I took a short break from writing twice a day reviews to have an existential crisis about writing reviews. I’m going to review what I’ve decided I’m reviewing for.
On file770, in the middle of some of the most interesting conversations I’ve had in web site comments, someone brought up the dual ideas of compelling questions and conversational analysis. I’m going to focus on compelling questions because that’s the half that I’ve latched onto.
This goes back to my post about Totaled. It was a good story. Had some interesting ideas. Didn’t do it for me and I think the reason why not has to do with compelling questions. Look at Ancillary Justice and the story is full of compelling questions. Then there’s Mono No Aware.
Cutting for spoilers about Mono No Aware, Totaled, and me.
Participating in the Hugo Awards as a voting member leads down so many interesting paths. A conversation about “who won the year of your birth” led me to Frank Kelly Freas.
It’s like what someone once said about Shakespeare: “Just one cliche after another.” A lot of Freas’ work might seem “generic”…but he came first.
From the comments on an io9 article about Freas.
Such neat discoveries.
I just downloaded the Hugo Nominee packet today and it has given me more insight into the nominees. Artists even self curated some works to be judged in the Best Professional Artist category. Unfortunately there was nothing there from Cater Reid. This is disappointing because I’m not sure what he wants to be judged based on. All I could find was a web comic.
After going to Julie Dillon’s website I realized I have stumbled across her art a number of times before. For this review I’m going to focus on works created in 2014 which include some that I have enjoyed in the past and am happy to highlight why I enjoyed them now that I have a chance to write more formally on the topic.