Confirmation from the author...
Wishing her the best of luck!
I'm listening to a guy complain about a squirrel stealing broccoli from his garden at the ByMUG meeting right now, speaking of what he's done to avenge the theft. "Avenge" is strictly my choice of verb for it, mind you. It entertains me to listen to such things, as well as family misadventures in an Israeli desert, discussions of various software compatible with more recent iterations of Mac OS X and on and on it goes.
I'm on warrenellis' "Orbital Operations" mailing list, and from there, I read this interview on tor.com about life on the Internet of today. Disturbing, yet hopeful. Maybe we - as a species - manage to salvage enough of whatever else is trying to survive us living on this planet, maybe not.
Last night, I rummaged through YouTube and found that The Agenda's people salvaged a 1976 interview from The Education of Mike McManus with the late Mel Hurtig. It's a bit of video history archeology in action there, dating back to when a kid in grade school in Saskatchewan wouldn't have a hope in Heaven or Hell of seeing a TVOntario show without some expensive intervention from either CBC or the local school board or public library. VHS and Beta were just starting their fight at the time, I think, right?
More as it occurs to me.
Had I thought sooner than I did that the procedures Eckler outlines therein might be an option for me to pursue, there might be far more copies of The Daily Planet Guide to Gotham City still "in the wild".
My apologies to everyone for that mistake.
If you want to see where I was last night, there's some pix I took of the event under discussion, taken at Library and Archives Canada's main building on Wellington. Some old friends of mine were there in different roles, and some new friends stood to be acquired. Also, the book in question is worth the money.
It's not every day that someone you're on a first-name basis with gets this kind of Recognition.
Chris Carter paid attention and gave due credit. So did Joss Whedon. And others as well in more recent times.
And so we all shall. For Jeff Rice, creator of Carl Kolchak, author of The Kolchak Papers that begat The Night Stalker, is no more.
So from Mr. Gaiman's keyboard to your screens:
Originally posted by officialgaiman at New Year's Wishes and gifts
A New Year's Gift, for anyone who missed it:
The BBC Radio 4 GOOD OMENS Website, with all six episodes of the Radio Series available to listened to over the next 2-3 weeks. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04knt4h
And a reminder, over at http://acalendaroftales.com/ you can read and listen to all the stories I wrote for the A Calendar of Tales. January's Tale takes place in the moments between the first and the last chime of twelve midnight, when the Old Year is over and the New Year not yet begun.
And for this year, my wish for each of us is small and very simple.
And here, from 2012 the last wish I posted, terrified but trying to be brave, from backstage at a concert:
From the Spur Authors' Festival discussion of "The Language of Politics" as moderated by CBC's Evan Solomon:
And as actors, Paul Gross and Gordon Pinsent haven't lost their chops.
Frustrated by the cliff-hanger ending, of course.
John Ralston Saul:
Minky Worden of Human Rights Watch:
Wired and Gizmodo have reported that the US Defence Department's PR people backed away from technical advising on the Avengers movie specifically because of SHIELD, and their uncertainty over SHIELD's place in the scheme of things.
lawmultiverse provided a little commentary of their own on the subject, and it wasn't their first attempt to understand how SHIELD could fit into legal pictures either.
Today, rfmcdpei made his own mention of a blog entry from Andrew Barton where the issue of creators needing to understand exactly what their fictional creations are supposed to be and be capable of, even if that understanding doesn't get all the way to the paying audience in full detail.
Here's what Andrew said exactly:
You know what, though? The military is right. According to the Defense Department, their main problem is that they couldn't figure out where the US military stood in relation to S.H.I.E.L.D., which Wikipedia describes as an "espionage and secret military law-enforcement agency," which really narrows it down - and, hell, I imagine it's easy as hell to maintain secrecy over something like a giant flying aircraft carrier. S.H.I.E.L.D. has, from what I understand, been the subject of fan debates over just what it is for a good chunk of the last fifty years.
Answering questions like this is important. They define what you can and cannot do in a story, and as such reduce the unmanageability of everything being possible into more restricted channels that can guide the flow of a narrative. Something that is shadowy, nebulous, and ill-defined even to the people writing it does not lend itself well to the best writing. Creators need to know how their creations work, even if that information never filters down to the audience.
I've had my own understanding of what SHIELD is supposed to be - mainly informed by the stories of Bob Harras and Dan G. Chichester published in the Nick Fury vs. SHIELD mini-series and the later relaunch of Nick Fury, Agent of SHIELD in the 1990's when SHIELD was reinvented for the first time, and somewhat further filled out by Jonathan Hickman's work on Secret Warriors and SHIELD in recent years. Among other sources.
It's my hope as a fan that we can get back to that framework: SHIELD as a planetary defence/intelligence service. The ultimate Blue Berets and as flexible as need be to handle the work in the back alleys as on the battlefield.
Your distance-travelled will vary, of course...
Sorry about that. Slight meme-attack by the Anti-Life Equation there. (As first explained by Jack Kirby and built upon by Grant Morrison, that is.)
Denis McGrath briefly "unretired" his weblog to transplant something he said on Facebook the other day.
I'm one of those "people who want to complain about the CBC cancelling Intelligence" - hey, Chris Haddock did some damn fine TV with that show, and it ended too bloody soon! - but as a supporter of CBC's existence, I have to acknowledge that Denis gets the point and shared it with the world at large because he recognized the need to share it.
CBC's getting it right here more often than not.
I just wish my earlier favourite shows hadn't gotten the axe to make room for these. There should've been room in the budget for everything I liked and this stuff too.
The CBC's worth the money we shell out for it as Canadians. And it's worth more than we're being trained to be willing to shell out for it, too.
Not apologizing for saying it, nor for believing it too.
Thanks, Denis. We needed the reminder.
I met Mr. Travers all of one time, by way of a CBC-hosted "town hall" session that sprang up after Russell Mills was dropped from the Ottawa Citizen. If memory serves, the topic that day was concentration of media service ownership. That's a problem that has long bedevilled Canadian society, and looks to keep on going in that way for the next few decades. I thanked him for showing up, and that was pretty much it.
The guy had some serious "on the ball" brains and I would find myself in agreement with his positions on more topics than not. And even where I disagreed, I had to admit that he had his logic researched and well-marshalled to the best extent any newspaper columnist could.
I'm going to miss reading his work.
He's still alive, it seems, and a while back, I stumbled across one of his short stories on his weblog.
It seemed to fit the Season, in a Twilight Zone way, and I still like it now.
So...for your reading pleasure now:
A Visit from Old Nick
Enjoy or don't, as the moment requires.
After seeing this item on the neighbouring town of Cairo, I wonder if that town was the only inspiration that Mr. O'Neil had in mind.
Or was Cairo in better shape back in the late 1980's?
Might it still be so, and this page isn't telling the whole story?