Kelson Reviews Stuff - Page 38

Seeing Ragtime on stage is a vastly different experience from listening to it, and not just because it’s live theater. There’s so much context, so many connections, so much subtext that you don’t get from the songs alone. It’s very much a go-home-and-hug-your-kids kind of show.

I’ve been a fan of the music ever since we did a few songs from it in a revue back in college, but I’d never actually seen it until this month, when I caught 3D Theatricals’ production in Redondo Beach.

It’s a big show — forty-six people on stage, according to the director — and they turned in a great performance. The vocal standout, I thought, was the actress playing Mother. The actor playing Coalhouse had a very different voice than the one on the album, but he had physical presence and was able to really convey both his optimism in act one and his rage in act two. The character needs both to work.

Speaking of differences between the production and the cast album, I should note: when you just have the highlights, Father comes off as just kind of clueless. When you have the full songs and the book, he’s a bit of an obstinate jerk.

I found myself struck by the layers of historical interpretation: It’s a modern production of a 15-year-old adaptation of a 40-year-old novel about life in America 100 years ago. And we’re still dealing with the same problems: Institutionalized racism and sexism, exploitation of the working poor, conflict over how to handle immigration. It really hit at the moment when authorities kill a young African-American because they think (wrongly) that she has a gun. You can argue that any historical fiction is as much about the present day as it is about the period it’s set in, and maybe it’s a matter of each era distilling the common themes from the older work, but it was telling (and disheartening) how topical the story still is.

I love this place. They have a great selection of science fiction/fantasy books (I assume the mystery selection is good as well, but since I don’t read mysteries I can’t really judge it), knowledgeable staff that can find or recommend things for you, plus author readings, movie nights, and other events. They get involved with offsite events like book festivals and science fiction/comic conventions as well. They usually get authors to sign a few extra books to sell later. I’ve bought several signed first editions here.

While the Redondo Beach location was open (it closed in 2014), it was my first stop for books in the genres they carry, and a must-visit stop when gift shopping for readers. The San Diego location is still around.

In the 1980s, Little Golden Books released a set of “Little Golden Book Land” books bringing back popular characters like the shy little kitten, the poky little Puppy, Scuffy the tugboat, etc. and putting them all together, apparently as tie-ins to an animated TV special.

As thin as its story was, at least “The Shy Little Kitten” had a positive message for shy children: It’s OK if you’re not as rambunctious and social as everyone else, because you can go off and do interesting things on your own, then come back to the company of others when you’re ready to handle it.

There’s a little bit more story in this book, but the message?

1. If you’re shy, there’s something wrong with you.
2. You’ll never have any fun.
3. It’s your own fault.
4. You should change yourself to be just like everyone else.

It’s toxic, whether it’s reinforcing shy kids’ own doubts about their self-worth or reinforcing other kids’ tendency to look down on them (now with extra “It’s your own fault” ammunition).

(And while the target three-year-old audience probably won’t mind, the book also suffers from the same problems as the rest of the “Little Golden Book Land” series: Background characters show up for no other reason than to have them show up, and descriptions are turned into names. We never learn the kitten’s name, but I don’t think it’s “Shy Little Kitten.”)

I hate destroying books, but I’m seriously tempted to toss this one in the recycle bin. Putting it in the donation box would be doing a disservice to whoever picks it up.

The first episode of Flash Forward is one of the best-constructed pilot episodes I’ve seen in a long time, especially of an arc-driven series. (I’ve been trying to think of the last show I saw where I didn’t feel like it took the cast or story a few episodes to get up to speed, and all I can come up with is Firefly.) In one hour, it managed to introduce a slew of characters, show the major world-changing event that sets the arc in motion, pose serious questions (both story-wise and philosophically), force characters to change, set up conflicting agendas and points of view, establish a mystery or two, and find a thematic conclusion to the episode that doesn’t feel like it’s just the first hour of a two- or three-hour show.

Most shows would take two hours to do all that, or pick and choose to cram it into one. (They even found time for a car chase.)

One of the things that really impressed me was that, just using one episode’s worth of characters, they showed the beginnings of so many totally different ways of looking at humanity’s glimpse of the future, whether through hope, fear, or simply confusion. From what they said at Comic-Con, one of the ideas is to be able to expand this to theoretically anyone in the world.

The extended preview of upcoming episodes (a flash forward to Flash Forward!) seemed to be making a great effort to say that yes, they’ll be answering questions, and no, you won’t have to wait 3 years to find out what the heck is going on (unlike that other show with Sonya Walger, Dominic Monaghan, and Oceanic Airlines).

There were a couple of moments that I thought were forced, though the only one that really stands out was the immediate juxtaposition of the “we’re being punished” and “this is a gift” reactions.

Adaptation

They did a good job of taking the source material, Robert J. Sawyer’s novel Flashforward (I’m getting really confused as to whether the TV series has a space in the title or not, but the book definitely doesn’t), and making something that’s recognizably the same idea, but telling a new story with it. It has the benefit of all the thought he put into it:

• What are all the consequences of everyone blacking out for two minutes?
• If everyone experiences his or her own future at the same instant, what about people who are asleep at that time?
• How do you determine whether people are seeing different possible futures or the same future?
• How do you determine whether the future can be changed? (It’s a common enough storytelling trope, but how would you scientifically prove it?)

And so on. But they can tell a larger story, with more characters…and still surprise people who read the book. I don’t know whether they plan on using a similar explanation for what caused the event, or whether the TV version will come down on the side of “The future is not set” or “You can’t fight fate” (though I expect it will be the former, for storytelling reasons). And there was a moment a few minutes before the end that just came out of nowhere and left me thinking, “Wait, what???”

The book is definitely worth reading, especially if you like science fiction of the “what would happen if…?” variety, and it looks like it probably won’t spoil much.

Update: Cancelled After One Lackluster Season

I miss it a little, but I miss what it could have been a lot more than I miss what it actually was. The book was fascinating, and the pilot episode was absolutely fantastic, but from there it was a study in missteps and missed opportunity, week after week. At least they built the first season around a one-year main arc, rather than relying on future seasons happening.

I really wish the show hadn’t squandered so much of its potential. The pilot was great, but the series got totally bogged down in the conspiracy plot and “There’s gonna be another blackout!”

(Worth a look: About a year after it was all over, Robert J. Sawyer wrote about what went wrong with the show, from his point of view.)

Could Batman patent the Batmobile? Is it murder if you kill Wolverine, knowing he’ll regenerate? Does Superman need a warrant to use his X-ray vision on your house? How much trouble can Stark Industries get in if one of Iron Man’s fights levels your business?

James Daily, J.D. and Ryan Davidson, J.D.’s The Law of Superheroes answers these and more questions about the legal implications of super-heroic tropes. You may recognize the names or the concept: The pair of lawyers and self-described comic-book nerds also write the blog Law and the Multiverse.

You’d think a book about law would be a dry read, but it’s actually a lot of fun. That’s sort of the point: some land dispute might not grab the average reader’s attention, but Superman’s troubles with the IRS? That’s something anyone can relate to. More than a “what if?” collection, the book works as an overview of U.S. and international law, told through the lens of comic books.

Examples

Some of the implications are kind of surprising. For instance: Music from a parallel universe where the Beatles never broke up (New Excalibur 4) might not be protected by copyright, because Earth-2182’s U.S. and U.K. never signed our universe’s Berne Convention. On the other hand, the surviving Beatles might still be able to control distribution through trademark law.

Another interesting thing to think about: if Commissioner Gordon calls Batman in on a case, he’s legally required to follow the same rules as the police regarding search warrants and the like, or else evidence may not be admissible. But if Batman goes after the Riddler on his own, he can probably sneak into the villain’s hideout looking for clues and not jeopardize the case (although he’d technically be guilty of breaking and entering).

As a non-human, Superman might not be legally entitled to legal rights as a person, though he and Gorilla Grodd would probably both be protected under animal cruelty statutes and the Endangered Species Act. This is one of several cases where it seems likely that law would change to settle the question (sort of like the DCU’s twelfth amendment allowing masked testimony).

As for that question about Wolverine: It really does depend on whether you know he’ll shrug it off. If you shoot him and think he’ll die, you’ve attempted murder and can be charged as such. If you know it’ll barely slow him down, it’s only assault. On a related note, if you kill Ra’s Al Ghul and then he climbs out of the Lazarus pit, you’re still culpable for murder. You did kill him, after all.

Missing

I was kind of hoping for a little more depth on some subjects, but they cover a lot of ground, and there isn’t really room. (Good thing they have a blog!)

The other thing that disappointed me is that they rarely stray from the mainstream DC and Marvel universes. Hob Gadling from Sandman is discussed at length in the chapter on immortality, and Moist from Dr. Horrible is mentioned in passing during the chapter on super powers as disabilities, but that’s about it. In particular, I would have liked to see some discussion of an Astro City story in which a defense attorney, under extreme pressure from his ruthless and well-connected client, successfully uses the doppelganger defense.

Overall

The Law of Superheroes is one of those fun books that you can take with you when you know you’ll only have sporadic reading time. It’s broken down into broad areas of law and then specific issues, so it’s easy to take a few minutes to read about mutant civil rights or immortality and property inheritance, then put it down for a while and come back later.

Verdict: Recommended. And then head over to their blog for more!