unknowns for me include The Lovely Bones, Sherlock Holmes, Avatar and Zombieland, which I haven't seen, Deathtroopers, which I haven't read, and Halo ODST, which I haven't played. (Okay, haven't played much. I've liked what I've played. And the soundtrack. And the fact that the entire Firefly cast is somewhere in there)

What's coming up for next year? The new Tron movie is coming out, which I'm horribly excited for, especially after watching the trailer and then the old movie. Slingers is likely going to get some more buzz. Iron Man 2 will be big, as well as Clash of the Titans, Inception (Really want to see that one), Chronicles of Narnia 3, The Book of Eli, and Toy Story 3. Hopefully, Scott Lynch will have his third book out, and Caprica will be beginning (High hopes for that one), as well as the second half  and second Season of Stargate: Universe. Who knows what else?

My Best (And Favorite) Books of the Decade

I told myself that I wouldn't jump in on this best of the decade that everyone else has been doing on just about every online printed source, but after seeing a couple of very good and a couple more very confusing ones, I went through my bookshelves and pulled out several books that were my favorite, and in my opinion, best genre books of the past ten years.

The Windup Girl, Paolo Bacigalupi This book was released earlier this year, and while I was unfamiliar with Mr. Bacgalupi's shorter fiction, I was singularly impressed with his first novel, The Windup Girl. I've already reviewed the book in length here, but in retrospect, this will likely stand up as one of the best genre books in the past ten years. The Windup Girl is not only well written, it's well conceived, which is just as important, I think, for a future world. Bacigalupi puts together a compelling, terrifying and ultimately believable near future, with relevance and everything that good science fiction should be.

Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell, Suzanna Clarke Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell was one of the books that took me a long time to get into and to finish - I stopped and started it several times since I got it, but was never able to really get into it before I actually made the time to read. It's a challenging book, with an older style of writing. Once I had gotten into the proper mindset, I was pulled right into Suzanne Clarke's alternative world of Wizards, Napoleonic War and fate, and loved every minute from that point on. Clarke dispels with the very common notion of sword and sorcery fantasy novel by setting it in a far more relatable London, and approaches the subject matter in a far different manner than other books of the genre.

American Gods, Neil Gaiman American Gods is another novel that I had to take my time to read, stopping and starting a couple times before really getting into the proper mindset that was required for Gaiman's world. This sort of mythological story is an interesting concept, where belief begets creation, and there is a conflict brewing between the old and the new, with the protagonist, Shadow, caught in the middle. The story is a profound one, and one that I'll likely return to someday.

Soon, I Will Be Invincible, Austin Grossman Where a couple of the novels on this list have been akin to great feasts of old, Soon, I Will Be Invincible is a modern day family dinner, a bit rushed, fairly complete but really good. Author Austin Grossman creates an entire superhero mythology, split between a hero and villain, in a modern day setting. Where a number of comic books have stagnated, with the same characters recycled year after year, we are party to a mythology that is put together with the benefits of a realistic society. Grossman's superheroes are just as messed up as the rest of us, and this is where the book is an incredible amount of fun, because it's like the Marvel Universe, but all grown up.

The Magicians, Lev Grossman Lev Grossman is the brother of Austin Grossman, and like his twin brother, he takes what was a well tread-upon world and tweaks it to become more relatable in The Magicians. Here, rather than superheroes, we are treated to wizards, and a magical academy. The style here is very different, and while there are similarities to Harry Potter and the Chronicles of Narnia, they act more as references and influences than they do style and feel. Grossman's Brakebills College is realistic where Rowling's Hogwarts is not, and imagines the fantasy world as one akin to ours.

The Lies of Locke Lamora, Scott Lynch I learned of Scott Lynch through a friend of mine, and when I picked up his debut fantasy novel The Lies of Locke Lamora, I was already pretty excited, and was impressed with Lynch's style of storytelling - his fantasy world is different from the typical sword and sorcery take that a lot of fantasy novels seem to have taken on. Like other authors on this list, he has put together an incredibly well conceived world, one that was vibrant, dangerous and interesting all at the same time. Lynch's follow-up novel, Red Seas Under Red Skies was just as good, and I'm eagerly awaiting the third installment of his series, The Republic of Thieves.

Altered Carbon, Richard K. Morgan Altered Carbon debuted with quite a bit of buzz, when it was released. Richard K. Morgan's first book about a noir mystery in a conscious/body swapping sounds like something out of the worst dregs of B-movie Science Fiction, but the result is a dark, exciting and intelligent SciFi thriller that I think of as Blade Runner, but more violent. The first of the Takeshi Kovacs trilogy, Morgan weaves together a complicated and twisting futuristic tale, one that had me guessing throughout the book.

The Amber Spyglass, Philip Pullman Where Harry Potter was the real fantasy show stopper of the decade (and for good reason), I've always thought that Philip Pullman's Golden Compass trilogy (The Golden Compass, The Subtle Knife and the Amber Spyglass) was a bit marginalized. Pullman's fantasy tale is more than that - it pulls in elements of science fiction and alternate worlds to put together an epic story that goes from a childhood fantasy adventure to discovering the nature of existence itself, while a war between two sides of that sort of question rages on across multiple universes. The Amber Spyglass, the conclusion to the series, is heavy with meaning, questions and utter brilliance, and is far above and beyond most genre books to begin with.

Coyote, Allen M Steele Allen M. Steele's Coyote was first serialized in Asimov's Science Fiction magazine, and is still a joy to read after several sit-down sessions. Grounded in quite a lot of hard science fiction, Coyote tells the story of a near future colony of humans who steal a massive space ship from their fascist American government and find themselves on Coyote, the moon of a distant planet that was deemed a good candidate for colonization. The story follows several characters as they learn to exist on this hostile new world, in a story that is very reminiscent of the origins of America. The follow-up books in the series are good, but this is easily the best. While the story isn't groundbreaking, it is a great deal of fun, covering a number of popular themes, chief of which is exploration and discovery, which helps to remind me why I love this genre so much.

Halting State, Charles Stross Charles Stross is one of the preeminent science fiction writers of our time, and his novel Halting State demonstrates that he's really clued in to what might happen in the next couple of years. Halting State is a book that I've talked about before, but what makes this stand out for me for the past decade is Stross's understanding of how the future might work, from technology to politics to economics, all of which are brought in for this story, expertly woven into the actions of the protagonist, and really make this a stellar read.

City of Pearl, Karen Traviss Karen Traviss has been making a name for herself with the tie-in world with Star Wars, Gears of War and Halo, but this first book in her own universe outshines them all. City of Pearl is a wonderfully realized book, the first in a six book series that puts together first contact, interstellar politics and warfare, environmentalism and bioethics. Spanning the course of several hundred years and across a couple of planets, this book puts all of that in with a number of intriguing characters and well conceived plot lines. The bonus is Traviss's cynical attitude towards humanity, which makes this book a bit of a break from most of the human-centric stories that I've read.

Think about this, I think that this is a good list to have put together. In a very big way, the past decade has been the most formative when it comes to my tastes in books, music and movies, and where my interests in Science Fiction, Fantasy and related genres really came from. This decade marked my high school years, where I not only transitioned from a Star Wars only diet of reading material to the larger classics: Dune, Ringworld and Foundation, to name a few.

While I got most of my base from these classics, most of the books that I've picked for this list are far from the classics - at points, they take a lot of the best themes and turns them on their heads, realizes a number of well conceived notions in new light and makes the genre something new and interesting to read. While reading these books, I've come to realize that the field of science fiction is not one to be left mired in the b-movie territory that long characterizes it; it is a dynamic and interesting field, one that will continue to thrill fans in the future.

Slingers

I came across a 'Sizzler Reel' for a project known as Slingers the other day, and I have to say, it this project doesn't get made as planned, I will be very, very unhappy. A couple of plot summaries have appeared, and the gist of the show is that it takes place in 2263 A.D., following an interplanetary war. The show is about a group of people onboard a spacecraft and use it to conduct a number of high stakes heists around the galaxy while on their way home.

There's a couple of reasons why this has had me absolutely giddy over the past couple of days. I've posted up links and shown a number of friends, who've shared much of the same excitement. When watching, I was reminded of Joss Whedon's now defunct show, Firefly, as well as a bit of Ocean's 11. While only a short clip/trailer, I think that this sort of thing has an incredible amount of potential for a television show, and hopefully one that can help fill out the real lack of space shows on the television at the moment.

I wonder why we don't have anything nearly as compelling as this on the television right now, with horrible shows such as FlashForward and Heroes on at the moment. This reel has humor, what looks to be an interesting story, good production values and a well concieved world in which it can play. After just three minutes, I'm left wanting more, in a very bad way, and have been absolutely thrilled to see the incredible amount of press that the clip has generated. According to the creator, Michael Seizmore, talks in LA have been moving forward, most likely to the massive positive response to what we've already seen.

To some extent, I hope that no networks pick this up, but that a show like this will screen only on the internet, such as Joss Whedon's previous effort, Dr. Horrible's Singalong Blog, which did quite well. Interference from a network, worries about stories and ratings in a time when these are becoming even more irrelevant or convoluted makes me worried that something like this won't succeed on a major network. At the same time, I'm worried that my own expectations have been raised to an unrealistic level for something like this, and I know that I need to dial it down, lest this is never picked up at all. The creation of this as a show is far from certain, as it still needs to be picked up as a pilot, then it has to be picked up as a show, and so on.

Still, there's this little bit of enthusiasm for something that's essentially just starting out. Already, there's been a fantastic response from a number of SF websites, including io9 and the SciFiWire, and already, there's a growing number of people who want to see this made into a series or something larger. I have to wonder if this is how shows will be made in the future, with small teases to a mass audience to build up support, with networks building an audience before the show is even created. This is easier for some of the more established franchises, but for a small independant production as this seems to be, it's remarkable.

Regardless, I'm thrilled to have seen it. Even if it's never made into a longer story, this short tidbit was the best 3 minutes that I've spent in a while. Hopefully, more will come in the next year or so. If so, I'll be there watching.

Josh Ritter & The Low Anthem

Last week, I caught an ad in the local paper, Seven Days, and found one of the more fantastic deals for a concert that I've seen in a while: Josh Ritter and the Low Anthem at the University of Vermont: $10. And, it was the next night. Purchasing a ticket was an absolute no-brainer, and on Friday night, I went up to Burlington to see Ritter for a second time. The last show that I had seen from Josh Ritter and his band was in 2007, where he played with Vermont group Grace Potter and the Nocturnals on the Waterfront Park. It was a fantastic show, and Ritter was introduced in grand style. The Low Anthem was a band that I had yet to see, but one that I was familiar with - looking back over the archives here, I'm surprised that I haven't written about them yet. Low Anthem opened for the show, and over the course of the show, I have to wonder if it's a brilliant concoction of a bipolar producer. The group opened quietly for a couple of songs, including a great rendition of Charlie Darwin, a high, ethereal, sounding song, before launching into several other numbers that where loud and fast - Home I'll Never Be, in particular, is one song that stood out from this style. Low Anthem was good, but unpolished. Coming off of their first album, Oh My God, Charlie Darwin, released earlier this year, this isn't necessarily something that was unexpected, but their sound was almost too raw, too varied, and had a very limited stage presence. I'm not sure that I saw them open their eyes on stage (that might have been the lighting though), but they seemed shy, hesitant until they began to play. While this obviously doesn't impact the sound, I've always felt that concert performances are more than just the music - it's about the entire experience and performance of the evening, music plus the band on stage. Fortunately, in this instance, Low Anthem's music, energy and drive really made their act shine over their appearance. Ritter, on the other hand, made the evening. From the start, Ritter practically jumped on stage, with a huge, boyish grin plastered on his face that didn't leave the entire time that he was on stage. This was one concert where I didn't take down a set list - I stood an enjoyed the show. The group played a wide range of songs, from some earlier albums, although mostly from The Historical Conquests of Josh Ritter and The Animal Years, as well as a number of new songs from next year's upcoming album. Throughout the set were a number of my personal favorites: Snow Is Gone, Wolves, Girl In The War, Good Man, Kathleen, Lillian Egypt, Rumors, Mind's Eye and a number of others. Ritter is one of the few artists that I absolutely love in person far more than I like studio recordings. When introducing his music to a friend recently, I told him to imagine the music about 10 % faster, and 90% louder, and you'll come up with an approximation to the intensity and mood of the evening. Ritter's group, all decked out in vests and ties, presented a polished, energetic and excited performance that will likely rank up on some of my favorite concert experiences. For me, Josh Ritter's performance epitomizes what rock music should be: It's fun, loud and full of wild energy by a group that seems genuinely excited and thrilled to be doing what they're doing. It's an added bonus that the group is brimming with talent - song-writing, musical expertise and sound is unmatched. If the band is coming near you anytime in the next couple of years, do yourself a favor and check them out.

Brian Stowell has a fantastic set of photographs from the current, ongoing tour - I highly recommend checking them out!
Wolves - Josh Ritter Lillian, Egypt - Josh Ritter The Curse - Josh Ritter Orbital - Josh Ritter Right Moves - Josh Ritter Snow Is Gone - Josh Ritter

Yo Ho Ho, and I need a Bottle of Rum

Some writers can really reach people from beyond the grave - J.R.R. Tolkien comes to mind. Michael Crichton is the latest author to have joined that odd club, with his posthumous novel Pirate Latitudes. The book is likely to sell a ton of copies over the Christmas season - Crichton was one of those rock star writers who sold an absurd number of fairly decent books, and this one will be no exception.

There's not much to say about the plot, honestly. It takes place in 1665, at Port Royal in Jamaica. England is at war with Spain, and a privateer named Captain Charles Hunter learns of a Spanish ship, potentially with a valuable cargo en route to Europe. He puts together a sort of A-Team of pirates around the port and sets off to capture the ship, despite the massive problems that face them. While doing so, they come across a kracken, scale an impenetrable cliff, take over a spanish stronghold, storms, capture and adventure on the high seas.

This is a book that is just fun. Fans of Pirates of the Caribbean will likely enjoy this, or anybody who likes that sort of genre. Crichton has never been one to do things half-assed: bringing dinosaurs back to life - twice - a time travelling spaceship at the bottom of the ocean, alien microbes back to earth that have a devastating effect on human populations - you name it, Crichton has created the literary equivalent of a Steven Spielberg blockbuster movie, and this is really no exception, except that in this instance, hollywood has remained a step ahead of him with the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy.

I've been an off and on fan of Crichton over the past couple of years. I fell in love with his earlier books and interesting take on Science Fiction with Jurassic Park, Timeline, The Andromeda Strain, and the Terminal Man, but felt that his last couple of books lacked that same spark and originality that his other novels held. Prey was a let-down, and I never bothered with Next or State of Fear. To be very honest, I'm not thrilled to see that Crichton's style never really picked up with Pirate Latitudes, either. The book felt rushed, incomplete - most likely because it was, having been discovered in his files after his death last year - but at points, the book felt like it was half an effort, and I'm disappointed that someone didn't take the manuscript, clean it up and put it into a better suit before shoving it into the public eye. Unfortunately, it just doesn't stand up to his earlier works.

Don't let that stop you though. This is, as the bookstore people will say, the perfect beach reading book. It's light, entertaining, certainly nothing to be read closely, and I half-wonder when we'll hear about the film adaptation. There's certainly plenty of materials, and I don't think that the pirate craze has been wrung completely dry *yet*.

Your fantasies merge with harsh realities

The movie Toy Story had a profound effect on me as a child - for a little while, I had my doubts that toys were really inanimate objects, much like the same doubts about the validity of Santa Claus and god. I was pretty sure that they didn't exist, but who knew for sure? Thus, I made sure to take very good care of what I had, lest they awaken in the middle of the night and try to exact revenge. Almost fifteen years on, and I know that's an amusing quirk, but I did gain some useful skills out of it: treat what you own with some semblance of respect, and they last longer. As I grew older, I found that I applied this philosophy to other things - namely books. I made sure that they were kept in prime condition, even going to great lengths to ensure that friends didn't abuse them while in their care. Even today, I'm still wary of lending books to people.

Thus, book stripping day is particularly troublesome for me at the bookstore, and even more so now that our store is closing for good. Recently, it was announced that Borders was closing 200 of their Waldenbooks stores in a response to the economy and to focus more on the bigger box stores that they have littered around the country. Our humble store is being shut down, and part of that entails scaling down our inventory in preparation for that. The Christmas season is a logical time to do that - there's a boost in sales, and I'm sure that a lot of inventory will go. Still, there is a lot of books that we are returning, and even more that we are destroying. Mass Market paperbacks are those that the store has us destroy, rather than mail back to a central holding area in order to resell them. Other chains carry a similar practice, and books are stripped of their front cover and thrown into recycling or the trash, with the covers mailed back to be accounted for.

This bothers me, a lot, because I absolutely hate the idea of both books being tore up, but also that a perfectly good book is otherwise tossed in the trash. As I've written many times before, I'm an avid reader, and I hold onto my books. I like the idea of having floor to ceiling shelves packed to capacity for that occasional time when the power shuts off and I'm left with nothing to do but read. I rarely give away or resell books, even if I've read them before - there's that niggling 'What if' in the back of my head when it comes to re-reading things, and I figure someday, I'll have a great collection of books to give away to a library or something like that. The corporate policy in this instance particularly grates with my own beliefs when it comes to books, especially when these books could easily be donated to those in need of a good read, or to struggling libraries somewhere.

What is even worse, in my mind, is that many of the books that are being destroyed are books that would likely be sold in the next month - I pulled a number of reputable authors off the shelf and from overstock to put into the pile, only to leave a number of other books that I don't think that I've ever sold or moved. It boggles the mind that we're reducing the number of J.R.R. Tolkien's books to make way for David Weber. The end result is that our Science Fiction section is being diluted with crappy books, which will likely hurt sales even more. It's frustrating to begin converting some of these genres to tie-in stories with huge, dedicated fan bases, away from some of the more 'original' SF/F that is far better in terms of quality and personal interest. I can understand the reasoning behind it, but that doesn't necessarily make it a better.

The other problem that I have with this situation is that it’s an incredibly wasteful symptom of commercial policy that demonstrates a lot of the excesses that got the country into financial trouble in the first place. Borders sent our store too many books with every shipment - something that I'm assuming falls under the notion of: "if the customer wants it, it should be there", rather than ordering the book for them, and having them either come in again, or pay for the book there and have it mailed to their home. The end result is a store that is packed to capacity - and most likely violating several fire and safety codes - with too much merchandise that is not going to move. This makes me wonder how much of Border's budget is devoted to the shipping of books back and forth, not to mention the amount of money that is spent on books that will ultimately never sell.

The large chain stores are really not doing well, especially in the face of major sellers such as Amazon.com, and it's no wonder, when you look at just how inefficient their business practices are. It's even more of a shame when it seems likely that excesses such as these have helped to contribute to the closing of stores - it's no longer cost effective to keep them in operation, but only because they have such a high push of merchandise that is designed to boost sales.

I'm annoyed that this is happening, and in a way, glad that I'm no longer going to be employed with the company anymore with the shutdown (or earlier, if some middle-management desk jockey decides that he/she's offended by this) because I dislike the sheer industrial and commercial grinder that these stores have become. There's no love for the books, for stories or for really retaining customers. It's a business in a place where there should at least be some pretense of an institution that is at least interested in what they're selling.

Apollo 12

On this day in history, Apollo 12 touched down on the lunar surface, allowing Astronauts Alan Bean and Pete Conrad to become the third and fourth men to step onto our nearest neighbor in space. Command Module pilot Richard Gordon remained in orbit during the EVA operations.

Where Apollo 11 saw the first steps in lunar exploration, quite literally, Apollo 12's mandate was far more important in the greater scheme of things. While there were some shaky beginnings to the mission, caused by an electrical strike upon liftoff, but the mission was salvaged by the quick actions of the astronauts on. On November 19th, the lunar lander touched down in the Ocean of Storms, and saw the first success of the mission, a more accurate landing that what had been required of Apollo 11, where Neil Armstrong had manually flown the craft to its eventual location. In this instance, the craft was within 200 meters of their intended target.

Apollo 12's landing zone was chosen because of its proximatey to Surveyor 3, a probe that had landed two years earlier, in 1967. Samples were taken from the probe to be brought back to Earth, and the Astronauts collected rock samples, in addition to sensors that were put into place to better determine some of the characteristics of the moon's surface and environment - sensors that determines seismic events, magnetic fields and solar wind were put into place, which were designed to operate long-term.

NASA also sought to improve the quality of the footage that they shot on the moon by bringing along a color video camera - however, this was something that they weren't able to carry out as the camera was pointed directly at the sun, disabling the camera and putting it out of commission.

After taking off from the lunar surface, the newly reunited crew remained in lunar orbit, taking pictures, and returned to Earth on November 24th, 1969, thus completing the 6th manned Apollo mission. The next mission, Apollo 13, took off in April of 1970, and was aborted due to an onboard explosion that terminated the mission, although the crew was returned safely.

One of the things that has been bothering me a little is the relative lack of interest in the missions that took place after Apollo 11 - aside from Apollo 13, the other missions were successes in that they reached, explored and returned to Earth safely, but not nearly as dramatically as the first steps on the moon, or a major accident. This is a trend that has largely continued through to the present-day - when naming space shuttles, Columbia and Challenger come readily to mind, and attract the most attention for their destruction, but how many people could name the remaining shuttles in the fleet, or tell me right now which one is in space at this very moment? (It's Atlantis).

This is even more of a shame, because this mission contained some of the more interesting astronauts, Pete Conrad and Alan Bean. Bean is by far one of my favorite astronauts - he left the service after becoming an instrumental member (and Astronaut) for the Skylab program - another incredible mission on NASA's part - and has since become a painter. His artwork is stunning, and well worth checking out.

To me, a moon landing is an incredible spectacle, where humanity has demonstrated a proficiency in technology that allows us to reach another body, and to tell us so much about our world and the next. Apollo 12 showed us that humanity's first steps on the moon were not its last, and in true scientific method, repeated an experiment with the same results. It showed that we can return to the moon.