The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Jon Rosebaugh:

My favorite emperor is Norton I, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico.

Ginger @15: The proper pronoun for Dr. Prilica is of course "it", unless you happen to be a Cinrusskin (or, I suppose, you could be carrying appropriate Educator tape, in which case you could argue that you are Cinrusskin).

(It's far from rude; Prilica sees us DBDGs as "it" as well.)

Excellent point, Lee. She certainly seems to be the active one in the relationship.

I dunno, I really like Gaila (that's the name of Uhura's Orion roommate, in case you didn't know). I think it's because of the second scene she's in, where the cadets are getting their assignments, and she turns around and gives Uhura this giant grin. That, though tiny, is enough to make her more than just Kirk's sex interest for me. If I get in the fanfic-y mood from this movie, I'm pretty sure she'll be involved.

And yeah, Spock-Prime could bring up the Guardian of Forever, or the intermix formula, or the slingshot maneuver, or any of the other time-travel methods from canon. That's the problem with having such an expansive canon, though; the same concerns apply to every other bad thing ever in the history of Trek. Picard gets captured by Borg? Go back in time and stop it. Federation blindsided by an invasion through the wormhole? Go back in time and stop it. Easy access to timetravel destroys 90% of Star Trek plots, so we agree to just ignore it.

Regarding Spock/Uhura, the hardest part for me to swallow is the cross-rank fraternization. (I never thought that the existence of pon farr meant Vulcans couldn't enjoy intimacy at other times.)

Michael, #47: Finding Freakangels (a weekly webcomic by the inestimably awesome Warren Ellis) shouldn't be too hard: http://www.freakangels.com/

Bill #10:

It's a beacon for the Doctor, innit?

Also, I'd considered doing one for Glinda from the Wicked musical,
but I don't own nearly enough books with excessive use of pink.

Well, far be it from me to deprive our host of some fun. Go ahead
and do a reading; I'm sure it'll be interestingly different from mine.

Thanks, Abi. I was really worried some of it was boring, which is an
easy way to get it wrong. Plus, my bookshelf is a bit limited. Anyhow,
the rest of you really need to step up here. I want to see some more.

Number Ten Ox, from Bridge of Birds by Barry Hughart.

1. This covers him: The King of Elfland’s Daughter, by Lord Dunsany (the unpredictability that supernatural forces inevitably bring to ordinary places and people)
   
2. This crosses him: The Hobbit, by J.R.R. Tolkien (An ordinary person thrust into an extraordinary adventure despite his utterly prosaic goals)
   
3. This crowns him: The Books of Magic, by Neil Gaiman
   (Irrevocably changed by his experiences, he enters into a wider world,
   filled with more mystery and responsibility)
   
4. This is beneath him: A Wind in the Door, by Madeline L’Engle (A strange sickness that can only be cured by an even stranger quest)
   
5. This is behind him: Superman for All Seasons, by Jeph Loeb and Tim Sale (The strong silent guy from a quiet, unremarkable farming village)
   
6. This is before him: Sun of Suns, by Karl Schroeder (His simple quest will be transformed by the secrets of the world in which he lives)
   
7. The Significator: Lady of Mazes, by Karl Schroeder (The
   circumstances of his childhood having uniquely prepared him for the
   road ahead, he’ll go to any lengths to save his people)
   
8. His environment: My Neighbor Totoro, by Hayao Miyazaki (A seemingly ordinary Japan China with supernatural events behind every corner)
   
9. His hopes: Going Postal, by Terry Pratchett (He rights a great wrong, gets the girl, and learns where he belongs in the world)
   
10. Culmination: Neuromancer, by William Gibson (Few will ever
    understand, let alone know his part in it, but he has helped to bring
    about a profound change in the state of the world)
    

This is devilishly hard to get right, due to the sheer number of
possible combinations. But here's Gaius Baltar in the new BSG, circa
the miniseries, with mostly SF/F, since that's what on my bookshelf:

1. 
   
   
2. This covers him, defining the problem space: Three Hearts and Three Lions,
   by Poul Anderson (an ordinary man called to be a knight, in a world
   with allies and enemies he doesn't understand, and a woman he's unsure
   if he can love)
   
   
3. This crosses him, showing the nature of his challenge: Son of a Witch, by Gregory Maguire (a journey of self-discovery, learning what his powers are and what he can and, more importantly, can't do)
   
   
4. This crowns him, representing the best possible outcome: Wintersmith, by Terry Pratchett (his past foolishness is transcended and he saves his people from the trouble he brought upon them)
   
   
5. This is beneath him, the foundation of the matter: Macbeth (urged into rash action by the woman in his life)
   
   
6. This is behind him, where he has been: The Princes of the Air, by John M. Ford (bootstrapping himself up to a high level of credibility and respect, but it may be just a house of cards)
   
   
7. This is before him, where he is going: The Lies of Locke Lamora,
   by Scott Lynch (deception, collaboration and a whole lot of luck will
   help him survive, at the cost of nearly everything he's accomplished)
   
   
8. The Significator, defining the Querent: A Wizard of Earthsea,
   by Ursula K Le Guin (a young man proud of his talents, about to be
   forcefully humbled and sent on a long journey of redemption)
   
   
9. His environment: Amadeus (a famous favorite son in the eyes of the world)
   
   
10. His fears: Tau Zero, by Poul Anderson (due to his initial
    errors, he'll never be able to stop piling falsehood upon falsehood,
    because if he stops just for a moment, he'll be torn to shreds by
    people sensing a weakness)
    
    
11. Culmination, how it all comes out: (well, we don't know that yet, do we, but here's my guess, based on season 3) Space Cadet,
    by Robert Heinlein (He gets no special commendation and is cut down to
    size, but he's strangely happy with the results, because when it came
    down to it, he did his duty)
    
    

Yay, more Gunnerkrigg addicts!

If you like Dresden Codak and Girl Genius, then you simply must try Gunnerkrigg Court.

David @ 295: It could also be seen as an instance of divinity not being especially comprehensible by humans.

Avram @ 274: Whee, I fail at semantics. What I meant is that omniscience and the like are not normally something God has to 'do' as an action; they're 'on all the time', so to speak. But parting the red sea or turning water into wine, that's an action. So for the sake of being human, he divested himself of those powers that were more like qualities than actions. I have no idea if there's a proper technical term for this. I also have no idea if this speculation is orthodox or not; it's not something I've previously examined closely.

Leigh @ 258: It's my belief (though it's been a long time since I was at bible college, so I can't really cite anything to back me up) that by the time Jesus began his ministry, he knew who he was -- that he was God, or the son of God, or whatever term you want to use (the Trinity is a pretty confusing concept). That knowledge must have helped him when communicating with God (the Father), but whether he did all the miracles himself or by asking God to do them is a little unclear, as the Gospels don't present a lot from Jesus's point of view.

If you wanted to speculate, you could say that Jesus laid down involuntary attributes of divinity, such as omniscience, while not laying down voluntary attributes. But such speculation typically requires a lot of careful analysis of the biblical text, and I'm doing this off the fly from vague memory. My personal belief is that Jesus was God incarnate, and that the Gospels are more or less accurate -- not necessarily word for word, but accurate in the areas that are important for doctrine.

I also believe that Jesus came into the world knowing he was going to die; if nothing else, he freaked out his disciples by telling them about it in the weeks leading up to the event. But I have no problem believing he could legitimately be in terror of it, especially with the certainty he had. Crucifixion is by all reports an especially agonizing way to die. He wouldn't have been human if he hadn't been afraid, even knowing he would rise again.

Lee @ 249: I loved the Wilder version for just that reason. Wilder's Wonka is arbitrary and capricious and singularly unconcerned with the children's safety. And saying "It was all a test" at the end seems to me to be at least a little better than saying "It was all because I hated my father".

Leigh @ 248,250: And the fact that the disciples were also able to heal people and perform other miracles means they were also divine? Jesus did say that with sufficient faith you could move mountains. And in Peter's speech at Pentecost, he said "Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him." (emphasis mine)

Treating the bible as a narrative, it's consistent with the narrative that some individuals can perform miracles through the power of God, without themselves being divine. Moses, Elijah, etc.

Chris @ 213: Aslan's sacrifice wasn't meant to teach Edmund anything, at least not directly. It was meant to save his life. The natural law in Narnia, laid down by Aslan's father when time began, states that every traitor is to be given over to the Witch for her to kill. Edmund betrayed his siblings, thus his life was forfeit to her. However, the Witch was persuaded to take Aslan's voluntary sacrifice in his stead, largely because she felt that with Aslan eliminated, the last obstacles to her total rule would be easily swept away. It wasn't a substitution of responsibility; it was a substitution of punishment.

And I take issue with you saying that Aslan knew he wasn't "really going to die". He did die, after suffering humiliation and agony. It was his sacrifice that broke the Witch's power and allowed Death to turn backwards, and then he came back to life. But he did die. Even if I knew that I would come back to life a few hours later, I doubt I'd voluntarily die without a very good reason; it doesn't seem like very much fun. So I don't think it's fair to call Aslan a cheat for it.

Leigh @ 237: I think this is perhaps a slightly different version of 'unaware'. If the Gospels are to be trusted at all, he certainly knew that he was divine, or at least of divine origin. But I believe the doctrine is that he voluntarily laid down his divine attributes, though not his divine identity, to become human.

I'm not an expert, but I have a hard time believing that Lewis made Aslan's tormentors grotesque because they were supposed to be a parallel to "the Jews". He wasn't setting out to write that kind of allegory. Rather, he was writing a story about who Jesus would have been in Narnia, and Aslan went up against the Witch, and the Witch's servants were pretty much all grotesque. They had also all explicitly chosen to throw themselves in against a creature they knew to be responsible for the creation and ordering of the world. That's not something anyone could legitimately claim about the Jews at the crucification.

They're not explicit parallels; they just occupy roughly the same places in the narrative. Anything more just doesn't fit. You might as well say that Hagrid was slow and less-than-bright because Rowling thought Obi-Wan was slow and less-than-bright, as they both occupy the role of initial tutor to the heroes in their stories.

Have you heard of anyone reading SF and fantasy as pirated e-text?

Hi!

I have on my hard drive 36 pirated e-texts -- 45 if you count the Amber books as ten volumes instead of one. You can divide these about equally between "books I downloaded after buying the deadtree, for greppability/portability", "books I downloaded to read and see if I liked them, and subsequently purchased in deadtree", and "books I downloaded to read and see if I liked them, but forgot to read". (The exception is Lord of Light, which I didn't like enough to buy, but did like enough to keep around in case I want to read it again and decide if I like it more. I just put it on my Amazon shopping list.)

In addition, my downloading of books often leads to more purchases than just those books. I downloaded The Atrocity Archives, because Scalzi's endorsement wasn't quite enough to make me risk money on "Lovecraft and BOFH humor", both genres I'd seen backfire too much. As a result of that download, I bought Atrocity Archives, preordered Jennifer Morgue, and bought everything else Stross had out in paperback.

I first read the Amber series at the public library (maybe Mr. Burt would like to go after them too?), but downloaded a copy to reread before I went and bought a copy. I've since bought it 1.5 times -- the Corwin books individually and then the omnibus.

I downloaded "Doorways in the Sand" because I'd enjoyed it in the library and couldn't find it in stores. I've since found a used copy. I'd have bought a new copy, only it's out of print.

I downloaded "The Books of Magic", which I haven't bought yet, largely because I have a weird thing about ordering online sometimes, and I never have enough spare cash when I find it in a store. But reading it was enough to get me into the theatres to see Stardust, if that's worth anything.

I downloaded "Global Frequency", which I also haven't bought yet, only because I just now thought to check if it was out in graphic novel form. So it's on my "buy this week" list, and also it got me to buy Transmetropolitan, all ten volumes of it.

In summary, Mr. Burt probably doesn't want me to stop downloading, if he's got the best interests of his constituency at heart, anyway.

Comment statistics for Jon Rosebaugh on the Making Light blog

Total: 27 comments. View all these comments on a single page.