Archive for December 2009

Sight Unseen

So Cameron’s latest opus has been released to the public.  Tweets were coming in from people standing in line for 3am showings.  The buzz has been epic, the anticipation was (and still is) through the roof.  Reviews are already flooding in.  This movie could potentially bring SciFi solidly back into the mainstream where literary and cinematic properties are concerned.

So why is the sci-fi community less than impressed with the result?  It’s got awesome special effects, it’s got alien worlds, space marines, lithe and beautiful blue-skinned alien women, giant robots, interstellar travel, what else could the people who are *supposed* to be lining up in droves to view this movie possibly want?  Where did Cameron go wrong?

Thing is, he didn’t.

Avatar isn’t for us so much, not for the hard-core Sci-Fi fans who know the exact conditions under which you *could* have sound in space, or understand *why* a triple helix is a biological impossibility and just what kind of biology you’d need to make it work.  Avatar is a piece of transcendent fiction, it’s written to appeal to those who love a good story and a great visual spectacle, but not, so much, for the sci-fi aficionado.  Arguing story memes like space-marines is like arguing the possibility of a cross-class romance in Titanic.  There’s no point.  There’s going to be tried and true (and hackneyed and overused) tropes in here *because* the movie is appealing to a broader audience.  It’s going to need those points of commonality, hackneyed sci-fi ideas that everyone has been exposed to, so that it can engage an audience for whom the idea of 10ft tall anime-eyed alien is something so far outside their experience that they’d be hard-pressed to keep up with the storyline.

To Assume means to make an…

I was thinking about assumptions today. Back when I first started on the Internet (back when alt. was the only way to chat and MUDs were causing people to flunk out of school) your username and your finger file were what people had to go by. When I used a female username, I was treated as date bait and when I used a male username, or even an indeterminate one, I was treated as one of the guys. That sounds a bit unfair, and it is. Even if I IDd myself as female, and used a male name, I was treated reasonably. I came to the conclusion (supported by my male friends) that it was presumed, when using a female name, that I was a guy acting out a bad stereotype (or that I was possibly some sort of technohooker).

But dong let me get sidetracked, the discussion here isn’t a boy versus girl one. Rather, it’s a case of presumption on the part of the participant. I’ve been mistaken for male, queer, libertarian, democrat, what have you and in each case it has simply been because the person I was interacting with had made a presumption that we were
the same. A person who had never met me, outside of an online chat room or comment string or other semi anonymous format had, barring additional proofs, decided we shared the same opinions and background.

Now, I know the Internet is a great equalizer, it allows people to transcend appearances and interact on a presumeably purer level, without preconceptions. But what I’m seeing is that preconceptions seem to be there *anyway*, that the mind fills the void left by the absence of face to face contact.

Is that better? Instead of assigning social stereotypes, were making an ever greater leap by assuming someone is just like us (and committing social faux pas like making social or racist or political comments we might not otherwise speak aloud).

It also speaks to responsibility on the part of the online user.  If you choose a username like “Baambi” or “A**munch”, that’s a deliberate choice on your part, that impression is one you are sending deliberately.  Is it really fair, therefore, to get pissed if someone treats you in a fashion that suits the identity you are imparting?  The socialy and crimminally minded do this all the time in reverse (or so the media would have us think).  They deliberately give the impression of nice, upstanding, harmless citizen while behind the scenes thier motives might be something far less harmless.