The Foundational Grimdark Series Returns Later This Year A Different Kind of Speculative Fiction Three weeks ago I did my best to define what the term speculative fiction means , drawing on diverse comparisons and examples, and even venturing a little beyond how most people seem to accept the term. I concluded that speculative fiction broadly included any stories that depicted worlds different from our own, and which often mirror our current societal anxieties. Glen Cook's The Black Company series certainly shows strange new worlds, but the societal anxieties it explores are notably different from the vast majority of books I tend to discuss. Like many science fiction and fantasy works of its era, The Black Company is primarily a reflection on the lives and experiences of soldiers in war. While Cook himself didn't fight in Vietnam , his descriptions have apparently resonated with many veterans over the years. These books are about brutal flashes of violence amid great swathes of dread-filled waiting, about joyful camaraderie and wrenching grief, about following orders and letting personal morals be damned. Women are rare, but tend to be the most interesting characters when they appear. Are they treated with a measure of respect? Um. Let's just get the bad stuff out of the way first, shall we? (Feel free to skip; as the title suggests, there's also a lot to like here!) Covers for the Annals of the Black Company, art by Raymond Swanland [Content Warning: SA] A Specific Type of Author and Audience This is one of those series where you can't really bring up your problems without getting hounded by those fans. You know, the ones who complain about "modern morals" regarding misogyny and homophobia being applied to their grimdark fantasy series. But alas. I won't go into too much detail; suffice to say that Cook depicts sexual – and plenty of regular – violence against women and children, and half the time it's his (anti-)protagonists The Black Company who are responsible for it. The series as it currently stands – with Soldiers Live (2000) – even ends with alien teenagers Shukrat and Arkana (pictured below on the cover of the forthcoming sequel) taking up the narration after being abused into compliance by the Company . Granted that what I've read is treated more matter-of-factly than many such depictions... However I also haven't read the interquel Port of Shadows (2018), and reviews like this make it sound like these issues are much, much worse therein. As this article and others suggest, Cook could have easily had his otherwise "reasonably moral" Black Company take a stand against this behaviour – if it really needed to be included in the books at all. But he didn't, and Port of Shadows clearly indicates that the intervening decades haven't changed his perspective. And I genuinely hate this aspect of the series, because there is also topnotch fantasy to be found here. Is this the type of rot that means you have to throw away the whole thing (examples for me include The Shadow of the Wind and Then She Was Gone ), or the type where can you cut off the one chunk and enjoy the rest (e.g. Mark Lawrence's books)? I think each reader has to make that decision for themself, and I'm personally still torn about it. Shukrat and Arkana on the cover of upcoming Lies Weeping , art by Raymond Swanland Premise, Characters and World The eponymous Black Company is a mercenary group who take work where they can get it. They are the last of the 'Free Companies of Khatovar', a title whose meaning has been lost to history by the start of the series. The first book sees them hired by The Lady's Empire to help quell a frustrating rebellion within her realm. The Lady is unquestionably evil – though a remarkable improvement over her late husband The Dominator, buried 300 years – but a job's a job, so the Company go to work. Annalist and field doctor for the Company is Croaker, a grim but mostly likeable man whose in-world writings make up most of the series’ narration. Other standouts include Raven, who joins up in the first book, both the Lieutenant and the Captain, and Silent, One-Eye and Goblin, who are the Company’s moderately talented wizards. Toad-like Goblin and ancient One-Eye’s magical and verbal squabbling is consistently entertaining throughout the series. Annalist Croaker through the years, art by Raymond Swanland (L) Mikey Patch (C) and Didier Graffet (R) The Lady is herself an immensely powerful sorceress who has inherited the skill of ‘Taking’ from the Dominator: essentially allowing her to convert subdued enemy wizards into powerful, loyal minions. The ‘Ten Who Were Taken’ are top among my favourite villains in fiction, their mere presence – allied or otherwise – a terrifying danger to the mortal men of the Company. Think of Darth Vader in that scene , except there's ten of them running around, scheming and squabbling, in an empire much smaller than a galaxy. (The other comparison would be to Brandon Sanderson's Unmade, but at least for now the Taken remain much more impressive in my opinion.) Soulcatcher stands out among the Taken for a number of reasons, including being the one to hire the Company and constantly speaking with wildly different voices – presumably those of souls somehow consumed. Things get even more interesting when the Lady's war begins seeing casualties on each side and she begins Taking rebel wizard-generals to fill out her ranks. All of this is elevated by seeing it from Croaker's view as he tries to save lives (not least his own) and record events while being little more than an ant on a chessboard. From a writing perspective it allows Cook to leave a lot of details shadowy and vague, especially concerning the greater shape of the world and its magic system – where other authors like Sanderson feel the need to define every tiny aspect of each. It's neat to see Silent, Goblin and One-Eye working their minor magics in direct comparison to the reality-warping feats of the Taken and rebel Circle; likewise I get the strangest fascination from Cook's city names in the early books – Roses, Oar, Deal, Tear – where any historical, cultural identity has been buried beneath centuries of conflict and tyranny. Soulcatcher of the Taken, art by antablement34 To be continued Once again, it turns out it's tough to condense feelings about ten books into one easily digestible article; so let's try for two. I am trying to keep things relatively spoiler-free, in case you feel the interest to try this series for yourself (or possibly return to it after many years). To be fair to the books, I am mentioning all the bad stuff here while only scraping the surface of the good. But also, the bad stuff is legitimately pretty bad, so do with it what you will. I’d be curious to hear your thoughts on the topic, since every attempt at online discussion tends to end with pitchforks raised against the speaker! The Black Company spends four books in the Lady's Empire in the North and six traveling the South (and beyond). Place your bets now, does Cook handle different races and cultures better than he handles a different gender? I mean, yes, he does. But there's a lot of room between there and anything resembling good representation, so we'll see. Thanks for reading and until next time <3

This Is How You Lose the Time War Note for readers: As I mentioned last time , I’m currently dialing back to one post per week. In the meantime I’ll share some of my fiction writing when possible, including this short piece  I wrote last week. Thanks as always for reading! Short & Sweet There are a lot of massive books out there! I'm currently (slowly) reading Ken Follett's The Pillars of the Earth , a historical epic spanning over 800 pages (my mass market paperback is 990). I also just finished Empire of Silence , over 600 pages in print and over 26 hours on audio. ( Here's my review , since I mentioned it a couple posts back .) I also love the novels of The Stormlight Archive , the shortest of which is 1001 pages long . In contrast, This Is How You Lose the Time War barely clocks in over 200 pages. I'm currently listening to it for the fourth time and can honestly say it's just as good now as on my first listen, as I continue to appreciate new intricacies and meanings. It's strange to say, but this short novel sometimes feels like it has more depth than any of the above – despite their being three, four and five times its size. (Of course, different books have different purposes. House of Leaves , for example, is both plenty long and near-infinitely complex .) So, what goes into making such a rich and memorable novel? Red & Blue, by Laya Rose Concept & World I doubt anyone else would start here, but the ideas behind This Is How You Lose the Time War were what initially hooked me in and helped me enjoy the rest of it. Plus it gives me the opportunity to explain what the novel's about, in case you're unfamiliar. Our characters are on opposing sides of a war over what the future of the universe will look like. To quote myself : The future is Red. The world is elegant and crystalline; human minds merging and separating in a vast network, needing no physical shape but capable of taking any, in sleek mechanical design. The Agency monitors and corrects any flaw in the utopian system. The future is Blue. The world is lush and alive; humans live in wondrous symbiosis with their environment, rigid technology long having proved inferior to clever and flexible evolution. Life is meticulously planted, nurtured and controlled in the utopia of Garden. These futures are incompatible. To continue existing, one side must destroy the other. Each sends agents into the past, to divert the current of time away from the enemy’s future and toward their own. It's hard to express how much I love this concept; these two realities fighting for existence with all of time and space as their battleground. If either side should tip the balance, the other will never have been. Of course, this is made all the crunchier by having Red and Blue embody their respective futures. Each weaves the strands of time by essentially weaponizing the butterfly effect and thereby shaping the future for their side. The two first make contact based on mutual respect and develop a relationship through exchanged letters, which take a wide variety of forms. Yet both Red and Blue understand that if they win, their rival/love will be erased. Thus the true, Romeo and Juliet -esque conflict of the book emerges: the pair against the world, both their futures wanting them destroyed. Somehow authors Amal El-Mohtar and Max Gladstone envisioned a story with stakes which simultaneously span all the multiverse and the dreams of just two characters. Completely brilliant. Red & Blue, by Noctilia Poetry & Prose The writing in this book is beautiful. It's technically prose, but it gave me an appreciation for poetry that twelve years of English and Language Arts classes never came close to matching. It also spans the spectrum of tone, with different passages being deeply heartfelt, funny, awestruck and so much more. Take just this one paragraph, sent by Red to Blue, etched into the scales of a cod swallowed by a seal off the coast of Newfoundland – and Blue's later response: “I consulted the literature on scents and wax seals, as you suggested. It’s all a bit counterintuitive, this business of communication through base matter. Closing a letter—a physical object without even a ghost in the cloud, all that data on one frail piece of paper—with an even more malleable substance, bearing, of all things, an ideographic signature! Informing any handler of the message’s sender, her role, perhaps even her purpose! Madness—from an operational-security perspective. But, as the prophets say, there ain’t no mountain high enough—so I’ve essayed the work here. I hope you enjoy your whacked seal . I didn’t supply any extra scent, but the medium has a savor all its own.” – Max Gladstone, This Is How You Lose the Time War “I should tell you, as Mrs. Leavitt would, that it’s customary to send letters that can be opened without ruining the seal , but I appreciate your innovation more than I can say.” – Amal El-Mohtar, This Is How You Lose the Time War Part of Red and Blue's bond grows through a playful discussion of letters themselves; Blue recommends Mrs. Leavitt's Guide to Etiquette and Correspondence to Red early on, helpfully showing why and how the pair's conversation takes this form. It's an easily overlooked aspect of the book, but one which bears a surprising amount of weight in establishing the format and relationship. Then you see Red reflecting on the fragile nature of these messages, an observation heightened by the digital future she comes from, built on information security. Following that is a reference to our own world, always amusingly attributed to 'the prophets', and a clever double-meaning of 'essayed' – Red's both trying to put what she's learned into practice and has created a short piece of writing on a particular topic . Top it off with a 'whacked [killed] seal' in place of a wax seal and Blue's later response, and I hope you begin to get a sense of how fun and engaging this book is. I also partly attribute this brilliance to how the book was conceived, with Max Gladstone writing Red's letters and Amal El-Mohtar writing Blue's. Two amazing authors and great friends consistently aiming to one-up and impress one another, very much like the character's they're portraying. Competition brings excellence and whatnot. Speaking of a team effort, last year I spoke to two friends about this novel in the video below; I'd love if you gave it a watch! My video discussion of This Is How You Lose the Time War Letters & Love “I love you. I love you. I love you. I'll write it in waves. In skies. In my heart. You'll never see, but you will know. I'll be all the poets, I'll kill them all and take each one's place in turn, and every time love's written in all the strands it will be to you.” ― Max Gladstone, This Is How You Lose the Time War What can you say; the world loves a rivals-to-lovers arc. Their budding relationship is made all the more fascinating for the fact they never meet face-to-face, instead constrained to their creative means of communicating. “Red, I love you. Red, I will send you letters from everywhen telling you so, letters of only one word, letters that will brush your cheek and grip your hair, letters that will bite you, letters that will mark you. I’ll write you by bullet ant and spider wasp; I’ll write you by shark’s tooth and scallop shell; I’ll write you by virus and the salt of a ninth wave flooding your lungs;” ― Amal El-Mohtar, This Is How You Lose the Time War Red and Blue's intimacy is their communication, ideologically and emotionally infecting each other with every word; compromising each other in the eyes of their superiors. The fact that this is also how they ultimately break free – Red with enough Blue in her to dare walk into Garden; Blue with enough Red to survive the Agency's lethal poison – elevates the power of their relationship to another level entirely. “I want to meet you in every place I ever loved. Listen to me. I am your echo. I would rather break the world than lose you.” ― Max Gladstone, This Is How You Lose the Time War As we discussed in the video above, the book depicts a lesbian relationship that also feels more generally, quintessentially queer. Red is a digital program and Blue is a force of nature as much as they are human women; their relationship isn't defined by gender so much as by their shared dream of defying the powers that be, escaping and being together. By the way, maybe consider reading this book? Red & Blue, by Laya Rose You Lose & We Win As Blue hints at in her very first letter ( ' this is how we win ' ), the pair ultimately escape by virtue of their connection and cross-contamination. But this line also connects back to the title, since both the Agency and Garden must continue to 'lose' (continue fighting) their time war in order for Red and Blue to continue existing at the same time. Their future together seems incredibly precarious, but what isn't, really? I'm sure I'll return to this book again at some point, but that's (almost) enough for now. Bear with just one more favourite quote of mine: “Wars are dense with causes and effects, calculations and strange attractors, and all the more so are wars in time. One spared life might be worth more to the other side than all the blood that stained Red’s hands today. A fugitive becomes a queen or a scientist or, worse, a poet . Or her child does, or a smuggler she trades jackets with in some distant spaceport. And all this blood for nothing.” Chills, every time. I've read a lot of speculative fiction, but it's truly rare to get a story as special as This Is How You Lose the Time War . [For the slightly silly explanation of how the book broke in to the mainstream – plus more interesting background info on it – this video  has you covered!] Thanks for reading and until next time <3

A juggernaut in more ways than one, from Seth Dickinson's Masquerade novels Note for readers: After seven months of writing two posts per week, I'm dialing back to one again, to help focus on new writing projects, recover my reading habits and reconnect with my passion for writing these. Thanks as always for reading <3 Masquerade "Look at Tain Shir and you cannot fathom the name behind the cartouche. You cannot extract her reasons. You only see why men turn to religion: for hope that there are gods to oppose her .” ― Seth Dickinson, The Monster Baru Cormorant Toward the end of last summer I wrote a trio of posts about The Masquerade novels by Seth Dickinson, looking at how they explore the horrors large and small of colonialism and empire. These remain some of my favourite books in the world, not just for their underlying message but also for their fascinating worldbuilding, tense narrative and powerful characterization. This is also an 'Einherjar' piece, and something of a follow-up to my post about Commander Wake from Tamsyn Muir's The Locked Tomb . You can find a longer explanation there, but suffice to say that these articles are focused on characters whose physical and narrative presence warps the world around them; characters who give badass a new name. (Consider checking back on my older posts for explanations of some Masquerade terms – spoilers ahead for the series .) Tain Shir, by Marceline2174 Predecessor & Foil It would be impossible to appreciate Tain Shir's presence in The Masquerade without her connection to Baru Cormorant, our main protagonist in the novels. After all, Baru is now walking the path that Shir previously tread and abandoned. She is constantly afraid that she'll misstep and end up like Shir – if the older woman doesn't kill her first. Tain Shir was born in Aurdwynn and, like Baru, grew up seeing the influence of Falcresti colonization work its tendrils into her homeland. At one point she came into contact with Falcresti merchant Cairdine Farrier and after years of correspondence, during which she grew increasingly frustrated with Aurdwynni capitulation to Falcrest, she left to become his protégé. Like Baru, Shir ultimately helps Farrier and Falcrest quell multiple nascent rebellions as part of her journey to becoming a cryptarch – the 'rulers through secrets' behind the symbolic Throne of Falcrest. Yet she abandons this goal for unknown reasons during her time in the deep south, around the time she makes contact with the Cancrioth, becoming uniquely unmastered in this world. So Shir spends the second and third novels taunting and hunting Baru, frustrated to see her young successor so completely ensnared by Farrier – and all the more so for the fact that Baru thinks she's free by virtue of having killed the hostage Falcrest held over her. That hostage being Tain Hu, Shir's adored cousin and Baru's lover. Shir and Baru are connected not only by their tutelage under Cairdine Farrier and resulting knowledge and agency, but also by their love for a dead woman, their culpability in subjugating their homelands on behalf of Falcrest and the physical, mental and emotional toll their journeys have taken on them. Not to mention both women's sexuality (though Shir might be bisexual, where Baru is lesbian), repressed by Falcrest and scarring them in different ways. Tain Shir and Baru, by furniture_piece Bane of Wives As I said, Shir is uniquely unmastered – she's the terrifying exception that proves the rule: everyone (else) has something they care about and which can be used against them, be it people, places or ideas. “Tain Shir walks the deck of RNS Sulane between the bombs and incendiaries and steel-tipped barbs. A weapon among weapons but she alone is free. The tragedy of the knife is the hilt. The tragedy of the crossbow is the trigger. Shir has neither. She cannot be gripped nor fired. She is unmastered. The sailors are rude with her. So be it. Etiquette is the domain of those whose power is conditional upon the respect of others, and Shir is unconditional. If she drifted alone in the void beyond the moon or if she walked among the monarchs of the ancient Cheetah Palaces she would not be altered in her capabilities or her intentions, for not one truth of her resides within a relationship to any other thing.” ― Seth Dickinson, The Monster Baru Cormorant This also sets her in stark opposition to the idea of 'trim' (luck, connection to other people and the world) held by people among the Oriati Mbo in this world. They believe that all things and souls are bound together, not completely unlike how the Falcresti believe there is always a way to leverage someone into compliance. Shir rejects it all, acting solely for her own motivations and untouchable by the social ties that bind everyone else. This is also how she earned her cognomen: Shir was personally responsible for leading so many Oriati men to their deaths as part of her work for Farrier that she became known for turning wives into widows – thus 'Bane of Wives'. But that's only the narrative/societal part of what makes her so terrifying. She's also associated with more than one ancient mystery of this world, having previously associated with the Cancrioth (I can't help but wonder if she's carrying one of their tumours or did so in the past) and following the practices of the all-but-forgotten Jellyfish Eaters. We don't know too much about the Ykari cults native to Aurdwynn or the practices of the destroyed Maia peoples, but I'd be confident in saying that Shir has sought power wherever she could possibly find it. On the modern front, she clearly understands Farrier's tactics and also has knowledge of his rival Hesychast's secret weapon in the Clarified. Of course, I wouldn't be writing about any of this if not for Shir's physical prowess. The Masquerade 's cast is filled with characters who thrive on the belief that the pen is mightier than the sword; it's hard to think of a single fantasy character who couldn't best our hero Baru in combat. This makes it all the more intimidating to see Shir, who is just as intelligent and educated as the rest, lead from the front with training, muscle and grim purpose. Beyond that, I'll let Shir's (re-)introduction speak for itself: “My niece,” Yawa said. “It can’t be her!” Apparitor wailed. “ She went into the jungle! She never came back! ” ... From the burning rushes rose a single red-masked Masquerade marine. A faceless and dripping figure with a heavy crossbow. Water beaded on the oils of her equipment. Knives glimmered in sheathes of wax. Behind her mask her eyes were a crow-feather shine. She raised a finger that gleamed with steel knucklebraces. She pointed to Baru. The smoke grenade in her fist burped and gushed chemical mist. With the ease of a drunken dockworker embracing a buddy at the bar she took the nearest sailor in her arms and slashed his throat and left the grenade stuffed in his collar to float with his corpse. The second man in her reach screamed and pulled a dive knife. She shot him in the face with her wet storm crossbow, as casually as a cat biting off a bird’s bright-feathered head. He fell like a comic, his feet walking on out from under him, his broken skull snapped back. ― Seth Dickinson, The Monster Baru Cormorant Tain Shir biting a Cormorant, by Hivemire Comparison & Close Setting Tain Shir next to The Locked Tomb 's Commander Wake (my previous pick as an Einherjar) reveals a few interesting parallels. Both are grimly determined women who warped the world around them long before the current narrative. Both are connected to the protagonist (Baru/Harrow) through the manipulative male authority figure (Farrier/Jod) in addition to ties of blood and love (Tain Hu/Gideon). Both are nigh-unstoppable killing machines who must be fled until circumstances change at the last moment. Yet both are also villains of circumstance, ultimately sharing the protagonist's belief that the current corrupt system needs to be overturned. The greatest difference is of course that while both series are trilogies awaiting their final fourth entry, Tain Shir yet survives while Commander Wake seems to be permanently destroyed. Shir even seems to have been partly won over toward the end of the third book, but remains enough of a wild card that I could see her playing any number of different roles in the final entry. If and when she dies, I'm sure it'll be just as spectacular as Wake's death at the hands of God. --- I know this wasn't quite as deep a reflection as most of my recent pieces, but again I'm hoping that modifying my schedule will help me reconnect with some more of that passion and excitement. Thanks as always for reading and until next time <3

Dune , Terra Ignota , Nightwish and more The Weight of a Life This week I began listening to Christopher Ruocchio's Empire of Silence (2018), a science fiction epic clearly drawing heavy inspiration from Dune , A Song of Ice and Fire and The Book of the New Sun among other works. Depending on how the book progresses, it might be worth writing about how and when it's appropriate to copy worldbuilding and even character traits to such a degree. But this book has also helped to crystallize for me a motif that runs through all the works listed above and much of science fiction & fantasy besides. Protagonist Hadrian reflects: "A wise man once told me that flesh was the cheapest resource in the human universe and that life spends more easily than gold . I laughed when I heard that and denied him. I was a fool to do so. How little I knew." – Empire of Silence Obviously this isn't a complete revelation – just last week I wrote about two books depicting brutal corporate slavery – but it got me thinking more about the relative value of life in these stories. Early in Empire of Silence , noble Hadrian wanders off alone and barely survives an encounter with a gang of ruffian adolescents. It's made abundantly clear that his life matters, because of both his aristocratic blood and his future plot relevance, mere pages after his above reflection on the value of plebeian flesh. So does all life have value? Or only some lives? Paul and the Fremen, by Steve Prescott Proximity & Narrative Tradition At this point I imagine we're all familiar with the idea that, illogical as it may be, our brains are wired to care a lot more about the death of someone close to us than the deaths of a million people we've never met – not only because of emotions and our societal divisions , but also because we simply cannot fathom such large numbers in any meaningful way. Many science fiction & fantasy stories explore this idea in the same way as Empire of Silence , and I think a vast majority of that trend can be linked back to Dune . Hero Paul Atreides and his family are set apart from their rival Harkonnens mostly by the simple fact that they respect human life. They've fostered real relationships with the working class of their ancestral planet Caladan and bring that mindset to their stewardship of Arrakis and its populace. It's a sharp contrast to the Harkonnens' brutal approach, and part of why Paul ultimately wins the respect of the Fremen. (If you're more familiar with Game of Thrones , the Starks and Lannisters have a very similar dynamic.) But still, Atreides blood is valued far higher than any other. Partly for emotional reasons (we see the story from Paul's & Jessica's perspectives, after all) and partly for narrative ones (harkening back to the likes of Achilles, Hector and Paris in The Iliad ), these lives are treated as far more precious than the average. I've sung a lot of praises for Ada Palmer's Terra Ignota books (and they deserve far more), but they also harshly annoyed me at times for how feverishly obsessive the narration could be about their noble cast. I'll contain myself to one example for today: The fourth book opens with a rapid worldwide descent from utopia into the chaos of war, with unnamed millions if not billions in need of immediate guidance, yet our point-of-view character – a supposed beacon for humanity, with unlimited access and connections – spends an absurd amount of time ensuring the emotional wellbeing of one peripheral named character before taking a break to eat chocolate cake with another. Granted that Palmer is actively imitating The Iliad even more than Frank Herbert was in Dune , but it's still a strange contrast to how in the same series J.E.D.D. Mason holds each and every life as being infinitely valuable . After all, we are all 'small authors', writing our stories on the world. Altruism, by Rob Rey Life has Value Of course life has intrinsic value . The science fiction & fantasy stories I brought up today each try to grapple with and communicate that answer in their own ways, though few reach as idealistic a conclusion as J.E.D.D. Mason. ( Dune also sees Paul & Leto II pivot hard on the value of life – I touched on it a bit here but might well be worth a follow-up post.) Many of these stories also contrast the privileged lives of their aristocratic characters with extreme hardships for the lives of everyone else, again similar to my post from last week . The Expanse has a pretty great storyline about this, which should probably also get its own post sometime. (I should probably mention the popular Red Rising series too, though for the life of me I still don't understand why the author chose to make the first book a Hunger Games ripoff and I have yet to explore the sequels.) Just because our limited perspective & our narrative traditions both seem to tell us some lives are more important than others doesn't make it at all true. Everyone deserves a chance to live their life to the fullest! May J.E.D.D. Mason and whatever other powers bless the people continuing to fight for a free Palestine and other causes – it's hard not to be inspired by the activists on board the Madleen and across America this week. (I feel like I was a bit scattered today, partly because a Google Cloud disruption has been messing with my ability to find and add images, but I hope the message still came across.) Below is a quote from the song at the top, in case you didn't make it through the whole twenty minute masterpiece. Thanks for reading and until next time <3 "We are going to die, and that makes us the lucky ones. Most people are never going to die because they are never going to be born. The potential people who could have been here in my place but who will in fact never see the light of day outnumber the sand grains of Sahara. Certainly those unborn ghosts include greater poets than Keats, scientists greater than Newton. We know this because the set of possible people allowed by our DNA so massively exceeds the set of actual people. In the teeth of these stupefying odds it is you and I, in our ordinariness, that are here. We privileged few, who won the lottery of birth against all odds, how dare we whine at our inevitable return to that prior state from which the vast majority have never stirred?" – Professor Richard Dawkins & Nightwish, 'The Greatest Show on Earth'

A wide umbrella covering diverse genres in media, a hope for our time Back to Basics, Briefly I'll be the first to admit that it's strange to do this piece now , having written over a hundred posts about ideas from speculative fiction in the last 18 months. Yet as I've admitted once or twice – and as you've likely noticed, having read a few of these – I have a habit of skipping or speeding through the basics on my way to talk about the most salient details and ideas a story has to offer. So today I want to go back and fill in the groundwork that probably should have come a hundred posts ago, in one form or another. Towards the end I'll also go a little bit into why speculative fiction is so important to engage with today and moving forward. "Fire Keeper", by M. Cooper (BeardedArtistStudios) What if...? Speculative fiction encompasses many genres depicting characters, settings or events that break from reality as we know it, including: science fiction (e.g. Rendezvous with Rama , Dune ) fantasy (e.g. The Lord of the Rings , The Stormlight Archive ) horror (e.g. The Haunting of Hill House , The Shining ) superhero fiction (e.g. Marvel & DC Comics, Films) alternate history (e.g. The Man in the High Castle , The Plot Against America ) weird fiction (e.g. The Ballad of Black Tom , House of Leaves ) magical realism (e.g. 1Q84 , Life of Pi ) and much more . In essence, if a story contains anything that doesn't fit into our understanding of the world, it's probably speculative fiction. Most often, and especially in science fiction & fantasy (SFF), those outlying elements will be related to either magic or futuristic technology. Stories in other genres depict worlds where the laws of nature and evolution simply work differently. These differences might be relatively minor in scale, such as the ' hard fantasy ' Masquerade novels by Seth Dickinson, or all-encompassing, like the universe as depicted in Discworld . Although it doesn't seem to be the norm, I tend to think of surreal fiction as also belonging under the speculative fiction umbrella. Media like Nathan Fielder's The Rehearsal (which I wrote about last week ) and Synecdoche, New York (2008) play with concepts of reality and artifice, truth and representation in spaces very similar to my favourite speculative fiction, breaking with logic and sense if not wholly with reality. Likewise Yorgos Lanthimos' surreal, absurd The Lobster  (2015) and The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017) have characters behaving as though they are living in a speculative fiction setting, even if we never see evidence of their world being so different from our own. "Faith", by Clayshaper A Mirror of our Fears Speculative fiction (especially science fiction, weird fiction and horror) often serves as a reflection of our societal anxieties. It gives authors and readers alike a medium to explore and confront current fears by disconnecting them from reality and presenting them through a different pair of eyes. This is part of the reason behind certain trends in film history. The Cold War inspired a generation of films about the possibility and aftermath of nuclear war while massively increasing the popularity of characters like James Bond. Likewise, the glut of 2000s-2010s apocalypse films is often linked to combined fears about global warming, 9/11 and various doomsday theories . I've written before about the many science fiction short stories from 2017-18 that feel like a direct response to Trump's first election, exploring xenophobia and feelings of alienation from one's fellows, government and society. These stories helped me grapple with the horrifying reality of the situation back then, yet somehow pale in comparison to our current reality. The stories published a year or two from now will be very dark, and for good reason. Closely related to its tendency to reflect our societal anxieties, speculative fiction often repeats the lessons of the past in new ways for younger generations. (I've touched on this idea that "those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" a couple times, most notably with regard to Dune and The Book of Fire .) But clearly we didn’t tell enough stories about the horrors of the Gestapo and other secret police organizations, given that it’s happening all over again today . "The Summit", by M. Cooper (BeardedArtistStudios) Storytelling In addition to being our salvation (only partly joking), speculative fiction is just plain fun. There are dozens of awe-inspiring moments and ideas I've found here that I'll never forget, from the blazing heroics of characters in The Stormlight Archive to the intimidating presence of the Ten Who Were Taken in The Black Company and to the cosmic mysteries hinted at in House of Suns and Remembrance of Earth's Past . There are also smaller stories that totally captured my wonder and heart, like Piranesi and The Thief – check out those links for why I think they'd make great starting points on your own journey into speculative fiction. Thanks for reading and until next time <3

Murderbot , Chain-Gang All-Stars and real life Dystopian? While I won't get into definitions again , I think it's important to remember that many of the terrifying societal problems we see in fictional stories are all too real for many people alive today. Even exaggerated and over-the-top stories are probably closer to reality than we tend to think at first glance. At its core, speculative fiction is a reflection of our societal fears and anxieties. It gives authors and readers alike a medium to explore and confront ideas by disconnecting them from reality and presenting them through a different set of eyes. Its purpose is to help us think more and in new ways about these issues, not to help us forget about them. I labelled this post as Part II because I previously looked at corporate dehumanization as depicted in the show Severance , plus I've actually already discussed Murderbot & Chain-Gang together in another recent piece . (As always, you can find a somewhat-organized list of my work here .) Murderbot & the Preservation team, by asterion-out-of-the-maze Life as a Commodity Where Severance depicts characters stripped down to their function as members of the workforce, Murderbot and Chain-Gang All-Stars explicitly show living beings as commodities – or slaves, as characters in both books call out. Chain-Gang doesn't have to reach very far in its depiction of American prisoners as slaves: the prison-industrial complex in our own world is already built on a profiteering, corporate system that keeps a massive population imprisoned and working indefinitely while paying them a small fraction of minimum wage . What author Nana Kwame Adjei-Brenyah has added is the option for prisoners to forgo their sentence by joining the CAPE (Criminal Action Penal Entertainment) program, through which they could technically see freedom in three years time – provided they win thirty-six gladiatorial deathmatches and also avoid being killed outside of the arena by a jealous or ambitious 'teammate'. Called 'Links' on ' Chains ', everything from the athletes' bodies to their trauma and criminal record are objectified and commodified by sponsors, media and the CAPE program itself. Their short lives and inevitable deaths are points on corporate earnings charts; their humanity stripped entirely away by the simple fact they are criminals (even if, as with an estimated 5% in real life, they're actually innocent). Adjei-Brenyah pulls various aspects of this system from the NFL & WWE, where profits have always come before athlete health, in addition to collegiate sports, where unpaid players generate billions in corporate revenue each year. Art from this Esquire article As I've written about a few times, Murderbot depicts a galaxy shaped by the existence of the Corporation Rim, where capitalism and contracts rule all. Our titular protagonist, a cyborg Security Unit, starts off the series as a literal commodity, rented out to protect (and spy on) other corporate clients. When the Preservation team rescue Murderbot from this existence and bring it to their relative utopia, they must do so by purchasing it; even then, it's only a legal person within their non-corporate territory. On my first read – and informed by similar narratives in Ann Lackie's Imperial Radch and Yoon Ha Lee's Machineries of Empire – this distinction about the rights of various artificial intelligences was my main takeaway. After all, we experience this story through the eyes of one of those characters. But both my re-read and the first four episodes of the Murderbot adaptation have opened my eyes to how bad most humans have it in the Corporation Rim as well. Early on, the series shows desperate workers signing contracts they don't have the education to understand, consigning themselves and possibly their descendants to lives of underpaid labour. (If you saw Alien: Romulus , protagonist Rain's situation is pretty much the same.) It's only later in the series that we learn about corporate takeovers and salvage rights. Sure it sucks to be in indentured servitude, but it gets a lot worse when your company goes under and your entire distant operation or colony is forgotten about. Centuries later, when your descendants are finally getting on their feet, another corporation can then swoop in, claim them as salvage and force them into slave labour. We already live in a world where lives are built and broken on the shifting tides of the market, but rarely are the stakes quite this terrifyingly high. Nonetheless, human trafficking is a real issue: this segment from John Oliver about the (essentially) enslaved workers responsible for most of the spam text messages we receive lives in my mind rent-free. "The Future of Work: Compulsory ", art by Tracy J. Lee Humanity I'm sure there are events in our world's history – perhaps happening right now – that make even the CAPE program and the Corporation Rim look downright utopian in comparison. It's important to remember that while these potential futures are terrifying and exaggerated in their own ways, both are based on real fears and I think both are eerily believable. Both stories also have groups fighting this system: in Chain-Gang it's a group of protestors not unlike you might pass on the street, in Murderbot it's a university-backed team fighting corporate claims to salvage planets and people. In each case, it's ultimately about fighting for and educating people about human rights. So join those protestors, and try not to support companies already well on their way to mirroring these practices. Because if we don't fight for our rights, we won't have them for long. Thanks for reading and until next time <3

Nathan Fielder's second season unearths the male communication crisis Flight Risk I want to briefly open by saying that if you haven't yet seen The Rehearsal Season Two, consider giving it a try before reading this. You don't even need to have watched Season One as each is fairly self-contained, though it will offer an introduction to Fielder (and his character?) in addition to context on his methods and the reasoning behind them. If you're entirely new to the work of Nathan Fielder, my one-line pitch would be that he lives, breathes and thrives on the line between reality and unreality, fiction and nonfiction. I've written before about how my favourite speculative fiction stories challenge my basic understanding of how the world works; between his deadpan humour and the hard to discern differences between himself and his character, Fielder embodies this fascination. I was first introduced to him through his show The Curse , which I highly recommend and want to write about eventually. Rehearsal Spoilers Ahead. Unlike its predecessor, Season Two of The Rehearsal is fully devoted to a single issue: communication breakdowns between airline pilots which lead to otherwise preventable crashes. Fielder was certainly working on this idea for years, but the timing of the season's release is pretty remarkable considering the many widely-covered aviation incidents we've seen in 2025. Fielder approaches the issue from a variety of amusing angles – including attempting to experience Captain Sully Sullenberger's life from childhood – but quickly focuses in on two key factors that seem intrinsically tied to the cockpit communication breakdowns he is investigating. The first issue is one of authority: co-pilots fearing to question the actions of their (often more experienced) captains because their careers are on the line. The second is about the pilots themselves: any diagnosed or divulged mental health issue is liable to have a pilot's flight license revoked. Which, as Fielder brilliantly sums up in the final line of the season: Art for The Rehearsal Season 2, by trytobehappy "So, if you're here, you must be fine." Clearly, pilots don't have mental health issues: if they did, they wouldn't be allowed to fly. My recap can't do the show justice in how cleverly it challenges this idea, but to give it a try: Fielder reveals in episode six that he has spent the past two years training for and acquiring his own pilot's license. He also does his due diligence in getting tested for anxiety & depression. Episode five & six also question whether he might be autistic. But he wants to continue flying, so the end of the season shows him ignoring the message that his test results are available. If he doesn't officially have anything wrong with him, he can do his job. It's objective vs. accepted reality, with lives on the line. And (sorry it took so long to get here) isn't that exactly what traditional masculinity is all about? Men don't have feelings, let alone mental health issues. If they did, they wouldn't be men. If you're here with the boys, you must be fine. It's no coincidence that just 6% of pilots are female . As The Rehearsal demonstrates, female pilots are subject to frequent and intense harassment. (And again, risk their jobs by objecting too harshly to a commanding officer.) Nathan notes the skill with which pilot Mara'D has learned to deflect and deter this harassment, but this remains a horrifying norm to have to accept. On the other side of things – and as the show places in direct contrast to Mara'D – are pilots like Jeff, who exude toxic masculinity like it's 1950. It feels obscene to look in on the change-resistant workplace culture of this industry, which makes me confident Fielder knew what he was getting into to some extent. But, of course, Jeff and his ilk are 'fine'; whereas someone seeking help for their mental health absolutely wouldn't be. Art by Levi Hastings for Buzzfeed News Boys will be boys If the existence of feelings and mental health issues is inimical to traditional masculinity, opening up or asking about them is unfathomable. (Not to mention potentially career-ruining for pilots.) Society's concept of pilots adds to this an aura of stoic superiority, maintaining which necessitates never being the first person to talk: you have all the answers and absolute control, so why would you ever need to open your mouth first? Given that, is it any wonder that Fielder never observes pilots talking to each other when not absolutely necessary? Regulations, their culture and our societal ideal of them require them to be perfectly self-sufficient, enlightened beings. Any hint to the contrary and they're gone. Of course, Fielder spends the season trying to pick away at this delusion from a variety of angles. He finds an incredible communicator in Mara'D because she isn't playing the game , and has in fact learned to work around those who are. Half his trials involve encouraging male pilots to communicate with the women in their lives, I think partially because their work life so clearly stunts their skills in that area. Clearly the pressure on pilots to remain this way is coming from all angles, so will require changes on multiple fronts. Fielder mentions talk therapy as a potential starting point, and I personally think that's absolutely true. Ultimately, perhaps just following the way our society down traditional masculinity a few pegs would offer a path forward. Official Poster Image for The Rehearsal Season 2 What about Season One? I spent far less time with Season One than most, yet I can't help but feel that masculinity is also at its heart. 'Orange Juice, No Pulp' feels very reminiscent of pilot Moody's conversation with his girlfriend Cindy, while 'Gold Digger' in some ways mirrors the very same communication issues between male pilots. As for the masculine angle in Nathan's role as surrogate, surrogate father in the whole Angela debacle... That's for someone else to analyze. I really appreciated not only how the show cleverly points out this deeply concerning issue in the aviation industry, but also how Fielder subtly begins to explore his own mental health throughout the season. It's fascinating to see how he's able to meet Jeff's toxicity with a straight face while also being extremely open about his own internal journey. I'd love to hear (or experience through subtle hints) Nathan talk about his relationship to gender some day. But he's an onion as much as any ogre, and that's probably at least a dozen layers away. Any parallels to traditional masculinity that I missed from the season? Would love to hear your thoughts! Thanks for reading and until next time <3

No subtlety, only brutal honesty in Chain-Gang All-Stars and Bury Your Gays Always A Bigger Fish It sometimes feels like the universe is actively out to correct me or prove me wrong. When I finished Chuck Tingle's Bury Your Gays (2024) last week for my monthly book club, I had the audacity to say in my Goodreads review that the book was "as on-the-nose as you can possibly get." After all, Tingle is not only exploring the ' bury your gays ' trope from the perspective of a Hollywood writer, but also has that queer character's life being threatened unless he bows down to corporate pressure and kills off his own star queer characters. It's incredibly straightforward in a way that probably reflects reality for many creatives in the mainstream. A few minutes after posting that review, I opened my next library book: Chain-Gang All-Stars by Nana Kwame Adjei-Brenyah (see my previous post for a brief introduction to it). And y'all, this book has stats . Consider me corrected, o' universe. “Suck my dick, America.” Randy Mac sighed as he pulled his denim pack off the ground. His catchphrase, spoken without a smile. – Chain-Gang All-Stars Thee Hurricane Staxxx, art for Shado-Mag by Charity Utukunda Imaginary Conflicts, Real Suffering Adjei-Brenyah delivers real-world statistics and facts related to the story through footnotes . In a way it causes the book to read like one of my more passionate articles, with hyperlinks to supporting evidence added to every other word – so it's fascinating to see a similar energy working so well in the context of a fictional story! Chain-Gang All-Stars is predominantly about the American incarceration system, with a focus on Black experiences and history. The harrowing facts he shares through footnotes range from the individual, wrongful deaths of people like George Stinney and Tina Davis to excerpts of laws about tear gas and torture. Adjei-Brenyah makes it clear that while his tale of gladiatorial combat between prisoners may be satirical and over-the-top, the human suffering and cost is entirely real. This is supported by a side narrative focused on family members of the incarcerated, which shows how widespread the effects of incarceration can be. As the book states, children of prisoners are six times more likely to become 'justice-involved' themselves. Bury Your Gays likewise puts queer experiences and representation front and center, without shying away from questioning how and why they clash with corporate concerns about profitability. It also barely disguises its corporate stand-ins and has a brilliant and relevant choice of villain , compounding existing issues while also introducing new ones. Our distraction-filled world makes it easier than ever to ignore real problems people are facing , so I can see why these authors would be interested in stating their morals and the issues loud and clear. I consider myself fairly well educated and still had things to learn from both novels, which I might have missed if they had been subtly woven into the speculative fiction worldbuilding. Covers of Chain-Gang All-Stars and Bury Your Gays Media Literacy? It's easy to see a trend like this and jump to worrying about declining media literacy. To some extent, I think that reaction is entirely fair! (I've brought up Netflix dumbing down their content more than once here.) It would be great if the entire world population could appreciate nuance and subtlety; the cynical part of me asks whether even these books will ever end up in the hands of someone who desperately needs to hear their messages. But I do think loud and brutal honesty has its place, especially in a world as conflicted and dark as ours. Both books are also bombastic enough that I think what might elsewhere come off as preachy fits right in: Bury has fictional characters coming to life and hunting their creator, while Chain-Gang is heaped with hard-hitting satire. Both books also address trauma quite openly, which I think is always important! Have you read either of these books, or another that seems to follow a similar trend? What are your thoughts on it all? Thanks for reading and until next time <3 -- If there's ever a piece in which to bring it up it's this one, right? I'm fundraising as part of the Toronto Pride & Remembrance Run next month on behalf of some incredible organizations – my page is here if you're able to help out at all!

Should narrative momentum pause for conflict? Should our lives? The Conflict Bear On Thursday I wrote about one of the ways ADHD inhibits my executive functioning skills, making the prospect of completing multiple tasks seem to grow exponentially more difficult instead of the linear progression I imagine most people experience. I discussed how writing things down, making them tangible, has helped me overcome a little of that difficulty. But sometimes even that simple step seems impossible. (And if it sounds exhausting to be stuck on the simple task of delineating the tasks you need to complete, yes. Yes it is.) In my experience, this happens when something else is – often unhelpfully – demanding my attention. Two weeks ago I explored the ideas of Time Blindness and our tendency to think of things as either Now or Not Now: unfortunately we rarely get to choose which is which, and some things in the Now can be pretty damn insistent in clearing the space for themselves. For me, one of those things is (emotional) conflict. I'm getting better at coping with smaller frustrations and disagreements, but larger ones can still shatter my executive functioning. It feels like an NBA defender blocking out a sixth-grader, or a grizzly bear sleeping fitfully next to your picnic; not technically worthy of a fight-or-flight response, but making it very difficult to focus on anything else. And from far too much experience, I can tell you that endlessly ruminating on the bear, trying to understand and empathize with its life story, does nothing for you or it. I'm trying to learn to take action and stand up for myself rather than re-assembling myself and my stance from first principles – and it turns out that when I don't respond to conflict by taking on a boatload of guilt, that bear starts to look a little more like a squirrel. 'Chips and Dip', art by Jeffrey Severn (Laughing Bear Art) Violent Action Speculative fiction has always made up the core of my media consumption, so it can be strange to recall that most genres rarely depict physical conflict – let alone one where both parties are empathetic to the viewer or reader. Yet the motif of two just and likeable characters forced into conflict is an incredibly powerful way of highlighting systemic injustice, as demonstrated in stories like The Hunger Games and Game of Thrones . I'm only a short way into reading Chain-Gang All-Stars by Nana Kwame Adjei-Brenyah, but it already uses the same setup to great effect. It depicts a dystopian future America where prisoners are given the option to compete in gladiatorial matches for a chance of eventual freedom, and shines a brief light on each contender's humanity even as they are eviscerated and dismembered by the reluctant but determined protagonists. Even when it's simply good against evil or beloved characters against faceless enemies, I think this action can be important in reminding us that there are things worth fighting for. (Simple enough, right? May return to go deeper on this with some research under my belt.) Loretta Thurwar from Chain-Gang All-Stars , art by fleshmonk Pacing and Progress The one thing I can’t stand is action for the sake of action. My dad always points out the obligatory yet purposeless chase scene(s) in movies, and there are a lot of books where the action feels similarly empty and wasteful to me. These sections simply cannot hold my attention, so I end up skimming through them. And in a lot of these cases, there's truly no important details to miss by doing so. Rather than try to examine what’s not working in those books, I want to focus on what works very well in both Chain-Gang All-Stars and The Murderbot Diaries  by Martha Wells. First and foremost, the action is extremely fast and deadly. These authors make it clear that a single misstep is all the difference between life and death, their protagonists only winning out through competence and intelligence. (I had a small issue with this in the latest episode of the Murderbot TV adaptation, where enemies were just a little less conniving and deadly than in the books, and I think it makes Murderbot look less competent as a result.) Neither book's action is entirely blow-by-blow either. Chain-Gang All-Stars adds weight to its fight scenes by contrasting the desperate humanity of its combatants with the dehumanizing bloodlust of its audience. It invites the reader to feel the characters' lives flashing before their eyes, in the few seconds before one of those lives is cut short. It demonstrates how traumatized and haunted the victors are, once the cameras are off of them. Murderbot hardwires its action into its plot: our protagonist SecUnit is never simply fighting for its own life, instead always on a mission to protect its client humans from varied and complex threats. Between that emotional element, Murderbot's situational awareness and the frequent need for rapid movement in pursuit of goals, this action carries weight, intelligence and velocity. Both Murderbot's own actions and those it can't foresee are liable to change the situation at any moment, often directly advancing the plot at the same time. Each author has clearly put thought into these scenes, making them matter for characters and readers alike. It's a core part of the story, rather than a dull hurdle you know the character will clear in a few dozen pages. Murderbot with its swarm of drones, art by bzeye Takeaways Well for one, I can't help but cringe remembering some of the combat moments of my old Dungeons & Dragons campaigns. I know it's partially the nature of that game system, but some of those fights must have felt incredibly dull and pointless. To answer both questions in the subtitle, no. Neither narratives nor our lives should grind to a halt for the sake of an obligatory conflict. Narratively it should be folded in, pack a punch and not outstay its welcome. In our lives – as long as it's not world-shattering – it doesn't have to necessitate a total reset and shutdown. We can roll with the punches and stand up for ourselves while also, of course, admitting mistakes and trying to grow from them. That's as close as we've got to a narrative arc, right? Would love to hear any tips or thoughts you have! Thanks for reading and until next time <3

Musing on the useful limitations of understanding Primordial Chaos & Clarifying Definitions Growing up, people were often surprised at my ability to multitask listening and singing along to music while fully engaged in other activities. During the pandemic, they found it hard to believe I could walk while simultaneously playing Pokémon GO and actively listening to audiobooks & podcasts. I've since learned that seeking these types of secondary stimulation is common for people with ADHD as it helps us reach a place of focus while also helping to drown out random distractions. I think the key is that we can engage with those secondary sources of stimulation passively: as soon as we need to actively think about and respond to two things at once, the situation can get messy. On my walks it just took an errant message, a sh*tty driver or a rare Pokémon for me to miss minutes or chapters of whatever I was listening to, and it was always hard to return to my rhythm once pulled away from it. The paralysis that comes from having two or more things demanding my attention is frustrating in the short term, but utterly debilitating in the long term when they start to build up. Messages I want to send, phone calls I need to make, blog posts to plan and write, the job search, household chores – they pile and pile, every added item adding to the guilt and anxiety associated with the whole. It feels impossible to isolate and tackle any one thing, because then I'm not addressing the rest. It's a storm, a maelstrom, forever wanting to grow and liable at any moment to lash out with feelings of guilt. And while I've been bolstered by some useful tactics I've learned in therapy – mindfulness, breaking problems down, focusing on one thing at a time, making SMART goals – I've only found one weapon truly effective against it: writing. Listing and defining these things pulls them out of the primordial chaos and gives them a tangible shape. Seven points in my phone's notepad feels a hundred thousand times easier to deal with than the storm, despite their ultimately being comprised of the same parts. (Whether you have or don't have ADHD, how relatable is this for you? Incredibly curious!) Lately I've been watching a lot of Angela Collier 's videos on science and data, and I've been reminded that this therapy-inspired method mirrors any rigorous scientific problem-solving: you define the parameters and sketch out the situation before attempting to tackle it, otherwise your attempt will probably be useless. 'The Fruiting Body', by Molly Devlin Sociality & Alienating Definitions In my piece last month about ' Dystopia & Privilege ', I questioned the usefulness of hard definitions. I think the vast majority of our social ideas and constructs are more context-dependent than we tend to admit, yet we so often cling to them as though they were as rigid as the laws of physics. (Does this make it sound like I'm about to launch into some crazed take on gray morality? Not today – and besides, been there done that .) I suppose I'm following up on this post about empathy I wrote a few days after [that dipsh*t]'s inauguration in January, in which I argued for remembering our shared humanity and against forever perpetuating the 'us vs. them' dynamic. (And I stand by that, while also believing in self-defence and standing up against corrupt evil *********s.) Our society constantly pushes us to fit into these perfectly defined little boxes. Hogwarts House, Myers-Briggs Type, Zodiac sign, political party, gender; the list goes on forever. It's (ab)using the principle of in- and out-groups, which innately foster a sense of belonging and rivalry, to stop people thinking for themselves and instead simply accept external categorization. All the easier to fit us into their advertising/consumer categories – like the thousands of hidden codes that each define a type of Netflix customer and determine what content and even thumbnails you see. Ascribing to any of these ways of self-categorizing builds us up to alienate people who are unfamiliar with it even while making us closer with those who are. This is often discussed with regards to the queer community, where there now exist sub-categorizations as complex and unique as some medical conditions. (I once wrote about neopronouns and the thousands of variations people use for their online personas.) Is that a problem in and of itself? No, but I think there is a point at which our pursuit of self-understanding and -definition becomes a fetishization of uniqueness. Similar issues exist in the broadest sense, with certain letters within the LGBTQIA+ community believing others should be excluded for any number of reasons. It's a million miniature 'us vs. them' situations that place tiny differences above our shared humanity. And half the time the differences aren't even real (let alone meaningful) – instead imposed by the broad category our birthday or feeling about parties slotted us into for the sake of convenience. What if instead of squeezing into these societal boxes, we could just be ourselves? What if we chose our own people, based on things that actually matter? What if that was the whole human race? Art by Molly Devlin A Decisive Conclusion ... will come if and when I find it. It would be so nice to say 'Definitions are good' or 'Categorization is bad', but I've been mulling it over for a while and I really think – as I hope I've demonstrated above – that it depends on context. They have their uses, but they are also dangerous when used in excess. There you go! Definitions are opioids. My work here is done. What's your take on any of this? Would love to hear it! Thanks for reading and until next time <3

With resonances throughout Ghost's music & human experience On the Surface Let's get it out of the way up top: 'Missilia Amori' and 'Umbra', tracks off of Ghost's 2025 album Skeletá , are about sex. For Missilia Amori it's at least contained to one double entendre – "Love rockets // Shot right in between your eyes" – though it's also the chorus, so I find it does rather stick out. Apparently the song was inspired in tone and cultural context by Kiss' "Love Gun", which certainly checks out. On the other hand, it's hard to mistake the lyrics of 'Umbra' for describing anything other than having sex in a church (though I'll try my best below, don't worry); singer & songwriter Tobias Forge described it as ' coital ', which sums things up quite well. Sex isn't the most complex topic – especially given Ghost's ability to tackle larger ideas, as I wrote about regarding ' Twenties ' and ' Marks of the Evil One ' – but I respect Forge's reasoning that it is a very human one (and perhaps worth discussing with regard to depictions in mainstream speculative fiction, another time). It also isn't anything new for Ghost, whose brand is defined by religious taboo. Many of their songs are about sex in one form or another: 'Monstrance Clock', 'Death Knell', 'Mary on a Cross', 'Kiss the Go-Goat', 'Jigolo Har Megiddo' – not to mention their covers of 'Nocturnal Me' and 'Missionary Man'. In comparison to many of those older songs, 'Missilia Amori' and 'Umbra' are remarkably subtle and fairly brimming with deeper meaning. So let's get into it! Cardinal Copia & Ghost, by Yukke_Art Shades of Manipulation Tobias Forge has described the album as being more intimate than most, concerned with internal and interpersonal feelings and struggles. I think that's especially true of these two songs, and not just for the reasons described above. Both songs use love – whether physical or emotional – as a vehicle to explore different types of manipulation between people and perhaps other entities. Missilia Amori first; I won’t go line by line for either song today, but you can find the lyrics here . The song depicts a relationship that once seemed genuinely loving, but in which the singer is now using the existing bond to coerce their partner. Each verse has its own example of this manipulation. The singer's opening lines ambiguously taunt their partner or try to warn them against throwing the relationship away. Later verses demand obedience now, while they (supposedly) still love each other: "Before my love has turned to hate", "Give in or the war is on". The Bridge turns these threats even more explicit, implying that the partner will never escape anyway, so why not just keep things as they are? "A man of faith is hard to find" certainly stands out here in the rare Ghost song the doesn't otherwise mention religion. I think the singer is simply saying that their partner won't find anyone better: at least they are a known quantity and faithful to the partner, whereas have you heard the horror stories out there? But I also really appreciate that this meaning isn't necessarily confined to relationships between two people. Ghost is always interested in people's personal relationships to religion, and this song absolutely fits the idea of someone trying to escape a cult or similarly indoctrinated religious group. One commenter suggested it being about a powerful country bullying another into subservience, which brought the brilliant sketch below (and, you know, all of modern history) to mind. "Umbra" ( lyrics here ) takes a little more imagination to extract a deeper meaning, mostly hinging on the early reference to death and the line "I see your light shine through."(Again, the song is undoubtedly about sex, perhaps even beyond the surface: check out the annotations on the lyrics at that link to see explanations for a lot of the double entendre and imagery. For one, using 'le petit mort' to connect the themes here is classic Ghost genius.) I suppose I have a couple errant takeaways from the song which may or may not coalesce into a reading of the piece as a whole. The first, as I referenced above, is to see the Church attracting (seducing?) followers by playing on their fear of death with promises of eternal afterlife. This resonates with their song ' Cirice ', which goes much further into the manipulative tactics used by religious institutions. In my mind, "I see your light shine through" has to mean an honest inner beauty coming to the forefront of a person's being. On the surface this is certainly through intimacy and bliss, but it also obviously connects to the religious imagery – it's that honest inner self that God supposedly loves and judges, after all. Yet the singer certainly isn't God, finding beauty in the sacrilegious act on display here. Instead I think the subject of the song's inner beauty is shining through because they are either transgressing against imposed doctrine, acting of their own will and being themself , or intimately meeting death and having everything but their truest self melt away in the face of an existential crisis . And you know what, I think this does all fit together! The subject had previously been drawn into the religion by the idea of eternal life, but upon actually coming face to face with their mortality (and maybe making love to death) they find the inner strength to stand and act on their own terms; their true inner beauty allowed to shine through. ' Pro Memoria ' and ' Zenith ' both carry similar themes, reminding us to accept the fact of our mortality not out of some Halloween spookiness but for the sake of making the most of our time in this world. Papa Emeritus III & Nameless Ghouls backstage, by Feu Vyper Again, really? Yep! It's about the grimmest reminder to practice mindfulness you'll get, but I don't think it's any less helpful for that. And the same goes for Missilia Amori: if you're in any kind of relationship that resembles what's depicted, don't assume that time and inaction will fix anything . We've got one life, so let your light shine through. Would love to hear your thoughts on my interpretation. Any other meaning or imagery that you picked up on and I missed? (Also, to follow up from my Thursday post : Murderbot is looking pretty good so far! Already some striking changes in the adaptation process, but interested to see where things go!) Thanks for reading and until next time <3

Why to be excited for the adaptation, premiering May 16th Zero Spoilers Introduction I'm trying a different approach to spoilers today, where each successive heading will mark slightly more spoilers and so you can choose how far you wish to proceed. Let me know what you think! Today will also be focused on introducing the world of the books and speculating about the adaptation. If you're interested in a deeper look at the character of our eponymous Murderbot in the books, look no further than this short article from last year ! So, what are The Murderbot Diaries ? Well, they're a seven-book (though the first four are novellas) science fiction series so far, with contracted plans for at least two more entries. You can read more about the origins of the series in this Wired article , which also goes a little into author Martha Wells' battle with breast cancer last year and how Murderbot helped get her through it. In tone and content, the books explore deadly serious themes and action through the quirky and sarcastic lens of protagonist Murderbot (pronouns it/its). But just as important is how this setup leaves room for Murderbot to grow and learn to care for its chosen humans, who are perpetually endangered by the predatory world they inhabit. My initial impression, based on the trailer , is that the adaptation has managed to capture at least those first two elements and has set itself up well to reach the third, but only time will tell. What else? If you choose to read the first book, you can expect one of the most inclusive casts in fiction today. The cast is diverse, queer and poly beyond your wildest imagining – I don't believe there are any characters who are explicitly trans, but gender itself is such a nonissue that half of them may as well be. Murderbot itself is completely aromantic/asexual and reads as highly neurodivergent – only adding to its lovability in my humble opinion. While I doubt the adaptation will match or surpass the books' on this front, I'm hopeful that it'll still do better than most of what's on TV. I had my doubts about Skarsgård's casting as Murderbot, but I can't deny the guy has range. Murderbot ( Apple TV+ ) All Too Relatable I suppose it's a light spoiler to reveal that the overarching theme of the Murderbot series is a struggle against capitalism and its corrupt, apathetic systems. Murderbot itself is a corporate product, a SecUnit, created and outfitted as cheaply as possible to generate profit for the Company. (That's the only name we have in the books; I'm curious whether the show will do the same!) The galaxy in which the series takes place is dominated by the 'Corporation Rim', where rampant capitalism has transformed life into the bleakest dystopia. Contract Law and certain other spoilery things are supposed to be attended to with absolute honesty, but a large enough bribe (and confidence that you won't get caught) will see even those standards ignored. (I recently wrote about similar explorations of capitalism through dark humour in this post .) Each book sees Murderbot dropped into a new situation where Corporate interests have made life miserable (if not highly endangered) for ordinary people, and it does what it can to improve their situation in one way or another. For the first book, All Systems Red , those people are a team from the non-Corporate, scientific entity PreservationAux. Promotional pictures make it look like two characters have been cut/merged for the adaptation, but the rest can be seen below: Left to right: Arada , Ratthi , Pin-Lee , Gurathin , Mensah and Bharadwaj ( Apple TV+ ) What I'm Expecting From the Adaptation I think it's fair to assume that the first season will cover the first book, though it will be interesting to see what's added to turn a 160-page novella with a lot of internal narration into ten ~25 minute episodes. My greatest hope is that Apple goes at least as far as the book in terms of a darkly humourous tone. Something along the lines of Severance would be great – as long as they avoid the massive pitfalls of their Foundation adaptation. The trailer showed off a couple looks at Murderbot's favourite show (-within-the-show), The Rise & Fall of Sanctuary Moon , and I think this could easily be another make-or-break factor. The books depict this show as the epitome of soap opera satire, so I need the adaptation to go at least halfway to batshit insane. I suppose my worry is that they just included the pretty colours and strange outfits to make the trailer pop. Again, time will tell. Gurathin hesitated. “It’s downloaded seven hundred hours of entertainment programming since we landed. Mostly serials. Mostly something called Sanctuary Moon .” He shook his head, dismissing it [...] Ratthi said, “The one where the colony’s solicitor killed the terraforming supervisor who was the secondary donor for her implanted baby?” Again, I couldn’t help it. I said, “She didn’t kill him, that’s a fucking lie.” Ratthi turned to Mensah. “It’s watching it.” - All Systems Red , Martha Wells If there's a season 2, I wonder whether the show will be willing to get a new cast for an adaptation of Artificial Condition , or choose a later book that returns to the Preservation crew. I've seen some speculation online about whether this season will end with a cliff-hanger introduction of fan-favourite character ART; I personally think they'll go with the simple but emotional ending of All Systems Red , but it also partly depends on how confident they are of getting renewed. Title Card of The Rise & Fall of Sanctuary Moon ( Apple TV+ ) Looking Back, Looking Forward Highest spoiler level here to say that I think we'll see Murderbot's backstory explored to a much greater degree in this season than we do in the first book. Author Martha Wells is great at doling out small details of history and worldbuilding while keeping the pace of her novels going, but I imagine the show will want to demonstrate Murderbot's virtuous (if tragic) nature pretty quickly so as not to potentially alienate viewers. And speaking of alienation... that's a fascinating direction the show might go in its spare time – maybe we'll get a closer look at the GrayCris operation? I'd be surprised if we spent many episodes solely at the Hub, so maybe we'll see an added outing or two. Anyway, I hope this was helpful whether you're new, returning or as actively interested in Murderbot as I am! What are your feelings going into the show? Are you planning to watch as soon as the first two episodes are up tomorrow, or wait for the whole season? Thanks for reading and until next time <3