4 members
5 members
18 members
48 members
13 members
48 members
48 members
11 members
14 members
21 members
Added by Penelope
The big frakkin' robots appear to have won out over the woolly mammoths after all. Updated studio estimates released today show that Paramount's Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen was No. 1 in the photo-finish race for box-office supremacy this weekend, topping the domestic pack with $42.4 million, according to The Hollywood Reporter.
We reported yesterday that Transformers and Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs were tied for the top spot when preliminary box-office estimates for the July 4 weekend were released.
Scott Edelman reports from Worldcon '09 on his blog, Failing Better

I very much wanted to see David Kyle this weekend. He was one of the Futurians, and a co-founder of Gnome Press. Dave was at the first Worldcon, and even at what was supposed to have been the first SF con before the Worldcon, which I believe occurred in 1936 when a group of New York fans drove to meet with some Philadelphia fans in the back of a bar owned my somebody's father. (Any fan historians out there, feel free to correct me!) A Worldcon isn't a Worldcon until I catch up with Dave, and I never got a chance to do that last year at Denvention.
Posted by Juliette Wade on August 14, 2009 at 7:26am — 3 Comments
Posted by Stephanie on July 30, 2009 at 8:11pm
Posted by Stephanie on July 13, 2009 at 6:45pm
Please use this space to remember Charles. http://irosf.com/news-item.qsml?id=218
Tagged: sf, brown, n., charles, locus
Started by Marti McKenna in The Station. Last reply by Patrick Swenson Aug 4.
I'm going to Westercon this weekend and I'm wondering if anyone else here is going. The most exciting part of this for me is that I get to be on a panel with Dr. Stan Schmidt of Analog Magazine and...
Started by Juliette Wade in Conventions. Last reply by Juliette Wade Jul 12.
Sign up to chat on this social network!

RIP Charles N. Brown
Please add your thoughts and remembrances to the forum.
from sliceofscifi.com Science fiction, to paraphrase Harlan Ellison, is about how the future affects people. But the skill-set required to write intelligently about science does not necessarily equip one to create convincing characters. This tension in the field has split the genre into two major schools: "science fantasy" and "hard sci-fi." Those who demand lively characters and intriguing conflicts gravitate (so they say) toward the former, while die-hard purists insist (with increasing frustration) upon the latter. This divide leaves some questioning whether the reading public's ability to even appreciate scientific concepts has been permanently damaged. Readers, meanwhile, are left to wonder where they might find a taste of the "golden age" of science fiction, when the past masters melded intelligent science with deeper elements of the storyteller's art.
In Bud Sparhawk's Vixen we have an answer.
Last month I began a conversation about the horror genre with one of the preeminent literary critics in the field, Jack M. Haringa, co-editor with S.T. Joshi of the International Horror Guild Award-nominated review journal Dead Reckonings. We covered topics such as defining this hard-to-classify genre, exploring its similarities with and differences from science fiction and fantasy, and name-checking some horror authors that IROSF readers might enjoy. Unfortunately, I ran out of room just as Haringa left us with this tantalizing tidbit:
[T]here's so much good new work being produced, it almost makes me forget about the genre's failings.
I would be the world's worst journalist if I didn't follow up on a juicy statement like that. All enthusiasts love their chosen field with a passion, and as a result all enthusiasts have no small number of opinions about what is holding that field back. So I asked Haringa if there was one thing he disliked about the horror genre, what it would be.
Do I have to choose just one? I suppose the most frustrating for me—and an aspect of the genre of which many readers might be unaware—is the virulent strand of anti-intellectualism that pervades the writing community and the core readership of the genre. Obviously, I don't mean that to characterize everyone who writes or reads horror. But if one spends enough time visiting message boards frequented by some small press writers and publishers, one begins to see that some of them have an almost pathological aversion to taking writing and reading seriously, that is to thinking about the content and expression of fiction beyond its surface.
I recently wrote an essay called "The Agnatology of Horror; or, Lies the Internet Told You" for a book entitled Writers Workshop of Horror, and in it I address some of the anti-intellectual attitudes I've encountered online. What it boils down to is that a book is—must be, really—about more than its plot if it is to be remembered. A writer needs to have something to say. And a reader, for his or her part, should not be put off by the occasional four-syllable word or extended metaphor—in fact, all of these marvelous tropes of horror are, ultimately, metaphors. And the reader ought to be curious about what the book has to say about the human condition. The last thing I want is a book that asks me to check my brain at the door. I don't want to read novels written for the lowest common denominator.
Europe's first best-selling novel was a Spanish fantasy: Amadís de Gaula (Amadis of Gaul). Written by Garci Rodríguez de Montalvo, this medieval tale of chivalry was first published in 1496 or soon after. Over the next 90 years, it was reprinted 20 times in Spanish and translated into seven languages. It spawned 44 direct sequels and, across Western Europe, there were spinoffs in literature, poetry, opera, theater, and art for another two centuries.
Nobility competed in jousts disguised as knights-errant from its pages. Illiterate people thronged to public readings. Everyone in the 16th century knew who Amadis was, just as today everyone knows who Spock is, even if they've never seen a Star Trek episode or movie.
Sometimes I say I don't believe in guilty pleasures, but that's only because the culture has changed. Once upon a time, people frowned on everything, so most of what I liked was a guilty pleasure. Then Geek Culture became ascendant (everyone saw the benefits of this, I suppose) and people now know that it's okay to like different things. This is, in my opinion, a Very Good Thing.
But it wasn't so very long ago that I had more guilty pleasures than accepted pleasures. I grew up in a reading household, so books were not a guilty pleasure. Neither was television, since my mother kept it on all day. Or music, although we did argue over whose music was the best (Mom won, but she died before I could tell her).
Fall has always been my favorite season, and living close to downtown Seattle means I do a lot of walking to get where I'm going. I don't know that I ever really appreciated fallen leaves so much as I do this season—every day on my way to work, I trample through the haphazard piles (yes, "trample"—I am not the most graceful of women) and can't help but smile. It just puts me in such a good mood and reminds me how important it is to appreciate the small things.
IROSF is sort of trampling through leaves of its own right now. We're undergoing some internal changes at the moment, and while I'm hoping that this won't affect your experience as a reader, you can already see that we're several days late this month. My hope is that this will be the last time we're this late—the point of internal changes is, as ever, to improve the site and your experience with it—and I thank you for your patience as we sort things out internally.
Network showed a new episode this week, although it advertised the World Series in its timeslot
May 20, 2010 at 6pm to May 24, 2010 at 7pm – The Concourse Hotel
Your dollars keep Red Rocket and IROSF flying.
© 2009 Created by Marti McKenna on Ning. Create Your Own Social Network