Jonathan McCalmont @ 12-11-2008
This month in Blasphemous Geometries: has the intentional fallacy had its day as a critical tool? Should we roll back the stone from the tomb of The Author?
Jonathan McCalmont suggests that genre fiction fan-writers and critics should cautiously embrace biographical criticism, and examine books and other works in the context of their creator’s mindset.
Continue reading “How to Dismantle the Wall Between an Author and Their Work”
Related posts
Jonathan McCalmont @ 15-10-2008
This month in Blasphemous Geometries: has the ‘Web 2.0′ phenomenon been a boon to science fiction fandom?
Or, asks Jonathan McCalmont, has it simply accentuated its slide from intelligent discussion into naked commercialism? And if so, how can we reverse the trend?
Continue reading “The Failure of Web 2.0 (with regards to science fiction)”
Related posts
Paul Raven @ 02-10-2008
The latest issue of online sf criticism zine Fruitless Recursion - curated by Jonathan “Blasphemous Geometries” McCalmont, no less - is online and awaiting your eyeballs.
You can read Jonathan’s editorial/introduction to start with, or you can dive right into the articles:
- Paul Kincaid’s review of Mike Ashley’s Gateways to Forever: The Story of Science Fiction Magazines from 1970 to 1980.
- Alvaro Zinos-Amaro’s review of Gabriel McKee’s The Gospel According to Science Fiction: From the Twilight Zone to the Final Frontier.
- Niall Harrison’s review of Michael Chabon’s Maps and Legends.
- Jonathan McCalmont’s review of Studies in Modern Horror, edited by NGChristakos.
Related posts
Jonathan McCalmont @ 17-09-2008
Back in black like an Australian hard rock band long past its sell-by date, it’s Blasphemous Geometries.
This month, Jonathan McCalmont addresses the issue of believability in science fiction - is the truth of a text based in its scientific accuracy, or somewhere else?
Continue reading “The Many Roads - and Solitary Path - to Believable Science Fiction”
Related posts
Paul Raven @ 22-08-2008
Novelist Ian Sales makes an interesting point - a lot of the stories and novels held up as classics of the science fiction genre are actually very bad adverts for the modern form:
I’ve complained before about the undeserving admiration given to many science fiction novels and short stories of earlier decades. Such reverence frequently results in fans recommending these works to people wanting to try the genre. And that’s not a good thing. Readers new to the genre are not served well by recommendations to read Isaac Asimov, EE ‘Doc’ Smith, Robert Heinlein, or the like. Such fiction is no longer relevant, is often written with sensibilities offensive to modern readers, usually has painfully bad prose, and is mostly hard to find because it’s out of print. A better recommendation would be a current author - such as Richard Morgan, Alastair Reynolds, Iain M Banks, Ken MacLeod, Stephen Baxter, and so on.
I think Sales has a good point there. I came to science fiction through the authors publishing in the eighties, and as such I’ve found that a lot of the classics are, while interesting from a historical perspective, pretty unfulfilling reads. And hell knows being made to read some of Dickens’ more tedious works at school gave me a knee-jerk reaction to literary classics, too. [Murray Leinster cover scanned by J Levar]
Which authors would you recommend to a reader wanting to dip their toes into the genre, and why?
Related posts
Jonathan McCalmont @ 20-08-2008
Another month, another inadequate pay-cheque. More empty days and suffocating nights alleviated only by cheap hooch, regrettable takeaways and the occasional all-too-brief orgasm. This is your life… and this is the return of Blasphemous Geometries.
The critical language of science fiction is balkanised according to the media form which the work being discussed belongs. Jonathan McCalmont suggests it is the critic’s place to encourage a merging of genre’s disparate media tribes. Continue reading “All mediums are equal - an end to science fiction tribalism”
Related posts
Paul Raven @ 27-07-2008
Here’s a heads-up for Futurismic regulars who don’t just like reading genre fiction, but who also like reading writing about genre fiction, and who would be interested in reading writing written about writing about genre fiction*…
Blasphemous Geometries columnist Jonathan McCalmont has just committed multiple counts of meta-criticism by posting the first full issue of Fruitless Recursion. Here’s the list of articles for you to get your teeth into:
- Alvaro Zinos-Amaro’s review of Barry N. Malzberg’s Breakfast in the Ruins.
- Martin Lewis’ review of Roz Kavenay’s From Alien to the Matrix.
- Paul Kincaid’s review of David Hajdu’s The Ten Cent Plague.
- Jonathan McCalmont’s field report on Paul Kincaid interviewing Christopher Priest.
Something for everyone, then. Aspiring meta-critics, take note - Fruitless Recursion is a paying market for critical works, so get writing!
[ * Try saying that quickly before the first coffee of the day has kicked in. ]
Related posts
Jonathan McCalmont @ 25-06-2008
Blasphemous Geometries returns, ready to bask in your merciless indifference.
This month Jonathan McCalmont has been thinking about that perennial discussion that is mathematically certain to arise in any situation where three or more sf fans or critics are gathered - how do we define science fiction? Jonathan has decided that we should stop trying. Continue reading “How to define a genre … and why not to bother”
Related posts
