Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
RSS Feed
View Profile
« January 2008 »
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31
You are not logged in. Log in
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
art events
craft and zine fairs
publishing
readings
reviews
slam
Writing
Contests and Submissions
Front & Centre Submission Guidelines
free range print
Saturday, 12 January 2008
"Dark Months"

My sister Jennifer's often referred to the 'dark half of the year' with some affection - time to hole up and create, or to build up energy, or to counteract the fact that the damn sun is still going down before 5:00 with the fire of creativity, because, being human - hey, we have artificial light.

Me, I'm ambivalent. But with a little work, you can pretend it's not dark out there - or at least that it doesn't have to be light out for you to leave the house of an evening and do stuff. Hence, my double-whammy last night.

I realized at the last minute that last night was the fifth Muses reading, featuring Kera Willis, at Rasputin's, so I headed out for that. Given the lousy weather, it was understandable that this reading was pretty sparsely attended - about 10 people in total. Kera decided to forego the microphone and just pull a chair out to a performance space to read to the few tables under the art displays. She read from her book Tenebrismo, produced by Greyweathers Press - I spoke to the printer, Larry Thompson, about the process. He creates hand printed letterpress books - one of those micropresses creating beautiful books that are scattered around Ottawa if you know where to look. Bookmakers more than publishers, they're hard to find but worth it when you do.

The Muses has apparently added an open mike component to their format, although there weren't any takers last night among the small audience. Still, keep an eye out if you're looking for another open mike in town.

Around 10:30 I pulled myself out of the conversation that developed after the show to catch a bus over to the Mayfair Theatre for a midnight screening of Daft Punk's Electroma - a fundraiser for artengine. It was packed, surprisingly - around 450 people showed up, nearly filling the theatre. There was even one guy in a beautifully crafted robot mask - and two members of the artengine board showed up in boxy retro-robot costumes. 

The movie... well... the camerawork was a little selfconsciously skilful - particularly in the first scene where I kept being reminded that some very tricky stuff was being done to get the shots of the moving car. A lot of the takes seriously pushed how long you could go without driving your audience nuts - and the long takes tended to create humour, when they finally broke to something incongruous, or when they stretched out beyond the comfort zone, or when the length of the shot just built the image (one shot of a dropped ice cream cone, landing upside down and then slowly, slowly, sliding sideways on the pavement for - oh, I don't know, much longer than you would expect the shot to take - pulled gradually building giggles out of the audience.)

Essentially, not much happens in this movie, and apparently at Cannes, people walked out during the long trek-through-the-desert scene. Don't know if I blame them - that part was painfully long and I wound up desperate for something to happen. Oddly, though, looking back I thought that might have been deliberate, a way to get the audience into the same state of suicidal desperation as the robot heroes. And frankly, the final 3-minute long-take scene made the whole movie worth it.


Posted by Kathryn Hunt at 12:21 PM EST
Post Comment | View Comments (2) | Permalink
Saturday, 10 November 2007
Blown. Away.

 

 

This picture was taken by Pearl Pirie - thanks Pearl! Right to left: Pam Mason, who detoured her trip to Toronto to come play with Ardyth & Jennifer; Gareth Pearson; Ardyth Robinson; Jennifer Wyatt.

 

I'm happily overwhelmed by the concert at St. Brigid's Centre last night...

A couple of months ago, my sister Jennifer mentioned that she and her musical partner Ardyth were planning on bringing their folk/singer-songwriter/harp duo (aptly enough named Ardyth & Jennifer) to Ontario for a tour, and did I know of anywhere they could play? I said of course, I'd start looking around - I've been wanting them to come play here for a very long time, partly because I always welcome the chance to visit with my sister, and partly because I really wanted the opportunity to share their music with people here in Ottawa. I think they're wonderful, and not just because Jennifer's my sister. 

It just happened to turn out that St. Brigid's Church had just been deconsecrated in September and closed down, and that Neil Wilson, the Founding Director of the Writers Festival, was involved in the group who had been turning it into a centre for the performing arts. So I asked if he thought that St. Brigid's would be a good venue. He said he thought it would be great, and then I was stuck with the worrying thought that I had a venue that seats 800 and an act that, face it, was virtually unknown here in Ontario. 

Shouldn't have worried. Neil knows pretty much everyone in this town, I think, and through his connection with the Folk Festival, we were twigged to another act that could play with them: Gareth Pearson, a 19-year-old guitar prodigy from Wales. I didn't know anything about Gareth, but he was going to be in the area, and Chris White at the Folk Festival said he was great, so we said sure and put him on the bill too. Then it was just a matter of getting the word out. 

I guess we did. I was honestly - being realistic - hoping for a hundred people. We had twice that. The church is a beautiful building with high fan vaulted arches and a huge mural painted on the East Wall behind the altar, which in itself is a gorgeous piece of art. The Writers Festival's lighting and sound manager, Mark Delorme, did a fantastic job of lighting the space. Just looking at the pictures people took of the show might give you a sense of the warmth the space is capable of. Then you add Ardyth & Jennifer's engaging onstage presence (something I envy my sister a lot for - I still get pretty flustered on stage) and their music, which really is quite beautiful, and you have a really unique art space. New opera house on Elgin? Who needs it? 

I could be accused of being biased about Jennifer's music - I do think their songs are gorgeous, the way their voices intertwine still gets me choked up, and they do wonderful original things with their instruments. They draw on the Celtic tradition, but  you can't pigeonhole them into "Celtic harp" - they're doing something new with ancient roots. I've been listening to them for ten years and I never get tired of it. So maybe I'm a little biased, but I will say in defence that there were cheers and whistles from the hall, laughs at the funny songs, a fair number of voices singing along on the one song requiring 'audience participation,' a long and enthusiastic round of applause, and several people stopping me to say how great they were. I can't be accused, though, of being biased about Gareth. And did he ever blow me away. 

I'd heard him play on YouTube before, and I'd met him a few hours previously and heard a few licks, but I was not prepared for this kid. He was astounding. I'd had my worries, partly because of his age, and my experience with some other young and gifted musicians, that he could turn out to be simply fast, a stunt player. I was completely blindsided by his sensitivity, his control, and his versatility. He played one desperately beautiful Chet Atkins tune that made my friend, sitting beside me, take a very long breath when it was over and pronounce it "transcendant." He played a Jackson Five tune with the bass, chords, and melody - all at the same time (and threw in a few quick Motown strike-poses to boot.) And he went through a Duke Ellington tune that he could play with his nose. That was the other really wonderful thing about his performance: he was so completely comfortable on stage, and very funny. Obviously having more fun than should be legal, and channeling that right on out to the audience. He blew the room away. 

And then they all got up at the end to play together, which was great. They'd barely had any time together before the show, but they did a really good job of onstage jamming on a few songs.

I'm still pretty much glowing from the great music and the wonderful vibe in that building. It really felt like something really special was starting. And I'm really happy, personally, that the first concert in St. Brigid's since it became St. Brigid's Centre for the Arts and Humanities was this one: a concert that I'm sure surprised everyone in the room at some stage, that was a blending of different styles and genres, that mixed traditional (and particularly Celtic) roots with modern influences, that touched down on both sides of the Atlantic, and that warmed that beautiful space the way it did.

Next week, on the 18th, we'll be bringing poet, scholar and mystic William Irwin Thompson to the same space. Check it out.  


Posted by Kathryn Hunt at 11:34 PM EST
Updated: Sunday, 11 November 2007 12:44 AM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, 26 October 2007
Top Girls

I just got back in from Third Wall Theatre's production of Top Girls by Caryl Churchill (running now through Nov. 3rd at Arts Court Theatre - their last production at Arts Court before they snuggle in with the GCTC at their gorgeous new digs at Wellington & Holland). Had I mentioned how very much I'd been looking forward to this show? Well, now I have. I think I've had the date of the opening night written down in my daytimer for over a month.

I'm a huge Caryl Churchill fan. Particularly because of Top Girls. I'd been looking forward to seeing this play as a sort of present to myself after finishing with the Writers Festival. And Third Wall Theatre did not disappoint me, one teeny bit.

This play has got some of the most virtuoso dialogue writing imaginable. Characters' speech overlaps and crashes, rises and falls, and over the course of the play builds up this inexorable rhythm of alternating chaos and stillness. People shout each other down, they interrupt each other, no one ever wants to listen to poor Lady Nijo going on about her kimonos, and they startle themselves and each other into moments that freeze the audience as well. I've seen Churchill's rapid-fire, overlapping dialogue done too choppily, as in GCTC's production of A Number last winter, but this flowed so naturally that it was staggering to think of the effort the actors must have had to put into making it sound so natural - like watching a ballerina's extended arm appearing to float, and then noticing the sweat on her skin.

I can't imagine even trying to read it, and I really can't imagine trying to perform it. The seven women in this production were all really impressive,  from the initial dinner party (done on a stage set on a turntable that rotated so slowly you forgot, by the end, that it was rotating) to the last act, in which the alternating chaos and stillness of the dialogue has become the rhythm of a family fight that will never end. 

The actresses are astounding, in particular Margo MacDonald as Marlene and Kristina Watt as Joyce in that last, draining act. In most of the performances I caught small details that spoke volumes: fingers fidgeting on the edge of a chair, a leg wanting to jiggle without actually jiggling, hair twisted around a finger or a posture changing slowly through the scene. Tania Levy was funny and understated as Dull Gret in the first act; she barely gets to speak but her movements were economical characterization, and counterpointed the others' dialogue without distracting.

I did hear a woman behind me (who I would venture to guess had a New Zealand accent?) say that she wished they wouldn't try to do British accents. But, really, it would be very hard not to. Certain words - 'knackered,' 'poor sod,' 'aces' - just don't sound right in a North American accent, and this play is laced with those British colloquialisms. And as it's part of the point that the setting is Thatcher's England, it would be equally odd, I think, to hear the actors talking like Canadians.

The staging was also nice - the stage becomes gradually more and more cluttered with stuff through the course of the three acts. (There are three, incidentally: many other productions have made it into two, but the director, Charles McFarland, had discovered that Churchill originally wanted it to be three acts, making it almost into three connected mini-plays.) My only concern was that the fade-outs at the ends of acts were slow, leaving the audience not sure when they should start clapping. In particular, the freeze-frame at the end of the dinner party in Act I went on long enough that I wondered if we were supposed to be noticing something in the tableau, and the lights went down, and house lights came up, so slowly that the audience were left looking around to figure out if they should start applauding or if there was something else supposed to happen.

It's difficult to explain the story if you don't know the play, so I won't try. But I will say that if you don't know the play, I can't think of a better way to meet it than this production. Go. Go.

 

And while I'm here: The Ottawa Small Press Fair is tomorrow at the Jack Purcell Community Centre on Elgin from noon to 5. I'll be there, will you?

Also: Saturday night at 7:00 at Library and Archives Canada, 3Dreads and a BaldHead presents an evening with Jamaican writer Lorna Goodison.  Lorna Goodison is the author of eight books of poetry, including Travelling Mercies, Controlling the Silver, and Goldengrove: New and Selected Poems, two collections of short stories, and an acclaimed memoir, From Harvey River: A Memoir of My Mother and Her People.

And on Sunday afternoon, Dusty Owl is hosting Robert Fontaine, probably best known as the movie critic for All In A Day on CBC, with his new book Movies Ate My Brain. 5:00 at Swizzles. 

Have fun deciding how to do it all.... 


Posted by Kathryn Hunt at 11:18 PM EDT
Post Comment | View Comments (1) | Permalink
Tuesday, 23 October 2007
Another season, another festival....

Yes, there's been a long silence. A lot of that has been the fault of the Writers Festival, which most people reading this probably know is where I work at the moment. Yeah, in 'real life' I do what I also do for fun. I know, it's a rare thing.

The Festival started out on the 13th with the City of Ottawa Book Awards and the Lampman-Scott Award for Poetry, and wrapped up on Sunday night, with the ReLit Awards and a live guinea pig in a chair sitting in for Bill Gaston. In the middle, there were talks on the Simpsons, on fathers and sons, on spoken word, on child soldiers of Uganda and on the possibility that neuroscience can prove the existence of the soul. There was an overly packed room for the tribute to Ryszard Kapucinski that had to be moved to the auditorium because we ran out of chairs, a full house for Capital Xtra's Transgress event, and waves and waves of laughter through the audience for Jasper Fforde (who is just as funny in real life as you might expect the creator of the Thursday Next books to be.)

I didn't get to see, but heard great things about, the reading on Wednesday afternoon, too, by Michael Winter and David Gilmour - a reading designed to be a 'secrets of the writing life' session, to give beginning writers, especially high school and university students, a chance to meet and ask questions of living authors. I heard a lot of people saying it was one of the best sessions in the festival, and I think I'm going to suggest we do it again. There were a lot of writers of all ages in the audience, and such glowing reviews of the event.

I also heard wonderful things about the Jean Chretien memoir event - we had Chretien himself booked to read, but sudden bypass surgery forced him to cancel. In his place, we got Senator Jim Munson, Bruce Hartley, and Giller nominee Daniel Poliquin to come talk about his career. Again, I couldn't be in the room, but I heard from people who were there that it was a terrific event.

I wish I could be in multiple places at once, so I could be at all of the events and still manage to get dinner picked up, all of the kids authors organized, and the box office and bars attended to. But hey, because I was organizing the kids' festival, Step Into Stories, I did manage to get out to a lot of public schools and libraries to be onsite while Kit Pearson answered some phenomenal questions from the kids, Simon Rose got them all to scream over the creepy mystery of the Princes in the Tower, Jacob Berkowitz put on his masterful performance as "Chief Bottom, Dung Detective" and had crowds of kids singing about fossilized dinosaur poop, Kenneth Oppel mesmerized auditoriums full of students with his stories about how he started writing as a kid, and Jan Andrews told her stories to a group of immigrants' kids who'd never had an author come to their school before.  

I love my job...

More stuff coming up, though, no rest for the literary. There's a free reading tomorrow at Carleton University, in 101 Azrieli Theatre, by Ivan E. Coyote, who I saw at the Festival and who was absolutely wonderful. Funny, precise, insightful. It's at 7:30; music by Rae Spoon and visual art by Valerie Salez.

Thursday night starting at 5:00 is a reading by Rob Winger followed by a poetry circle, in the English Lounge on the 18th floor of Dunton Tower, Carleton U Campus. After that everyone's trooping down to the Avant Garde Bar to hear Gary Robinson. I would go, if I wasn't in a class that night, dammit. I'd love to sit in on a free poetry circle with a GG nominee!

And next Sunday, on the 28th, at 5:00, Dusty Owl is hosting Robert Fontaine, best known as the movie critic on All in a Day, with his new book Movies Ate My Brain.  

And there's more to come! Onward!


Posted by Kathryn Hunt at 1:03 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Wednesday, 3 October 2007
Free Will Stanton!

A book you truly loved as a child is often hard to return to in the same kind of way as an adult. While I loved The Lord of the Rings when I was eight and my parents read it to me for the first time, it was a completely different book for me than when I read it as a teenager and discovered all those warrior characters that I hadn’t noticed before - too engrossed in the hobbits - and different again when I went back as an adult to read it, marveling at the world-building, the depth of Tolkien’s knowledge, seeing the side stories playing themselves out, reading the appendices.

I also don’t think I’ll ever be as wrapped up – literally going hot and cold with the drama of it – as I was when I was twelve and I first read Kidnapped, so transported by the sheer romance of Alan, the wanted man, this time for a crime he actually didn’t commit, hiding from the King’s men in the moors.

And I don’t think I’ll ever read and reread a passage with as much breathlessness as I read, over and over, the first chapters of The Grey King, the fourth book in Susan Cooper’s The Dark Is Rising series, when the hero, Will Stanton, is recovering from a violent illness which was laid on him by the Dark. I think I had a sort of preadolescent crush on Will Stanton. Saying his name, when I was a kid, made me short of breath. I wished he could really exist. He was just so damn cool. I loved The Dark Is Rising, the second and most popular book in the series. I could recite all of the central poem, and probably still could, most of it… “When the Dark comes rising, six shall turn it back /  Three from the circle, three from the track…”

Which is what brings me to my outrage when I saw a trailer for a movie called The Seeker, and I thought I recognized an element or two, and then I saw the URL for the movie’s site: www.seekthesigns.com. It couldn’t be, I thought: sure, Harry Potter made millions, The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe was a not half bad re-imagination, and Peter Jackson’s overwrought, but still masterful, Lord of the Rings trilogy even got my approval on most counts (don’t get me started on Legolas skateboarding, though.) But wasn’t Eragon, Bridge to Terabithia and The Golden Compass enough for the world? Who said Hollywood could have my Susan Cooper?

I looked at the website, and it was worse than I’d thought. I’d been prepared to cringe on hearing Will speaking with an American accent, acting like a junior-boy-band member. But I have to admit, watching the trailer was like watching a train wreck. It was as though someone had walked into my house, broken something I cared deeply about, shrugged, and left again.

For those of you who don’t know The Dark is Rising: Susan Cooper built her series on the creepy and flinty foundation of British mythology. The founding metaphor is of King Arthur standing as the last defender of the Light against the Dark (which a lot of people argue convincingly is a metaphor for the last Romanized Britons defending their island against the onslaught of uncivilized and terrifying barbarians from the Continent.) Over that metaphor she creates a world in which, among us, there are certain beings born – the Old Ones, who guard and protect humanity against the Dark. But this isn’t benevolent. They don’t do it because they love humanity. They do it because that is their part to play, and the part of the Dark is to bring humanity into a world dominated by avarice, selfishness, and despair. The two sides are balanced, and beyond them is the Wild Magic, which scares both sides with its complete unpredictability and power. The Wild Magic is neutral, and terrifying.

Will Stanton, the seventh son of a seventh son, wakes up on his eleventh birthday to discover that there is a forest outside his house where there wasn’t one before, and he can’t wake anyone in his family. Almost in a dream state, he walks out into the snow-covered wood, and begins to meet this other world which he was born into. He discovers that he is an Old One – the last of the Old Ones to be born, in fact – possibly immortal, if beings that can move at will through time are immortal, with powers he begins to understand slowly. He, as the youngest, has to find and protect six Signs – the Signs are a quartered circle like a Celtic cross without the arms; Signs of wood, bronze, iron, water, fire and stone. His guide and teacher is possibly the oldest of the Old Ones, Merriman (who I always imagined being played by a very skinny Ian McKellen.)

And they aren't comfortable, the things Will learns; he finds out that he will always seem a bit strange in the world, animals will act strangely around him, appliances jump with static, the world of the Light will always insinuate itself into his, asked or unasked. He learns that being an Old One means always thinking about the bigger picture – you can’t let your personal concerns affect you. Will has to learn to see his own family as no more or less important than any other human being. He has to learn to use his powers to erase their memories of things they’ve seen, and to hide what he is from them. He learns that even his beloved mentor can callously use a trusted near-son as a tool to accomplish the Light’s goals. He watches, in The Grey King, his friend lose the dog that he loved more than anything else to the fight between the Light and Dark, and realizes that he can’t say anything to help him, that he has no idea what that human grief is like. Being an Old One means you will never really be human, and you can’t have all those human relationships and cares that other people can. A few times in the books Will gets moments of being able to act like a boy, but they don't last. That was one of the things I found the most tragic about Will, even then, and more so now that I’m an adult.

Part of what I love about these books is that they never talk down to kids. They may have been written from the point of view of children, but they’re hard. Think about the immortality of the Old Ones. They are everywhere, at all times. They can travel through time, and Merriman is the “oldest”, Will the “youngest.” But, it’s never suggested that Will is going to live any longer than an average human. His immortality is bounded by the confines of his life. He was in the Dark Ages, he will be whenever this world flares out: but he’s just an eleven-year-old-boy, whose voice has not yet broken and is a clear, astonishingly beautiful soprano that he knows – because the Old Ones know the future – will deepen into a pleasant, but unremarkable, tenor. (That’s an image that’s stuck with me ever since I read the book the first time – the transience of the boy’s soprano voice.)

Think of Will’s close, loud, raucous, large family, which he can only participate in with the detachment of someone who knows that this moment will not last, and who will never feel included, completely, again. Think of the spooky unexplained threat of the Dark: “The Dark is rising. And this night will be bad, and tomorrow will be beyond imagining,” one of the Old Ones says to Will before he even has any idea what’s happening to him. The sign that the Dark is gaining power is a cold snap that just deepens and deepens, locking down the village in England where the story happens into isolated houses of people trying to stay cheerful, losing their will slowly. Will has to defend his family against an enemy who looks completely normal, completely harmless, who walks into their house protected by the laws of hospitality to taunt Will. There are laws beyond even the champions of the Dark and the Light, and they must be learned and obeyed.

The movie sweeps all of that aside. I can tell from the trailer. I haven’t seen the movie, it hasn’t been released yet, but it is clear from the attitude of the trailer that what is going on here is a video-game style chase-quest. Get all six signs before the bad guys do. Put them together at the end and make a very cool swirl of light and wind, á la Raiders of the Lost Ark, that destroys Evil. Boy with “normal life and normal problems” (cue shot of love-interest girl on schoolbus) gets superpowers, gets to “save the world,” and (here I really cringed) gets the girl. The producers took a complex and powerful world and devolved it into “good versus evil” with a well-dressed, iPod-toting American tween as hero.

How can I say how much is wrong with this? Instead of the silent forest, the doors standing at the top of a hill in a clearing, a passage into another world, the wonderful figure of the god/myth Wayland Smith standing by the road mending the shoe of the horse ridden by the champion of the Dark, and Will’s intial encounter with him while he still has no idea what’s going on . . . instead of that we get an unsuspecting Will being accused of shoplifiting in a mall and hauled into a back room by security guards who are not quite human (as evidenced by some neato CGI manipulation of their features in shifting light.) Instead of Merriman, who I always saw as a slightly prickly, white-haired Oxford don type, you get a grizzled but still young, broadshouldered, black-cloaked warrior. Instead of the weird dreamlike ways in which the Old Ones walk effortlessly from one room to another century, you get a tornado of light-sparkles and a spinning camera. Instead of the terrifying experience of the Book of Gremayre, which Will reads to gain the knowledge he will need, (and which is retrieved by exactly the cold using of Merriman’s servant that so disturbs Will) you get an explanatory sequence with our Warrior telling him he can summon fire and make things move with his mind – “Can I fly?” the not-Will asks,  “you know – whoosh?”

Help. And to cap it off . . . “I’m supposed to save the world? I can’t even talk to a girl,” the not-Will says, and then by golly, look, you get a shot - toward the end of the trailer - of the kiss.

What was that I just said about the gorgeous tragedy of Will and all the Old Ones? That being the protectors of the Light means that they can never have the kind of normal human relationships that everyone else gets? That they’re always, essentially, alone? Right. Nope, this is all about an adolescent boy getting the confidence – through superpowers – to win the girl. I have the sinking feeling, since I assume that’s her front and centre in the movie poster, that she turns out to have powers too and they can team up to get the baddies.

What really angers me is that it isn’t, the way it has been with other movies in the past, an issue of not having the technology to visually achieve what the writer described. It’s pretty clear from recent movies like Pan’s Labyrinth, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, and yes, The Lord of the Rings, and gorgeous visual experiments like Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, Mirrormask and Sin City, that pretty much anything can be accomplished by the right artists. That’s not the issue. The issue is quite probably that this screenplay was written by committee. Someone pitched an adaptation of The Dark Is Rising. They gave a boardroom full of producers a quick synopsis. “This boy discovers that he’s really…”

The board members put their heads together: they know this storyline, it’s been done a thousand times, always good for a winter release. But movies need romance, especially if they’re movies about adolescents. The main character needs to be an Everyboy, shy around girls, sure that he’s really got hidden depths, and lo and behold, he does. Kind of like that Peter Parker kid. And Old One? Won’t it confuse people if you go calling a child ‘old’? Ditch that. Not cool enough. Call him the Seeker, and let Ian MacShane and the rest play the “Old Ones.” They can be like mystical guides that don’t really do much, but they’ll make good straight men for Will’s cocky banter because they’re all serious. Because we have to write in some cocky banter for him, that way the kids’ll warm to him. But I like that stuff with the Black Rider. Wait, isn’t that already copyrighted? We’ll think of something else to call him so Jackson doesn’t sue. The mythology? Strike that too; who the hell’s this pointless blacksmith character? And drop the King Arthur stuff, that won’t fly with the American public. But the basic idea – that could be good. Six signs, lots of excitement, sort of a race to collect ’em all. Think we could market collectible Signs as a parallel promotion?

It’s the application of movie formula to the formula of myth that drives me crazy. The basic premise is as old as storytelling, yes. But it’s the ambiguousness of Cooper’s book that caused it to live so powerfully for me. There are laws that must be followed, no matter how high the cost of following them. The Light is just as terrible and frightening as the Dark, in the books. Will is bound by painful duty, not because he chooses to be and not because it’s cool, but because it’s the way things have to be. He is set apart. He will never be innocent again. He is already an Old One. It’s a terrible thing. He sees and does wondrous things, but over it all there is the balance, there are the rules of engagement, there are powerful ancient forces at work that are anything but human.

These are complicated and important themes. And kids are capable not only of understanding them, but of finding them beautiful. I’m sorry for all the people who might go to see this movie and have the books poisoned by it, who might go to the books, afterward, looking for the wrong story.

</rant>

Posted by Kathryn Hunt at 10:09 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Saturday, 22 September 2007
William The Gibson

I just got back in from the "Evening with William Gibson" hosted by the Writers Festival. It's hard not to go a bit fan-girl when I've been reading Gibson's work all my life, and so many things about my particular take on the world have been influenced by him. I remember referencing his books when I reported to my family on what it was like to live in Japan, and I have had a lot of my own writing heavily influenced by his. It's hard to escape the cultural constuctions that people have built using his work as a springboard - cyberspace, cyberpunk, virtual reality, the way we see technology interfacing with us.

So, admittedly, I did the teensiest internal squeak of "ooh, that's him!" when he came into the Library and Archives. He's - unmistakably tall, gangly, slouchy and deliberate. His reading (from the latest, Spook Country) was WAY funnier than I ever really thought Gibson's work was - he even cracked himself up once in the middle of it. Somehow you think of books like Neuromancer as being so deadly dystopian (and overhung with all kinds of massive SF recognition as Great Works) that you don't notice there's this current of humour in them. Re-read them, but do it in a slow, deliberate, sardonic Virginia drawl. They're lots funnier that way.

And the interview was fascinating - Adrian Harewood isn't an SF fan, or at least, that's what I think I overheard him saying, and I think that's a good thing. If you want to understand someone who writes science fiction, it can only help you to come at them as though they don't. We have far too many preconceptions about science fiction, and they get in the way. I'm - intrigued, but not particularly surprised, that most of the SF writers that I respect will say, when you ask them about predicting the future, that science fiction doesn't do that, or any of the other things that you might assume science fiction does. A couple of quotes I really liked from the night: Gibson said things like "All fiction is speculative, if someone thinks they're not writing speculative fiction, they're naive," and "Science fiction is no more about the future than country music is about the country," which I liked, and which sounded a lot like Ursula Le Guin to me, as well.

And of course the audience was made up of a lot of extremely well-read SF geeks, who had good questions, and very specific ones. And, more of my gamer friends were present than have ever been to a Writersfest event before or probably ever will again.

 

And in other events - I went to see 'Poetry In Motion I' at the Ottawa International Animation Festival on Thursday night, and I'm really hoping to catch Part II on Sunday at 1:00 at the National Gallery. It seems beyond self-explanatory that animators would produce a lot of short films based on poetry: what I found delighting and fascinating about the ones I saw on Thursday was the vast range, from films that gave pictures to the voice reading the poem, to films where the words themselves came to life, moved, and began to abstract themselves. One of my favorites was an animation of a Dutch poem where I couldn't understand any of the words, but laughed in delight at the animation (largely at the battle of two ink squiggles). Another was a chilling illustration of Philip Larkin's "The Old Fools." Add to that some hilarious animation of a sound poem or two and a moving series of haiku in French with animations like moving Impressionist paintings... and you've got an hour of illuminating, thought-expanding films. And the animation of "At the Quinte Hotel" by Al Purdy made everyone in the room laugh out loud.


Posted by Kathryn Hunt at 10:30 PM EDT
Updated: Sunday, 23 September 2007 12:07 AM EDT
Post Comment | View Comments (1) | Permalink
Thursday, 13 September 2007
Sad news

I was saddened today to hear of the passing of local poet and artist Alootook Ipellie. While I can't say I knew him particularly well, I saw him at a lot of events around town, and for a while he was a regular at Dusty Owl, so I knew him to talk to. After meeting him, I started seeing references to him around the Ottawa lit community and the larger Canadian scene, and I started to appreciate how important a voice he was.

Alootook was a visual artist, poet, prose writer, editor, Inuktitut translator and a world traveller (I remember talking to him about his travels in Germany and Australia,) born in the small hunting camp of Nuvuqquq on Baffin Island in 1951. He was an editor, writer, poet and cartoonist in Inuit language and culture magazines in the 1970s and 80s in Ottawa, such as North, Inuit Monthly, Inukshuk, and Nunatsiaq News. He was widely anthologized, notably in An Anthology of Canadian Native Literature in English in the early nineties, and his first collection of stories and line drawings, Arctic Dreams and Nightmares, was published in 1993. I remember his reading, at Dusty Owl's open mike, from a piece he wrote which was included in an anthology of Indigenous Canadian erotica - a quietly sardonic, funny, honest, glimpse into what it is to be Inuit in this world.

With his death, the North loses a voice and Ottawa's arts community loses one of our own. 


Posted by Kathryn Hunt at 11:19 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Tuesday, 4 September 2007
Toot! Toot!
Just found this pretty nice review of Tattoo This Madness In (which I edited) on Books To Watch Out For. Yay! Had to toot my own horn just a little.

Posted by Kathryn Hunt at 9:45 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Sounds of Downtown

Just heard about this through the Capital Poetry Collective, who will be there - if you're in Carleton Place this Saturday, this looks pretty good. Sue Foley's headlining.... 

And things are ramping up for the Writers Festival, so next Monday come out to the Ottawa Magazine Fiction Issue party at the Library and Archives and buttonhole one of the Writers Festival gang for some advance buzz about the writers coming for the fall! 7:30...


Posted by Kathryn Hunt at 6:34 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, 31 August 2007
Making Books

I picked up a book by an Ontario-based small press publisher this afternoon. (I don't really think the title or the name of the publisher is all that important.) I was handed it by my boss, who gave it to me with the comment, "Why do some people make books?"

I saw what he meant when I looked at it. The book was a desktop published trade paperback, 350 or so pages, with a glossy cover and perfect binding. I opened it and almost immediately shut it again - the font was crowded, too big, sans-serif. Some kind of condensed Arial or something. The gutters barely existed and the header was only a line away from the text. Not enough white space. Not enough rest for the eyes. And a cheap-looking font to boot. (I know, this blog is in a sans-serif font, but that works for reading on a screen. Not on the page.)

Then I started looking closer. What is it about your impressions of the way a book looks that has such a powerful effect on how seriously you take it? The story could have been great. I don't know. I couldn't get to it. I know that I noticed that the headers were printed on pages they shouldn't have been (the dedication page, the frontispiece, the blank page on the right hand side at the end.) That the font was too big, too dark, too condensed. That the story text began at the very top of the left-hand page ("No! No!" cried the layout designer in my mind, "Noooooo!")

And (this is the kicker) that what I guess was the initial page had not only a "This book is a work of fiction" piece of boilerplate, which I guess I can understand, but a paragraph to inform us that, and I quote, "This book contains language which might be considered inappropriate and / or descriptive scenes. Reader discretion is advised."

Which is when I realized that Jasper Fforde may be right and television may actually be taking the place of books in our world. This was a book laid out by someone unfamiliar with books. Because anyone who thinks you need to warn the reader that a novel might contain 'descriptive scenes,' or that viewer discretion announcements need to be printed in books the way they're interspersed in broadcast media, just never internalized what books are. They haven't spent enough time around them to know what looks right and what looks very wrong.

(And don't get me started on the fact that the book might contain 'inappropriate' language. Inappropriate to what situation? Or what audience?)

Astounding. Am I being a snob? Shouldn't everyone have the right to make their books, and be damned to the conventions? Isn't it good that small publishers can flourish now, thanks to technology, and so a whole lot of voices can be heard that wouldn't have been before the age of print-your-own? Am I being ivory-tower and elitist? Or is there a real effect caused by bad presentation (to more people than just me, because I will admit to being very sensitive to visual semantics?)

I had an argument with someone once, in which I said that certain conventions of spelling and grammar should only be broken with extreme caution and forethought, otherwise you will be taken for ignorant or illiterate. "Where do these conventions come from? Who dictates the rules that say you have to punctuate dialogue such and such a way?" he asked me. I answered that no on-high authority figure makes this stuff up, it's just the rules that have evolved and that people who read come to expect. "So you're just doing it because everyone else does? Sheep!" (Which is about when I dropped the discussion, because he started bleating over everything I said after that, but that's another story.)

Still. How do we learn what looks right? How does what looks right change and mutate over time? And what subtle stuff is going on in our heads as readers (or viewers) when the way the text looks can have such an effect on the tone of the story? It's fascinating. 

And, is Jasper Fforde right? Are people now producing books out of the paradigm of television shows? And what does that mean? 


Posted by Kathryn Hunt at 3:11 PM EDT
Updated: Friday, 31 August 2007 5:05 PM EDT
Post Comment | View Comments (3) | Permalink

Newer | Latest | Older