Magic Hours by Tom Bissell: This marvelous collection of essays chronicles everything from film shoots to novelists rescued from oblivion. (The essay on the Underground Literary Alliance, with its portrait of raucous factions, unexpectedly reveals how soft today's literary world has become.) But if you peer between the cracks of these smart pieces, you may very well see how cultural lives are formed from the most unexpected life choices. And as we follow Bissell's development as a writer over the years, that goes for Bissell as well. (
Bat Segundo interview with Bissell)
Angelmaker by Nick Harkaway: Harkaway's latest novel greatly improves on his previous book,
The Gone-Away World, which I'm already on record as praising.
Angelmaker adopts genre elements without ever feeling like a genre book, and it leads me to believe that Harkaway is well on his way to a narrative grace close to China MiƩville's. Yet inexplicably this very fun book, which includes an eightysomething badass named Edie Banister, a mysterious mechanical object that may destroy the world, farcical scenarios involving lawyers and the police, and some unexpectedly moving moments about fatherhood, doesn't appear to be getting much attention in American newspapers. Nothing from the snobs at
The New York Times Book Review, nothing from
The Washington Post. And since I can't get Harkaway on Bat Segundo, I hope this Jump Up and Down mention gets you hopping as well.
The Age of Insight by Eric Kandel: Unless you're really pressed for time, forget Jonah Lehrer. If you want to understand creativity and its relationship to neuroscience, then the bowtie-wearing Nobel laureate is your man. In addition to being a physically beautiful book (you will drool over many of the paintings), there are helpful overviews on optical illusions, science, biographical backgrounds, and many vital figures from the Vienna Secession. Kandel's enthusiasm (and his call for greater unity between the humanities and science) is contagious.
“This isn’t Doctor Who. This is bad science fiction.”
I thought the two were one and the same. I’m not a DW fan from way back – I checked the new series out on a lark – but it seems obvious that if you’re looking for good SF this isn’t the place to go. As ridiculous as the “Aliens of London” two-parter was, I enjoyed it, and in fact I found much more disturbing the definite hints of romance between the Doctor and Rose – isn’t that a DW no-no?
Actually, I happen to think that Doctor Who, when it works, is GOOD science fiction. Sure, it’s a show done on an absurdly smal budget. But part of the charm is seeing the writers and the actors do their best, despite the flimsy sets and the crappy special effects. Even when there’s a bug-eyed monster story, there’s funny dialogue (such as the Brigadier saying, “Just this once, I’d like to meet an alien menace that wasn’t immune to bullets.”) or rich charcterizatiosn (the betrayal/redemption of Captain Yates, the relationship between the Master, Jo Grant and the Doctor, the Doctor gradually revealing elements of Ace’s past to her).
I didn’t really mind the flirtation between the Doctor and Rose. Seemed more playful to me. And besides it’s been established multiple times in Russell T. Davies’ version that the Doctor isn’t interested in romance.
What I was upset by was the wretched nature of the aliens. I didn’t so much mind the farting, but I really hated the idea of the top levels of government being so casually infiltrated. The old “Doctor Who” was plausible enough not to do something so brash — to keep the nature of UNIT just within the parameters of reality to be real. That’s not the case for the new show, and it’s a pity.
I’m really going to prove myself a novice here, but what is UNIT? I rolled my eyes at Mickie’s ability to control ballistic missiles from his home computer, but is this something from the series’ continuity?