I was fan of the Phantom Stranger comics back in the 70s, but I never read the very earliest issues until I got the recent anthology.
Here’s what those earliest issues turn out to be like:
Don’t worry, it got better.
Tag Archives | Science Fiction
Libertarian Tag
William Gillis has tagged me with the question: What motivated you to start looking into Anarchist/Libertarian thought?
I’ve got a long version here, but the short version is: as a 15-year-old science fiction fan I read an article on “The Science Fiction of Ayn Rand” in the May 1979 Starlog; this led me to Ayn Rand’s novels, which led me to her nonfiction, which led me to read people she cited, and then to people they cited, and so on; hence I was soon reading Murray Rothbard, Isabel Paterson, David Friedman, etc. I resisted anarchism for an embarrassingly long time – but I was gradually growing more radical, thanks to my reading, to the influence of the Institute for Humane Studies (including such lecturers as Randy Barnett and Don Lavoie), and to events like the first Gulf War. On May 12, 1991, I decided I had finally become an anarchist.
I hereby tag everybody.
Chambers Film in the Works?
I see that this website lists The Repairer of Reputations as an upcoming film, but gives no further information.
“The Repairer of Reputations” is a short story by Robert W. Chambers, written in 1895 but set in 1920; it also serves as the first chapter of Chambers’ The King in Yellow, a collection of inter-related fantasy stories that exercised an important influence on H. P. Lovecraft.
“Repairer” takes place in a future in which something vaguely resembling World War I has occurred and the American progressive movement has achieved political ascendancy under a President Winthrop, who has introduced a comprehensive program of centralised bureacucracy, aggressive nationalism, extensive public works and urban renewal projects (with an emphasis on neoclassical marble edifices), a nationalised police force, severe racial cleansing laws (including “the exclusion of foreign-born Jews as a measure of self-preservation”), and tax-funded euthanasia chambers in every town (to encourage the unhealthy and maladjusted to relieve the community of their presence).
The Wikipedia page for the story says that these features of the projected future society reflect “the author’s xenophobic tendencies.” I wonder what the basis for this latter bit of speculation is. For all I know Chambers did have xenophobic tendencies, but I don’t think this story by itself is evidence of them. Are the wikipedists assuming that Chambers approves of the society he depicts? Admittedly the narrator obviously approves of it – but the narrator is also pretty clearly intended to be recognised as unreliable, and in fact insane. It seems at least as likely to me that Chambers is satirising the proto-fascist political tendencies of his day. But I await correction from those who have read more of Chambers’ other works than I have.
Encounter Suit
I reported in October that J. Michael Straczynski was supporting Ron Paul. Now he has evidently changed his mind. Quoth JMS:
I donated $2K to his campaign, in order to encourage a more moderate voice on the Iraq war.
Then I discovered that he wanted to overturn Roe vs. Wade and a lot of hard-won civil rights legislation.
So much for that.
Seems odd to me to give $2000 to someone whose views you haven’t investigated, but then I am not rolling in money, as JMS reportedly is since selling Changeling.
For what it’s worth, I would prefer President Paul over President Sheridan.
Gods of the Pacific
I’ve previously discussed the Super Powers series as one bit of Jack Kirby’s New Gods-related work that isn’t going to make it into the four-volume Fourth World Omnibus.
Turns out there’s another bit of Kirby’s New Gods-related work that will likewise be left out.
In the late 1970s, San Diego’s Pacific Comics was one of the best-known comic book stores in the country, with ads in all the major comics. (I remember buying a back issue of Kirby’s 2001: A Space Odyssey series on my one visit there, in the spring of 1977.) Well, in the early 80s Pacific Comics transformed itself into an independent comics publisher in competition with the giants DC and Marvel, and managed to sign some of the most prominent talent in the industry, including Neal Adams, Sergio Aragones, Steve Ditko, Mike Grell, P. Craig Russell, Jim Starlin, Berni Wrightson, and of course Jack Kirby. Its most famous product was Dave Stevens’ Rocketeer.
One of Kirby’s projects for Pacific was a series (running for thirteen issues plus one special issue) called Captain Victory and the Galactic Rangers. As the series went on, it gradually became clear that it was a sequel to New Gods and that the lead character, Captain Victory, was the son of Orion. (I’m actually not convinced that this was Kirby’s intention from the beginning, given some continuity problems posed by the early issues – though admittedly the later issues are not free of these either.) Of course Kirby could not be completely explicit about the connection, given that DC still controlled the rights to the New Gods characters and situations. Hence Darkseid is called Blackmass while Apokolips becomes Hellikost; but their intended identities are evident enough.
So, how is it? The early issues are frankly not so great; but as the New Gods material starts moving toward the forefront Kirby seems to be finding his feet with the material and it begins to get quite interesting – just before cancellation.
After Kirby went back to DC to write Hunger Dogs, was he still planning for Captain Victory to be in continuity? It’s not clear; Captain Victory implies the destruction of New Genesis, which Hunger Dogs shows; but it also implies that the final battle between Darkseid and Orion ended with Orion’s death, Darkseid’s survival in energy form only, and Darkseid’s minions still in charge of Apokolips – which is not how Hunger Dogs ends, but of course these events could have come later.
Image Comics is rumoured to be planning a collection of all the Captain Victory issues some time this year.
Goblins at the Printing Press
One downside of the lower cost of publishing that computer technology has made possible is the proliferation of sloppy publishing houses. Now don’t get me wrong – the benefits definitely outweigh the costs. But the costs are real, and I’m entitled to gripe about them. Kessinger Reprints comes to mind – their productions range from the good (Isabel Paterson’s Never Ask the End, a perfectly fine facsimile edition) to the bad (Jules Verne’s Children of Captain Grant, filled with scanning errors) to the ugly (Lysander Spooner’s Vices Are Not Crimes, which includes the footnote markers but omits all the actual footnotes, in addition to mangling the subtitle).
But what I’m griping about today is the Quiet Vision Press edition of George MacDonald’s fantasy classic The Princess and the Goblin.
The text itself is pretty much okay – just a few typos (mostly capitalisation and hyphenation errors). But …
First, on the back of the book it says:
The Princess Irene has been kidnapped by Goblins. And it is up to an unlikely hero, Curdie the Miner Boy, to save the day.
Um, no.
It’s admittedly true that throughout the book the reader is continually led to expect that Irene will be kidnapped by the goblins and that Curdie will have to rescue her. But it never happens; MacDonald is too clever a writer to be that predictable. Instead it’s Curdie who gets kidnapped, and it’s Irene who has to rescue him. So, strike one.
Next, the back of the book continues:
An amazing tale from one of the founders of modern fantasy, George MacDonald. Including illustrations from a late 1900th century edition.
Wow, that’s really old. Or else from far in the future – one or the other. Strike two.
Finally, on the first page of the book there’s a place for the owner to write his or her name, and here, in fancy Gothic font, we see printed:
This Books Belongs To ____________________
Strike three!
And then, to add insult to injury (or perhaps injury to insult – or at least threat to incompetence), the copyright page sternly informs us that “No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted,” blah blah blah, “without permission of the publisher.” This in a book where both text and pictures date from the 19th (or 1900th?) century and so are in the public domain! I wonder if there are any legal penalties for claiming copyright protection when you don’t actually have it?