firecat: red panda looking happy (Default)
I really like Moby-Dick (the novel by Melville).

I'm afraid I don't much care for this guy's artwork style, but he made 552 illustrations for Moby-Dick (one for each page of his edition), which I think is a great project.

He also claims to have "the world's largest personal collection of Nazgul art"

This is a recent article about him.

While digging around to find out more about this guy, I discovered there is now a biennial "marathon reading of Moby-Dick" in New York City. This happened in 2012 and 2014. In 2013 there wasn't a reading, but there was a "Moby-Dick Not-Marathon," aka a convention. The next marathon will be in 2016. Its Kickstarter campaign is a sight to behold.

I found out about Matt Kish via a pattern by Ann Weaver, "His Mark," in the new (50th!) edition of

She has published two books of knitting patterns based on Moby-Dick. The paper versions of the books have illustrations by Matt Kish.
firecat: smiling cat (cool)
I finished watching the David Tennant Doctor Who episodes. Should I put a spoiler cut even though all these shows aired 2006–2010? Might as well.

spoiler cut )
firecat: red panda looking happy (Default)
I was quite entertained by Star Trek: Into Darkness but it didn't make me gleeful the same way Reboot did. Not that sequels often do that.

massive spoilers )

1 Jan 2013 05:26 pm
firecat: red panda looking happy (Default)
via [personal profile] andrewducker

Plot holes in World War II (what were the writers thinking?)
firecat: bag of popcorn and movie reel (movies)
I finally got to watch The Avengers. I liked it, but I wasn't blown away. Maybe partly because I have never read any of the relevant comics.

So I invite those of you who had strong feelings about it to talk about what you loved/hated about it.

Also, where's the best fanfic? :)

(If I were writing Avengers fanfic, I would write it about Loki and one or more of his doubles.)
firecat: jiji looking surprised (surprised jiji)
In case you don't have enough yaoi K/S in your life (1 image within)...
Read more... )

(Sent to me by someone who is welcome to identify zirself, or not.)
firecat: red panda looking happy (Default)
Originally posted by [personal profile] kate_nepveu at announcing 2012 Con or Bust auction

I am pleased to announce this year's auction to support Con or Bust, which helps fans of color/non-white fans attend SFF conventions. Bidding starts Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 12:01 a.m. EST (GMT -5) and ends Sunday, February 25, 2012 at 11:59 p.m. EST. You may post auction offers and make donations now.

For more details, please see these updated posts explaining how to:

As a reminder, Con or Bust is now helping fans attend all cons of their own choosing, not just WisCon as in the past. (Requests for assistance to attend cons in April, May, and June 2012 will be taken from February 15 through 25; see the "request assistance" link for more details.) Because the demand for assistance is greater than before, please spread the word widely!

More information about Con or Bust.

firecat: red panda looking happy (Default)
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows isn't the best movie ever, but I found it very entertaining. I'm not going to pay much attention to the reviews of M. LaSalle of the SF Chronicle in the future. (He gave it 1 star out of 5.)
spoilers ho )
firecat: red panda looking happy (Default)

One could also describe this post as "how to be a fan of things that have problematic elements, without necessarily being a fan of the problematic elements themselves." And/or "how to be a fan of what you're a fan of without attempting to defend it as perfect and without badgering other people to consume it if they have decided they don't want to."
Liking problematic things doesn’t make you an asshole. In fact, you can like really problematic things and still be not only a good person, but a good social justice activist (TM)! After all, most texts have some problematic elements in them, because they’re produced by humans, who are well-known to be imperfect. But it can be surprisingly difficult to own up to the problematic things in the media you like, particularly when you feel strongly about it, as many fans do. We need to find a way to enjoy the media we like without hurting other people and marginalised groups. So with that in mind, here are my suggestions for things we should try our darnedest to do as self-confessed fans of problematic stuff.
firecat: mouse with rainbow colored circles covering up its eyes (color mouse)
You guys, Helen Mirren just said in an interview that she would like to play the Doctor on Doctor Who. And then I exploded. Wow. Helen Mirren. Doctor Who. With a creamy “wants to play” center.
I don't need that much's just that I find the number of episodes daunting compared to the amount of time I spend watching TV by myself...the OH having said he doesn't want to watch Dr Who.

...although come to think of it, he might well watch Helen Mirren do Dr Who.
firecat: stopmotion puppets of gene and sam, characters in the tv show "life on mars" (life on mars stopmotion)
Finished watching the British TV show Life On Mars. Waah! I loved it and didn't want it to end.

(There might be spoilers in the comments.)
firecat: red panda looking happy (Default)
14. Did you have a gateway fandom? Still in it? Why or why not? Is there a community for it on DW?
OK. I'm sure this has been discussed to death elsewhere, but since it's the first time I have thought about it, I will discuss it to death here too, behind this here cut.
Read more... )
As far as actively investigating/interacting with media fandom is concerned, Star Trek: Reboot is mostly what did it.

TL;DR: Very late bloomer.

15. What's your current obsession? What about it captures your imagination?
I don't have a positive current obsession right now, and that's a problem. I'm happier when I have one. I expect one will eventually come along; I'm open to it.

16. What are you glad you did but haven't really had a chance to post about?
I'm glad I've done various things, none of which I intend to post about.

17. How many people on your reading list do you know IRL have you met face to face?
About 80.

18. What don't you talk about here, either because it's too personal or because you don't have the energy?
Read more... )
19. Any questions from the audience?
You can ask me anything any time. If you want to ask anonymously, you can do so by commenting on a public post in my journal. Anonymous comments are screened and I'll get a notification. (I might put up a sticky post to this effect, I suppose.)

20. Yes, but what are your thoughts on yaoi?
I feel vaguely benevolent toward yaoi and I know very little about it.

21. What's your favorite thing about Dreamwidth?
It's full of smart people talking about fascinating things.

Part 1, questions 1-9
Part 2, questions 10-13


22 Oct 2010 01:30 pm
firecat: red panda looking happy (Default)
Claimer: I have a small role working on Wiscon.

I think people who run Wiscon did a right thing by withdrawing Elizabeth Moon's GOH invitation, as a result of her writing a post that showed intolerance of Muslims, and then deleting all the comments on the post.

I disagree with the people who think it was unforgivable that the decision was not made instantaneously.

I don't disagree with the people who think it took too long. I also have sympathy for the amount of time it took, because the decision-makers were trying to deal with a situation they haven't handled before, and that's hard for a sizable group of humans.

I disagree with the people who think it is unforgivable for Wiscon's public communications to have waffled (the initial message was that we would not withdraw the invitation, then we did). It would have been better if that hadn't happened, but see above.

I agree with the people who point out that the length of time the decision took caused practical and emotional hardship for potential Wiscon attendees who felt unsafe as a result of EM's remarks.

I agree that the waffling and the delay made it look like the people who put on Wiscon might not be committed to creating a convention welcoming to people of color and third-wave feminists.

I think almost all the people who put on Wiscon are committed to creating a convention with a social justice focus. Also, we may not be working hard enough on it and may not be sufficiently well educated on social justice issues.
firecat: red panda looking happy (Default)
I am noodling about some conversation around a current event, but not directly addressing the event or the people who are involved in it.
(I agree with this post 100%.)

There is some fascinating discussion in the comments of this post. D. Moonfire:
I try really hard not to only pay attention that are “reasonable”. I think it very important to read about unreasonable, insane, and otherwise brain-dead people from the simple point that I’m looking at them from my point of view. If I stuck with reasonable, then I’ll be just confirming the biases I already have (I believe the proper term is confirmatory bias or something like that). I won’t learn anything more and I’ll just put myself in a bigger hole that I’m already in....I think it critical to see the world from points of view that don’t agree with you, those unreasonable people out there.
Two things strike me here. One, I agree that if you only pay attention to people you consider to be acting reasonable, you'll end up with confirmation bias. Two, when you see "reasonable" opposed to "unreasonable, insane, and otherwise brain-dead," and you see "unreasonable" defined as "points of view that don’t agree with you," it's easy to see why conversations go astray. It's easy to end up with "Be reasonable" meaning "Agree with me" and "You're not being reasonable" meaning "You're not agreeing with me and therefore you're insane or brain-dead." Laura Resnick: It’s also worth noting that -emotion- is highly over-valued by many people, i.e. the notion that how strongly you feel about something has a direct corollary to how informed, valid, or inherently correct your opinions are.
I don't like the word "over-valued" there. What she's really talking about is public behavior, not emotion, and what she's really saying is "People who publicly express emotions are taken more seriously than people who don't." And personally, as a cold fish, I don't like that. But I don't know that this translates to publicly expressing emotions being "over-valued." Skennedy: Any motivations ascribed to thousands of individual comments and tens of thousands of opinions spread on peoples’ own blogs are straw men - easy to dismiss compared to the rainbow of actual diverse opinion.
YES YES FUCKING YES. But this reply is probably right: Resa: ...but humans are tribal creatures and tend to think in tribal terms...
I now have almost automatic reactions to phrases such as "those people": "which people do you mean, exactly? what makes you lump them together?") and I am glad of these reactions. But I probably retain more tribal-creature thinking than I am aware of.
firecat: girl's hands holding apple on her lap (holding apple)
Here is what [profile] nisi_la wants. [profile] nisi_la is a Wiscon 35 Guest of Honor.
Meanwhile, I want everyone who was hurt or offended or puzzled or appalled or angered or infuriated or stymied or worried or threatened or in any way negatively affected by Elizabeth Moon's post to attend WisCon 35. Because when I was asked to be a Guest of Honor for that convention, you were the ones I was expecting to see there. And because I want to dance with you, and sing with you, and talk about smart stuff with you, and admire how beautiful we are, and flaunt it!

That's what I want. You do what's right for you, though. I don't always get what I want. I will miss you if you don't attend, but I love you unconditionally.
I don't know if I'm going to Wiscon, but my attendance or failure to attend isn't likely to have anything to do with Elizabeth Moon's offensive statements about immigrants and Muslims (my post about that is here: Basically, I plan to attend if my life circumstances permit.

I will attend because I know people on the concom and I care about them and want to support them. Because I see many friends there I don't see anywhere else. Because there are always interesting conversations (many of which, for me, are in the lobby rather than at the panels or speeches). Because there's so much going on that for me it's possible to ignore some of the stuff and people I don't like or agree with. Because I think the Tiptree Award is cool and important. Because a number of important organizations have been born at Wiscon (including the Carl Brandon Society and Broad Universe) and I want to support an environment that gives birth to such organizations. Because people who make Wiscon happen have been trying hard in a number of ways to increase inclusiveness for oppressed and marginalized people at Wiscon.

The inclusiveness efforts that affect me personally are: Wiscon people have acted to oppose fat hatred and promote fat acceptance. Wiscon people have tried to accommodate people with mobility difficulties. Wiscon people have tried to accommodate people who have social interaction limits. Wiscon people have not done a perfect job of implementing/supporting these things, but they've tried hard and have made real improvements, from my point of view.

I've tried to form an opinion about whether the Wiscon concom should (have) ch(o)ose(n) to rescind Elizabeth Moon's guest of honor status. I haven't settled on an opinion. I'm aware that my circumstances—as a white person, born in the US to parents born in the US, with a flexible religious affiliation (atheist Buddhist)—afford me the privilege of not having to form an opinion.

Following are some of my thoughts that didn't coalesce into an opinion:

She said something that's deeply contrary to Wiscon's policies of inclusiveness, and she has not shown in public any inclination to change her mind or apologize for hurting people by making these statements. As such it's contradictory for Wiscon to be sending the message that it honors her.

She said it after she was chosen as GOH. To what extent is Wiscon responsible for things that GOHs say after they are chosen as GOHs?

She has said similar things before, although they didn't garner the same amount of attention. To what extent is Wiscon responsible for researching the prior public statements of prospective GOHs to find out whether they've said stuff that's contradictory to Wiscon's policies?

I value the idea of responding to speech that we don't agree with, with more speech.

I value having events that are dedicated to certain viewpoints, at which people can discuss the finer aspects of those viewpoints (events with some room for non-"viewpoint-101" conversations, if you will). When people attending those events feel obligated to spend time defending and explaining the most basic elements of our viewpoints, that space loses some of its value.

When someone we invited to our event says something so threatening and hateful that people we want to be part of our event no longer want to attend or feel unsafe to attend, our community is weakened.


firecat: red panda looking happy (Default)
firecat (attention machine in need of calibration)

March 2019

10111213 141516


Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 19 Apr 2019 10:54 am


RSS Atom
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios