#hugo winner

[basicallyanotherwitchesthing]

Robert Silverberg - Moonferns & Starsongs - Ballantine - 1971 (illustration by Gene Szafran)

[katiesclassicbooks]

Review: Watchmen by Alan Moore Illustrated by Dave Gibbons

Synopsis:

Watchmen is a graphic novel that was written by Alan Moore and illustrated by Dave Gibbons. It was published in 1987. In the midst of the threat of nuclear warfare, the world is reimagined as if super-heroes really exist in this graphic novel. The group of super-heroes also known as the watchmen, presented in this story are all psychologically complex. We get glimpses into their pasts and their different viewpoints. They all have different viewpoints on how to save the world. Also, complicated and imperfect morality. 

Storyline:

I was hooked and astounded by this multi-layered story. There really was so much packed in here. This shows a world that is overshadowed by potential destruction and Armageddon. A world plagued by the threat of nuclear warfare. Yet, in this world super-heroes are real and what are super-heroes for except to save the world? It’s so much more complex than that though. These super-heroes are flawed. They are just as human as everyone else (well most of them) and have been shaped by their pasts. They all have different viewpoints about the world, saving it and fighting crime. All of which are interesting, all seem morally complicated and none seem like exactly the right answer. Also, the question is asked ‘who watches the watchmen?’ What is behind it all? Does anyone really have the right to make decisions on behalf of humanity or other people? If superheroes existed would they have that right? Do policemen and the law have that right? Do political leaders have that right? Does anyone have that right? I’ve read that Alan Moore is an anarchist and within that theme of ‘who watches the watchmen?’ I can see his anarchy seeping through. This story was so engrossing, thought provoking and wonderfully executed both through the storytelling of Alan Moore and the artistic talent of Dave Gibbons. 

Setting:

Watchmen is set in a slightly altered 1980’s where some of the history has changed a bit because of the existence of superheroes. The setting was great and since this is a graphic novel was shown through art rather than described with words. I really did love the art style in this graphic novel. I mean, this is the first graphic novel/comic series I have ever read so I don’t have anything to compare it too, but I really did love it. My favorite color palette and setting was when Dr. Manhattan was on Mars. I loved the blue and the pink. All those images when he was there were so cool. Perhaps the scenes on earth were so busy, that the simplicity, space and yet beauty of the drawings of Dr. Manhattan being away from it all just kind of did it for me. 

Characters:

The characters and the concepts they explore are what really made this book. Through their exploration all the themes of the novel emerge. First of all there is Rorshach. He is ultra pessimistic and you could say even potentially a nihilist. His focus is smaller and he sees the worst of humanity. It seems like he thinks it’s hopeless, but yet relentlessly fights evil. He doesn’t seem to look as much at the big picture as the others though. While I liked Rorshach in a way and he was an interesting character, he was not a favorite. Then there’s The Comedian. He also sees the worst in the world. He sees the world as a big joke. Therefore he decides to cash in on the joke and reflect humanity’s worst qualities. Sure he’s a superhero, but he also works for the government. He was not likable to me for obvious reasons. Ozymandias was a favorite character of mine, although I didn’t completely agree with or admire him. In fact, what is so great about these characters is that you don’t agree with or admire any of them completely. They and their ideologies are all flawed. Ozymandias has a utopian, optimistic vision for the future. He wants to bring a resurgence of all that is great about humanity such as knowledge and art etc. His idol is Alexander the Great. He says that people in the 20th century either were taking a pessimistic or optimistic approach. Seeing the potential for enlightenment or seeing it all as hopeless and almost wishing the world would end. (Don’t think much has changed in the 21st century either). He obviously sees the potential for humanity. He is known as the world’s smartest man and he sees that everyone taking sides and fighting wars just constantly leads to division and can now lead to mutually assured destruction. He decides that humanity needs a threat from outside in order to unite them. I really liked that concept and his vision for a utopian future. The problem is, that plan leads to the sacrifice of the few for the many. Which, morally doesn’t seem right and most definitely not a perfect plan. While he has good intentions for the long term of humanity, he is still very egotistical and seems like he wants to conquer the world. He is the one that really brings up the question ‘who watches the watchmen?’ because he is the one that changes that fate of the world. Did he have the right to do that though? I thought it was interesting that within this story there was a guy reading a comic book about pirates and it paralleled the main story. It was juxtaposed really well and this one image stuck out to me in it. This one man is trying to make it back to his hometown to save everyone from a ship that will take everyone to hell. He has been shipwrecked and is left on an island with a bunch of corpses. He sails to his hometown on a raft that floats on the corpses. The image of him going to save everyone from hell, yet being propelled there by the corpses of others really tied into the rest of the story and what I feel Ozymandias does. It was a good image for what people do in war regardless. Jon or Dr. Manhattan was perhaps my favorite character. I loved his sections. He is the result of an experiment gone wrong where he was completely disintegrated, but he reassembled himself and now has super powers. Timelines got messed up with him and he experiences all time at once. I found him utterly fascinating and the section where it talked about how he experiences all time at once really got me thinking about the nature of time. I put the book down for awhile after that part because I got so caught up in my own musings on time. He also questions whether anything even made the world. He says its a clock without a clockmaker. He says nothing ends. You could say that his views are similar to the meaninglessness that Rorshach sees. I think Rorshach is so much more nihilistic though and I almost feel like Jon shows infinity and infinite potential perhaps. Jon becomes separate from humanity. He doesn’t see how in the grand scheme of things humanity serves any great purpose. He wants to detach from it all. He starts to do that, but then another character named Laurie reminds him of the miracle of life, so he returns for a bit only to become disgusted and leave again. He seems to want to detach from humanity and feeling. Sometimes though it seems he misses and might long for human connection. While he represents disconnection and wanting to disconnect from humanity, Laurie and Nite owl aka Dan seem to cling more tightly at the end to human connection. As the world has gotten more divided people have become more divided. Laurie sees death around them, she’s been confused by her past and she’s been disappointed in trying to be in a relationship with someone as disconnected as Jon. Nite Owl has fallen into boring middle aged retirement and feels a sense of impotence. All these factors bring them together to both try and fight crime and to connect with each other. Laurie I feel is more driven to connection. Nite Owl gets a thrill and feels important when he is fighting crime. These are the complex characters of Watchmen and I understood all of them and yet didn’t quite agree with any of them at the same time. They show different reactions to the world and humanity. Pessimism vs. optimism. Connection vs. disconnection. 

Did I Like It?:

I absolutely loved Watchmen! I wasn’t sure what I would think of the graphic novel medium or this story and it absorbed me, it made me think a tremendous amount and I just think it is a masterpiece that’s very powerful!  It impacted me and I will be thinking about it for a long time to come. My love gave this to me to read as it is his favorite book and he thought that I would get it and appreciate it. I am so glad he did! He was right and I can’t wait to discuss it more with him. Noting how much I have loved his recommendation, I think I’ll be keeping him around for awhile haha. He also recommends V for Vendetta, which I want to read soon now as well. 

Do I Recommend It?:

Yes! So highly. To most people. Doesn’t matter if you think you won’t like a graphic novel or superheros. This book demands to be read. It contains so much and is just a fabulous thought provoking creation. 

~Katie 

[leightoningstrike]

An Archive of Our Own, a project of the Organization for Transformative Works

Chapters: 9/18 Fandom: Marvel Cinematic Universe, Captain Marvel (2019) Rating: Mature Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply Relationships: Soren/Talos (Marvel) Characters: Talos (Marvel), Soren (Marvel), Mar-Vell Summary:

Pre-Movie

Talos is a spy in the Kree-Skrull war, hardened by life spent in constant danger. He has sworn to stay cold and distant but when he is given an impossible mission with an even more impossible woman his resolve is weakened.

[bormgans]

GATEWAY - Frederik Pohl (1977)

GATEWAY – Frederik Pohl (1977)

Gateway is a famous book. It’s one of the very few books that won 4 major prizes: the Hugo, Locus, Nebula and Campbell award, and it’s on numerous essential SF lists.

While it’s a perfectly self-contained book, Pohl wrote 5 sequels: Beyond The Blue Event Horizon (1980), Heechee Rendezvous (1984), The Annals Of The Heechee (1987), The Gateway Trip (1990) and The Boy Who Would Live Forever(2004).…

View On WordPress

[booksandchainmail]

so i finally read seasons of glass and iron

which won the hugo for short story this year, and it was the gay feminist fairytale deconstruction i didn’t know i needed.

But afterwards i looked it up online, and found a review that said, and i quote:

“It’s also message fiction with a troubling conclusion: that women should give up on husbands in order to find their freedom with each other. [...] This has a slight misandrous feel.”

a) no fucking kidding

b) “troubling”

c) “slight”

d) how is anyone of this a downside

[basicallyanotherwitchesthing]

Joe Haldeman - Mindbridge - Avon - 1978

[bormgans]

THE MAN IN THE HIGH CASTLE - Philip K. Dick (1962)

Glad that I finally read this – the first PKD I truly liked. Reading it almost never happened, as after Flow My Tears, The Policeman Said I decided to stop seeking out more Philip K. Dick. But as I’m also slowly trying to read all big classics of scifi, I had to tackle it one day. The Man in the High Castle got Dick a Hugo award, and is one of the stalwarts of alternative history. It is…

View On WordPress

[melaniem54]

Review: The Empress of Salt and Fortune (The Singing Hills Cycle #1) by Nghi Vo

Rating: 4.75🌈 I’m not sure how I came across this incredible author and series. Perhaps it was that amazing cover or the hints of cultural magic mixed with references to strong women within an ancient history fantasy setting in the description. The Hugo award helped. Doesn’t matter. It doesn’t prepare a reader for the sheer beauty, the quiet cruelty, and vastness of the world found here. Love.…

View On WordPress