Phone started repeatedly throwing bad errors, overheating, etc. I have a replacement on the way (god I hope I did not get ripped off cheap as it was) but if anyone wants to ask for a story in exchange for donations, my ko-fi is here and you can DM or leave a screened comment.
Normal rate is 100 words per dollar. I do typically make a limit of 5K words, but that's negotiable for the right idea.
(This on top of being shorted pay that is STILL not sorted out has made for depression icing on the depressed cake.)
Both Athena and I went to go see the new Superman film, and we both came away with differing opinions on it. We thought it would be fun for each of us to put our reviews of the film in the same post so you can see how we got to where we are on this take on the character and the story. Warning: Spoilers are ahead.
If you like this “Two Takes” concept, let us know. We might do more. — JS
ATHENA SCALZI:
I love Superman. He is my favorite superhero, and I am always defending him against those who claim he is “boring.” Needless to say, I was extremely excited for Superman (2025), and had to go and see it on the big screen. I’m sad to report I didn’t really like it all that much. Though I’ve been seeing tons of high praise across the Internet, it was pretty mid in my book, so let’s talk about it. And, of course, here is your spoiler warning.
The first thing of note that this Superman movie does differently than most is that it begins at a time that Superman is already an established hero. This is not an origin story, this is a story in a world that already knows Superman and that he has been active in as a hero for years. While most people find this to be a refreshing take, and that they don’t need to see his origin story for the hundredth time, I can’t say I like the decision. I don’t hate it, but I really love origin stories. I like seeing Superman discover his powers, or having to learn to control them, or save people in his youth and having to keep it a secret. It’s a personal thing more than anything.
Right off the bat, I absolutely hate Lex Luthor’s ensemble of evil employees that are like, video-game-playing-“Gen-Z”-written-by-Gen-X-lackeys that are all like “yes!” and fist pump the air when they land a punch on Superman using their weird consoles. It’s cringe. They’re all cringe. Lex Luthor shouting out letters and numbers is cringe. Especially the line delivery for the exposition of “wow you really seem to know what Superman is going to do next,” and “Lex Luthor has spent the past three years studying all his fights and learning his moves so now he can predict what he will do next.” Great, thanks for that explanation, guys.
So, Clark goes to work at the Daily Planet, and this movie decides to include not only Jimmy Olsen, but Cat Grant, Steve Lombard, and Ron Troupe, as well. This feels like entirely too many players on the board for the reporter gang, as Cat, Steve, and Ron, get absolutely no meaningful screentime or characterization, and the only way you’d even really know who they are is if you’ve seen other Superman media such as My Adventures With Superman, where they are actual characters and serve a purpose. They felt so thrown in at the last minute and like an afterthought in this.
Of course, the real main reporter here is Lois Lane. Now here’s something that I like about the movie. I really love how Superman handled Lois and Clark’s relationship, especially the scene where she interviews him, and it starts out as sort of fun and playful, but quickly turns into a real and meaningful conflict that has a lasting impact on both of them and their relationship. The most important thing about this scene, though, is our insight into Superman’s morals and beliefs.
While Lois grills him about breaking laws, committing potentially devastating acts against a US allied nation, and threatening to cause someone bodily harm or worse, he can’t stop retorting with “people were going to die.” More and more passionately. People were going to die, and he had to stop it. No matter the laws, no matter how the US or the media would see it, he knew he had to stop this loss of life. He knew what was about to happen was wrong, and that was enough for him to act, whether or not it was legally correct.
Lois says the world is viewing him as a representative for the United States in this situation, and he claims he’s not representing anyone but himself, and doing good. Exactly. Because that’s what Superman does. He represents good, he does good. How he goes about doing it is largely questioned by the public, the government, even his girlfriend, but he knows in his heart he is doing good, and that’s what is most important to him. Above everything else, above even the law, he will do good.
I love that this interview scene caused a real fight between Lois and Clark. He doesn’t understand why she’s “being like this.” Why is she acting so against him when he saved people? How could what he did ever be construed as a bad thing? How could people possibly be mad at him for stopping a war? A country was about to be invaded, and he told the tanks to turn around. In what universe is he not a hero here? And how could anyone, especially this person he cares about so much and is supposed to like him, too, question him about his intentions, when his sole intention is to be good and help people. It’s truly a hard watch.
I really hate in Superman media when Superman is wanted by the law, turns himself in, and immediately gets handed over to the bad guys and gets locked up and tortured. It’s so predictable and so unfortunate. I truly didn’t understand how Luthor was even keeping Metamorpho under his control. Yes, Luthor had his son held hostage, but as we later see, when Superman breaks the glass and flies over to rescue his son, Metamorpho flies over right after he does using like a jet propulsion out of his lower body. Okay, so maybe he just wasn’t strong enough to break the glass himself? But later in the movie didn’t he form a giant hammer and smash some tanks? Kind of sounds like he could’ve smashed the glass and flown over to his kid and saved him at like, any point. I guess the only explanation is when he says he can’t hold his son while he changes forms, so I guess that’s the sole reason he needed Superman’s help in rescuing his son. Pretty weak sauce, though.
Anyways, Metamorpho and his son aren’t really the part I want to talk about in the pocket universe. The part I really want to look at is the death of Malik. Malik was a normal person who liked Superman, who even helped Superman one time. And Luthor made sure he paid the price. This scene is so incredibly tragic, and so good. Superman saves people, not gets them killed. And he certainly doesn’t just watch as they get killed. Except in this case, he has to. And it hurts him, deeply. David Corenswet portrayed Superman’s agony and pain perfectly in that scene. You just know he wishes it had been him instead.
Does anyone else just really dislike the Justice Gang? What a bunch of a-holes. I hate this Green Lantern, I hate how they portrayed Hawkgirl, and Mr. Terrific is fine. Again this is another example of too many characters on the board with not enough time to devote to getting to know them or really care about them. Plus, as is shown by Superman’s numerous attempts to mitigate damage, both to civilians, property, and the Kaiju itself, these jerks don’t give a hoot or a holler about collateral damage. Yes, collateral damage happens, but the Justice Gang is so reckless and headstrong that they just shoot first, worry about bodily harm to civilians later. I don’t find them funny, I just think they’re jerks.
And yes, they do “save the day” in the end, but I give them no praise for deciding to actually go be heroes when they were already proclaiming themselves as heroes. Wow, they saved people! Umm, yeah, that’s what they should have been doing anyways? Without needing Superman to convince them to go fight the good fight? Especially Green Lantern saying he only cares about protecting Earth from alien threats. My guy, why even bother protecting a planet from aliens if it’s going to be war-torn, unjust, and cruel? How ’bout you focus on Earth first and then fight the alien threats when they show up later to your awesome, peaceful, not terrible planet.
I also dislike the weird relationship between Jimmy Olsen and Luthor’s current companion, Eve. Eve is obsessed with Jimmy, and offers him information on Luthor and Superman if he agrees to go out with her. This whole relationship is played for laughs, but I find it very uncomfortable and unfortunate for Jimmy. He doesn’t like this girl, but makes her promises in order for her to help them. It doesn’t feel funny, it just feels wrong. Especially because he wants her information, but regards her as stupid and incompetent, and makes fun of her physical appearance. It just feels gross both directions.
Moving on, I also am not a fan of the rift that tears Metropolis in two. I think the rift is like, too much conflict. We have Luthor, Ultraman, the Engineer, the Raptors, and we have the war across the world, do we really need a rift tearing through the planet? It just feels like a bit much, and very silly that the way to fix it is to “hack the system and put in a code.” It feels half-baked.
In that same vein, I don’t think Superman should’ve been stuck in Metropolis fighting his clone, I think Superman should have actually been the hero to save Jarhanpur. Those kids were holding up the Superman flag as the Boravian army invaded, and they stood against the invaders shouting Superman! And who comes to save them? GREEN FUCKING LANTERN. This felt so unsatisfactory and like total BS. Yes, Superman is the one that “called them in” but come on! I don’t want to see Green Lantern flip off tanks, I want to see Superman shield children from bullets, his red cape flowing in the wind. This isn’t a Justice Gang movie! You’re telling me Big Blue is back home throwing his clone into a black hole? Talk about boring. I want to see him SAVE PEOPLE THAT BELIVE IN HIM!
Now, one thing I think this movie gets right is Luthor’s sick obsession with Superman. He is clearly un-fucking-well, and I think this movie and Nicholas Hoult’s portrayal of Luthor really nails that characterization aspect. Hoult’s ability to switch between a cool and collected demeanor, to an absolute madman spitting venom in every hate-filled word towards Superman is wildly impressive. He thinks he is a mastermind genius but really he’s just a crazed, sick individual. And he’s not really all that smart, just a rich, power-hungry, jealous man. Hits close to home, doesn’t it?
So, yeah. I didn’t really like this movie. Which is a shame because I think they nailed Superman’s morals, beliefs, his personality, the way he would interact with the world and with people. They absolutely killed it with Superman’s character. But that’s about it. A good Superman does not a good Superman movie make.
Overall, this movie was like a 5/10, very middling. I didn’t hate it but I don’t like it much, either. To be honest, I prefer Man of Steel. That’s right, I said it. I miss Henry Cavill, what can I say?
What did you think of Superman? What is your favorite Superman movie/media? Let me know in the comments, and have a great day!
-AMS
JOHN SCALZI:
There have been several live action Superman movies, going back to Christopher Reeve’s iconic portrayal in the 1978 film (and actually before then, as there was a 1948 serial starring Kirk Alyn, but I’m doing a Jedi hand wave on that for this conversation). Across these many films and actors who have essayed the character, it’s generally agreed upon that the ’78 film, and Reeve’s turn in the blue suit, are the best of the bunch. After watching the 2025 Superman, with David Corenswet as the lead character, Reeve and the ’78 film still remain on top. But! Now there’s a new film, and new actor, in second place.
The reason for this comes down to tone. Superman is fundamentally an optimistic character; he’s decent and kind and humble (as much as a ridiculously overpowered character can be), he puts others before himself, and he fights for truth, justice and the American Way — which is understood to be a positive thing in the Superman mythos, even if in the real world the American Way is often not in a great state. In D&D parlance, he’s true Lawful Good, in a world that keeps wanting to tip over into chaos, or alternately is pushed there via Lex Luthor or other bad actors.
The problem is that lawful good is — sorry — kind of inherently boring. “Fundamentally decent” characters have a high incidence of being a snooze. You have to support them with interesting side characters, interesting situations and, particularly, an interesting antagonist. If you can give your main character an actual personality, that’s a plus too, but you can get away with not doing that if everything else falls in line.
The ’78 Superman (directed by Richard Donner and with a murderer’s row of screenwriters including Oscar winners Mario Puzo and Robert Benton) nailed all of this. The script was light, humorous a lot of the time, but serious when it needed to be. The newsroom of the Daily Planet had a terrific Lois Lane (Margot Kidder) and Perry White (Jackie Cooper). The film’s Metropolis was lived in and alive. And, of course, Gene Hackman’s Lex Luthor is still the best superhero villain (with his own terrific supporting cast in Ned Beatty and Valerie Perrine), full of genial evil.
In the middle of all that worldbuilding and character work, all Christopher Reeve and his Superman had to do was be decent and kind, offer an occasional corny quip (“bad vibrations?”) and save the day. This is not to say Reeve didn’t have to act — you try selling decent and kind while everyone is chewing scenery around you. See how you do. It did mean the filmmakers gave Reeve the space and support to make his turn in the role iconic.
Contrast this with Bryan Singer’s rather ill-fated Superman Returns (2006). Brandon Routh had the look and the decency, but he didn’t have the support. Bryan Singer intentionally tried to ape Richard Donner’s vibe, but as a director he doesn’t have Donner’s lightness of touch, antic where Donner was comedic, and the script was underwhelming. Kate Bosworth’s Lois Lane wasn’t up to the task of being a foil, and Kevin Spacey’s Lex Luthor, smarmy though he was, didn’t gel. The whole affair was off, and everyone felt it.
I actually liked Zach Snyder’s darker and grittier take on the Superman mythos in Man of Steel (2013), because Snyder (and screenwriters David S. Goyer and Christopher Nolan) committed to the bit; Henry Cavill’s Superman was still decent, but the world around him was more dour and Superman darkened to match. Snyder’s problem would be that the only direction you can go from “dark and gritty” is “darker and gritter.” That’s fine for Batman, less so for Superman. Batman vs. Superman was a bummer when it came to Superman; Justice League was a slog.
For the 2025 Superman, James Gunn (who wrote as well as directed) hearkened back to the ’78 Superman vibe and plan, but unlike Bryan Singer, isn’t trying for a slavish continuation. Also unlike Singer, Gunn has an actual sense of humor. That sense of humor is not the same as the one you’ll find in the ’78 Superman — Gunn’s sense of humor is a lot more overt and rather more juvenile. Of all the things that you would call his vision of Superman, “sophisticated” isn’t one of them. But it does keep things light and moving quickly.
Gunn’s Superman, in the form of David Corenswet, matches his sensibility. Reeve’s Superman had a delivery that was dry, even if could be corny; Corenswet’s Superman, on the other hand, is basically an adorable lunk who means well. He’s not stupid! But he might not think enough steps ahead, and he might be in over his head. He’s the strongest person on the planet but can still get flustered by a very smart, very pretty woman (that would be Lois Lane, in the form of Rachel Brosnahan, who is terrific) who isn’t taking any crap from him. Superman is famously called a “boy scout” but this is the first Superman you could actually see being a Boy Scout, really proud of his all his badges and the fact that he made Eagle Scout without once having to resort to using his superpowers to do it.
(Over on Bluesky I noted that as an actor Corenswet reminded me less of any previous Superman actor and more of Brendan Fraser circa The Mummy and Blast From the Past; this was met by several “OH MY GOD YES”‘s, so I think I’m on to something here)
I like the Gunn/Corenswet version of Superman. I like that he’s decent and kind but still feeling his way in the world, and can be outmaneuvered because of that — and indeed that’s exactly what this iteration of Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult) is doing. This edition of Lex is a vainglorious billionaire who hates not being the alpha dude for the whole planet, and boy, doesn’t the idea of a billionaire weaponizing his insecurities feel a little too close to home at moment. Once again, this film has the second-best live action version of a character; Hoult isn’t going to beat Hackman as the definitive Lex Luthor — who could? — but his take is right for this particular world.
This particular world also has sunlight and color in it, which I really like, as well as probably more back story than any one single movie needs, which I am less enthused about. This is because Gunn is obliged to set up a whole new DC Cinematic Universe, this one subtitled “Gods and Monsters.” There’s criticism that this Superman is overstuffed, and the criticism is on point. I don’t know that it serves this film’s own story to jam in the “Justice Gang,” regardless of how much fun it is to point and laugh at Green Lantern Guy Gardner’s haircut (actor Nathan Fillion apparently insisted on it as it is canonical), or how much of a delightful surprise Edi Gathegi’s Mr. Terrific turns out to be (Isabela Merced’s Hawkgirl is given relatively little to do). And then there’s Krypto the dog, who is there as much for merchandising as plot. I get why Gunn did it, and, fine. It wouldn’t have hurt the film, as a film, to have focused more on Superman and his own supporting team.
With that said, this is the second-best Superman film for a reason. Overstuffed though it might be, it also hits the marks of making a good film with a fundamentally decent main character. The supporting cast ably supports. The antagonist viciously antagonizes. The worldbuilding is solid and mostly smart. The lightness and sense of humor pull us through. Is it a great film? No. But if simply being good is good enough for the character of Superman, it’s good enough for this story about him. James Gunn has put his stamp on the character and the universe, and I’m looking forward to seeing where both of them go from here.
Writers are in conversation with other writers, both the ones who are contemporary to them, and the ones who came before. In this Big Idea for The Dreaming of Man, author Nikoline Kaiser talks about what the takeaway is from these discussions, for this book as well as other things.
NIKOLINE KAISER:
I might be a writer, but I’d never claim to be a master of words. And while I feel I do have some sort of unique voice, made up of my experiences and values, there is no secret to the fact that I stand on the shoulders of giants. By this I mean that I borrow relentlessly from my favorite authors; as many a writer will tell you, reading is often the biggest source of inspiration you can find. And especially nowadays, with the near-oversaturation of tales available to us, giving a new spin to an old idea becomes a necessary go-to.
Here’s the thing though: writers have always been borrowing. Many fans of Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings have heard the story of how J.R.R. himself read the Shakespeare play Macbeth, and was very unsatisfied with how the “no man of woman born” line referred to a man who came into the world via caesarean section and not, you know, a woman. Here (or so the story goes) was born his idea for Eowyn, the warrior maid who disguises herself as a man to fight, fulfilling a similar prophecy from the trilogy. (Incidentally, his ire over the walking forest in Macbeth being soldiers disguising themselves with branches, and not an actual, moving forest, is what gave birth to his idea for the Ents. Tolkien apparently had a lot of beef with Shakespeare).
Growing up, Eowyn was one of my favorite characters. There is something very affirming about seeing a female character in the kind of role she has, especially for the time the novels were written in. Plenty has been written about the cross-dressing aspect of Eowyn and other characters like her. Playing with gender roles takes on a new meaning (or maybe at times an even older one) when reading with a modern lens, and when I started my own venture into writing, I quickly found that this was a source of constant ideas. Who are we when we crawl over the walls erected around us at birth and decide to do things not because of but despite or even without thought to, our gender?
Here’s another aspect of the type of fantasy Tolkien wrote (and the type he decidedly didn’t write) and the precursors Shakespeare and his contemporaries played with in, for example, Macbeth: prophecies. In modern times, a lot of derision has been levelled against the Chosen One archetype; the one hero (usually male, usually white) who is destined to defeat the evil of the land. Of course, he succeeds despite all odds. But those aren’t really the fun prophecies, are they? They aren’t much like the prophecies we know from older times, when the Sphinx warns that Oedipus will kill his father and marry his mother and then, by the very act of trying to avoid this, it ends up happening. It’s certainly not Macbeth in the eponymous play being told that “no man of woman born” can kill him and his end will only come when a whole forest grows legs and starts walking, only for a C-section baby grown into a vengeful man and an army with foliage on their heads to arrive and end his reign.
Those are the clever prophecies, the word-twisters, the djinni-in-a-bottle giving you everything you wished for, except you really, really shouldn’t have been wishing in the first place. They’re often self-fulfilling, because if the protagonist hadn’t reacted to the prophecy, they might never have created the circumstances to make it come true in the first place. It’s here that the “master of words” thing comes back, because if you say something in the right way, any sentence can hold both the venom and the antidote. Shakespeare (who was also heavily inspired by the stories of his lifetime – Macbeth was a real person, though the historical figure seems to have been a lot nicer than his literary counterpart) took the prophecy with a specific focus: “no man of woman born.” Tolkien took his focus elsewhere: “no man of woman born.” And in the gender euphoria of Eowyn, of growing older, of learning things about myself and the world, the words changed in my head too: “no man of woman born.”
There’s no mastery of words necessary for this idea to spring forth, and thank some kind of god for that, because I might have never written my story if there were. But if the giants before me swam in the ocean, I’m in the shallows on shore, the water pooling behind from the waves they created. Plucking out the words and emphasis that suits the ideas in my head – if I could tell people only one thing about writing, I’d say to dive into the waters of those that came before and see what wonders – or horrors – lie beyond the deep.
Hello on Wednesday! How are things going in the world of fic?
Did you write?
- Yes! - No! - Not yet!
If yes, what kind of writerly activity did you engage in? How do you feel about it? If no, what were the obstacles/situations that affected your writerly pursuits? What will you do differently tomorrow to get more writing done? If not yet, because the day hasn't gotten going yet, what kind of writing activity are you planning (or hoping) to accomplish?
We're on holiday in Portmeirion this week. It was so hot over the weekend that even I was starting to wilt a little and a lot of ice cream has been eaten. We've been for a few gentle walks around the woods here and said hello to the Bristol Colonnade:
This was originally the facade of the bath house at Arnos Court in Bristol. Arnos Court is just down the hill from our home, so this would have been part of the view when our late 1920's house was first built. The bath house was damaged by bombs in the Second World War and was scheduled for demolition by the council in the late 1950s but Clough William-Ellis, the architect of Portmeirion came to the rescue and transported the colonnade to the village and had it rebuilt there.
We'd planned an expedition today but the temperature dropped dramatically overnight and the forecast rain and windy was extremely rainy and extremely windy, so we decided to stay relatively local. We got a takeaway lunch from the extremely nice street food kiosk in the village. The weather was so bad that the usual queue was completely absent and the only other customer was a small bedraggled blue tit that was determinedly eating the contents of a mayo packet.
This afternoon we went out to Porthmadog and strolled up and down the high street and visited the maritime museum and the local bookshop. I've been trying to learn Welsh so I picked up a Welsh grammar book and a kids book in Welsh to see if I could translate any of it. The cashier rang everything up, thanked me for the purchase, and I automatically said thank you back while I was putting my purse away. It wasn't until we left the shop that battlehamster said I'd got a big smile from the cashier because her last sentence had been in Welsh and my thank you had been in Welsh too. So, I guess that despite the brain fog, I've managed to pick up something from Duolingo. Which is encouraging.
When author Josh Rountree’s story just wasn’t quite working, he decided to change his perspective. Literally. Travel back in time in the Big Idea for his newest novel, The Unkillable Frank Lightning, and see how switching things up narratively ended up being the solution to his problem.
JOSH ROUNTREE:
Well, I’m knee deep in monsters now, aren’t I?
A lot of my Big Ideas these days seem to involve them. For a while now I’ve been working on a series of monster stories set in long ago Texas. I’ve tackled werewolves and snake-headed harvest gods. Vengeful mermaids and The Creature from the Black Lagoon. Now I’ve worked my way up to one of the greatest monsters of all time.
Frankenstein! (Cue lightning strike.)
Or Frankenstein’s monster, I guess.
My Big Idea for The Unkillable Frank Lightning was to tell a version of the Frankenstein story, set in the Old West. I had plenty I wanted to say about death. How breaking the fundamental laws of nature to bring a person back to life would be a really bad idea, with consequences that would reach far beyond the reanimated corpse and those responsible for his resurrection. Frank Lightning is not the only character in this story who has cheated death, and all carry that around like a weight on their souls. And I wanted to say a lot about the mythology of the Old West. How wild west shows and Hollywood movies have sold us an often sanitized version of the period, that centers the wrong heroes.
But also? I wanted to see my monster go on a rampage. I wanted to see what would happen when an unkillable person found himself in a gunfight. I wanted black magic and secret occult orders and townspeople with torches.
I wanted my monster to tell us his story.
But of course, the Big Idea doesn’t always unfold the way a writer expects it to. And the character you think is going to be at the center of it all isn’t always the voice that comes alive and demands to be heard. I worked several months, trying to tell this story through the monster’s point of view, and eventually realized it just wasn’t working. I tried alternating points of view, trying to tell the story through the eyes of various characters. But one voice, that of Catherine Coldbridge, spoke louder than all the rest. And I realized she was my protagonist. She was the character to tell this story.
Catherine is my “mad scientist” in this tale. My Dr. Frankenstein stand-in. She’s a doctor in the 1870’s, and she’s a member of an occult order called the Three Rose Temple. Catherine is an orphan, and when she loses her husband too, it causes her to make one terrible decision that will haunt her for decades.
Catherine is terribly flawed, and desperate to make amends. She is determined and practical and willing to forgive anyone but herself. She is an exceptionally strong woman who has, for a time, given up on her life and let the world ruin her. But as she beings to tell her story, Catherine is finally beginning to emerge from that sorry state, and planning to take control again. Catherine is endlessly fascinating to me, and as soon as she started telling the tale, it poured out of her, and it poured out of me, and I knew we were in this together.
Catherine Coldbridge is not our typical pulp western hero. But who needs more cowboys in white hats? Who needs another hard man with a thousand-yard stare to ride in and save the day?
I’ve been making more charcuterie boards than usual lately, and I’d like to think practice makes fairly decent, so I’d like to show y’all some of my recent spreads I’ve done for gatherings and parties and whatnot. I usually post them on Instagram and Bluesky, but just in case you missed them, you can get your fix right here and now!
For the 4th of July I was in Texas, and my friend hosted a party, for which I volunteered to supply some snackage for. Here’s the charcuterie board:
For this board, I used prosciutto, salami, Munster, Kerrygold aged cheddar, Brie, chimichurri gouda, fig and honey goat cheese, candied pecans, Castelvetrano olives, Mike’s Hot Honey, Honeycomb, and cherries. Everything on there except the pecans I picked up at H.E.B.
This was the rest of what I served:
While the salsa and guac I bought pre-made from H.E.B., I did assemble the watermelon, feta, and mint salad and drizzled it with honey, and put together the caprese skewers with balsamic glaze. I honestly think this turned out really well! I was very happy with my summery salad and light bites.
Just a few days ago I got my AppyHour Box (which I have regrettably not been doing posts over lately!) and decided to make a little board for my dad and his friend that was visiting from out of town.
This board consisted of a Togarashi cheese, an aged gouda, a smoked goat cheese, dried cherries, coppa, and prosciutto (I think it was a Calabrian Chili prosciutto?). The two jams I forgot to take the lids off of are a caramelized pear and honey spread, and a raspberry hibiscus jam. I thought this was a cute little lunch for my dad and his guest, and I’m glad the enjoyed it.
Finally, this past weekend, I hosted a friend’s baby shower at the church. She said she expected around fifty people to attend, and I can say with confidence I’ve never tried to make a spread for that many people before. I was definitely intimidated, but I was determined to make an approachable spread that would appeal to the masses and not spend hundreds of dollars doing it.
I didn’t capture everything, but here’s the gist of how it turned out:
There was also cucumbers, bell peppers, baby carrots, celery, cherry tomatoes, dill dip, salsa, tortilla chips, garden vegetable entertainment crackers, fig and sesame crisps, honey mustard mini pretzels, rosemary flatbread crackers, coconut macaroons, chocolate covered pretzels, chocolate covered shortbread cookies, and chocolate covered Belgian waffle cookies.
Other than the tortilla chips, whole grain mustard, fig spread, rosemary almonds, and chocolate covered pretzels, I bought everything at Aldi, and despite buying doubles if not three of absolutely everything I listed, my total came out to $220. I was able to make this huge spread and refill it when it got low and feed 50 guests for just over $200. Who knew Aldi was so cool?! I spent about fifty bucks more than that on my spread for the Texas party, and that was only to feed about ten people.
The best thing on the spread from Aldi was the honey mustard mini pretzels, or the chocolate covered waffle cookies. I am definitely going to be stopping at Aldi more often for some surprisingly cheap and yummy treats.
What item looks the best to you? What’s your go-to cheese to serve for entertaining guests? Am I the only one who didn’t realize how neat Aldi was? Let me know in the comments, and have a great day!
Author Marie Vibbert is back on the blog today with a fresh new novel that’s bigger and badder than ever. Dive into her Hellcats universe once more and see the world from an all new perspective in Andrei and the Hellcats.
MARIE VIBBERT:
Why are all sex robots depicted as miserable? Wouldn’t they just program them to be really horny? Thus, I created the character of Andrei: a sex-positive sex robot who loves his job, and humans. All the humans. When Galactic Hellcats was released in 2021, people responded warmly to this minor character, and when I asked, “What do you want in a sequel?” one of the top responses was, “More Andrei! And let him have sex! Why do you have two sex bots in this book and no one gets past second base?”
Why? Because my dad might read this book! I didn’t say that. I blushed and affirmed I would try harder in the sequel to be as uninhibited as Andrei.
And sequel time has come! My first goal was a book that wouldn’t require reading the previous one, and so Andrei and the Hellcats is from Andrei’s perspective, as a relative outsider. As I drafted, I realized that my little idea about sex robot preferences led into a bigger idea: how do we form our moral preferences? Can robots (or AI) have a conscious choice in their morality? What does that say about morality itself?
I know, that sounds heavy for a book about a sex robot enlisting a space biker gang to rescue his sister from an evil queen, but come drop down this mental rabbit hole with me.
As I fleshed out Andrei’s character to take center stage, I had to confront aspects of his life, personality, and preferences. He likes sex, a lot. Check. So why does he work as a hospitality manager at a space station instead of enjoying an all he can shag buffet at a brothel? Did he have a choice, or was he built for this role? Was he hired or purchased?
All of these questions funnel down into the intersection of consent and capitalism. Andrei cares a lot about consent in sex; he has whole libraries of code for it. He recognizes hesitation, the body language of distress and coercion. “I don’t enjoy inflicting harm,” he laments at one point, “I’m really only comfortable when there are safe words.” Yet he has never examined his own consent to play the role assigned to him, until the evil queen comes along and kidnaps him and his sister. He thinks Queen Jasmine of Ratana is simply roleplaying “Evil Queen and the mindless sexbot” until after their tryst, when she waves her hand and says “deactivate yourself.” Through her words and actions she makes it clear she doesn’t think Andrei is self-aware, and he realizes she felt that way the entire time they were fooling around. This prompts a moral crisis: have other clients of his mistaken play for reality? Does he need to update his most sacred algorithms?
Poor Andrei! What is sapience? What is consent? I wanted to have him follow this rabbit hole to money as a motivation, anti-capitalist gal that I am. To that end, I had this fun idea to have him in conflict with the Hellcats. They are, to put it mildly, uninterested in property rights, especially kleptomaniac Ki. Wouldn’t it be a hoot if, having finally enlisted the gang, he’d interrupt the ensuing caper with, “Excuse me, does that belong to you? Put it back.”
To quote Ki, “Ugh, it’s like taking my social worker on a heist!”
Nothing makes a plot outline happier than juicy, theme-relevant complications! But I found the right opening for my little gag difficult to find, and part of that was, well, I was already forcing Andrei to confront his programming through every step of the plot. First the evil queen, then I put him on his own on a strange planet with nothing but his keen fashion sense and gift of gab. How can he find where they’ve taken her? How can he begin to save her? He has no local currency and has to contemplate breaking his programmed reverence for property rights to even get to a point where he can start searching in earnest. He wonders why he can’t bring himself to steal what he needs, why he was programmed to be a good little capitalist. “Were we designed to desire things to keep us working? Could we learn to do without designer clothes and porn subscriptions?”
By the time he gets to the Hellcats, he’s ready to hear Ki out when she takes it upon herself to turn him to the lawless side of the force. He has already seen that laws can be unjust; the queen’s law declares him and his sister property! When Ki compares hoarding money to hoarding kisses, Andrei accepts that ownership is not as important as good snogs… or the safety of sapient beings.
As I was writing, I found myself a little envious of Andrei. He can consciously edit his moral programming when he discovers a bias in it, while I make the same gaffs nine or ten thousand times before I learn. Well, so do the Hellcats. They have those relationship arcs to get through, all that learning what and who to prioritize. So while he learns from them, Andrei gets to drop some truth bombs in return. “Darling, I get it. When you and your brother left the factory… I mean, when you were born, your settings were the same…. Then you were sent out into the world, and your programs updated.”
Ninety percent of writing a novel is making decisions. Where could I fit in my little anti-theft Andrei gaff? Well, I couldn’t. Then I realized he still cared about the rule of law. Ah ha! The confrontation now comes not from stealing, but from breaking and entering, and I got to use all the snarky lines I had daydreamed.
Andrei sighs, “Humans take so long to make decisions! How did they ever get around to inventing us?”
(… she wrote, thinking about her own plot outlining.)
That accomplished, I was free to make everything worse! Bwah ha ha. Have to push all those moral lessons harder with some external examples, right? So they all get captured in a forced labor camp. It’s dark. I found myself pausing on a scene where an explosive implant takes out a guy’s arm because sometimes they just go off and thinking, “Um, self? Is this still a lighthearted space romp?” And lo, the moral quandary has come home: the choices I make as an author can reflect my own morality (or lack thereof.)
I couldn’t just have them blow up their way out of there, leaving the other slaves behind. Crap. I had to go back and change the entire ending heist to reflect my values of collective action. Andrei, I hope, would be proud.
Andrei gets through the plot, the Hellcats get through the plot, and the author gets through the plot: each a little wiser for it.
The book should be available wherever books are sold. Have your local independent bookstore order it, or your library!
I like to imagine that this isn't the first time Jeremy has noticed the new room, but that he refused to enter while Hope was sleeping in there.
My experience with cats is that, if an area that's usually closed is left open, they'll want to check that area out and sniff around (I say "area" and not "room" because I'm including things like closets and cabinets).
As such, for this to not have happened sooner, I insist it MUST be because he was previously hesitant to enter while a stranger was in the room. A sleeping stranger, perhaps, but all the same.
A lack of a plan coming together anyway
Past me: "Ha! Four panels! That'll be easy!"
More recent me: "Oh. Right. Detailed backgrounds, and intentionally zoomed out a bit. Eep."
To be fair to, and harsh on, myself, I made this page more difficult than it needed to be by not planning out, and labeling, how everything was layered better. I work from premade templates, and normally, I don't really need to label the layers beyond the default, make a bunch of new layers, etc.
With a page like this, however, I absolutely should have made a customized plan, and labeled things appropriately. I don't know if it would have saved a lot of time, but I imagine it would have saved some, and even if it didn't, it would have made the whole thing less stressful.
I'm currently halfway through a very much needed two week holiday and I think I've finally unwound enough from assorted work and family stress to realise how tired I am. We spent last week having a gentle staycation at home.
On Monday we went to Slimbridge Wetlands Centre and ambled around admiring the birds:
There were a truly surprising number of flamingos there:
...and a very odd looking chicken. Not sure what breed that one was:
We pottered out to Weston Super Mare on Wednesday to visit the tiny museum there as they currently have a Paul Kidby Discworld exhibtion. I spent quite a lot of time giggling at the descriptions and I was not the only visitor doing that. The musuem has some exhibition space downstairs and a very nice cafe and the permanent town history exhibits are upstairs. I'm still a little confused about this sign though:
Hello on Sunday! What kind of a writing day has it been so far today -- or if today hasn't gotten going yet, how did you fare yesterday?
- I thought about my fic once or twice - I wrote - I did some planning and/or outlining - I did research and/or canon review - I edited - I've sent my fic off to my beta - I posted today! - I'm taking a break - I did something else that I'll talk about in a comment
Sunday Discussion: It's a new writing week, and that means a fresh start. Maybe you had a great writing week last week, or maybe last week wasn't the greatest for getting writing things done -- what kind of goals do you have for keeping up your momentum or starting off fresh this week?
New Home (571 words) by Anonymous Chapters: 1/1 Fandom: The Aristocats (1970) Rating: General Audiences Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply Relationships: Duchess/Thomas O'Malley, Berlioz & Marie & Toulouse (Disney: Aristocats) Characters: Thomas O'Malley, Duchess (Disney: Aristocats), Berlioz (Disney), Marie (Disney: Aristocats), Toulouse (Disney) Additional Tags: Fluff, Domestic Fluff, Character Study, of sorts Summary:
So, if I want to buy a 100 Grand candy bar (or an Almond Joy, or a Heath Bar, or whatever), and I go to the candy aisle in the local gas station, or the one in the IGA, the candy bar will cost about two bucks, give or take. But! If I go to the local dollar store to buy the same brand of candy, packaged as four to six “fun sized” individually wrapped bars, each of these packages are $1.25, or $5 if I buy five. The aggregate amount of candy by weight is pretty much the same as if I bought the full-sized candy bar, but because they are packaged differently, it costs half as much. Does this make sense? No! It does not! I mean yes, I understand that one is positioned as an impulse buy and one is not, I do understand the psychology of the supermarket. I get it, truly I do. But it still boggles my mind.
Likewise if I go to the store to buy a 12-pack of Coke Zero, it will be somewhere between $8 and $10, but if Krissy goes to Kroger on a particular day and shows them her Kroger card (or whatever) then she can get the “buy two, get three free” discount, which again means the actual cost of the 12-pack is 40% of what its usual cost is. It works similarly for lots of other things, including things that are not junk food or drink.
“Congratulations, Scalzi, you’ve discovered coupons,” I hear you say. Look, I’m not saying any of this is new. But it does seem to me the variance in pricing is more significant now than it was before. I’m not exactly what you would call a price-sensitive individual these days, but I still finally broke down and got myself a CVS card because the difference in cost between having that card, and not, was high enough that my brain rebelled against needlessly spending that much more.
(Yes, I’m aware that CVS, Kroger, et al are data farming what I purchase. As a practical matter, I don’t really care if CVS learns I’m buying Doritos; they were tracking the UPC when I went to check out anyway. And as a general matter I’m not purchasing anything in a supermarket or pharmacy that I want to hide from data crunching.)
I know this is a bit of an aimless rant, but I think what I’m really getting at is that the answer to the question “why are things so expensive right now” really is “because fuck you, that’s why.” That candy bar quite evidently doesn’t need to be $2; that 12-pack of soda doesn’t need to be $8, and there are a lot of people who can’t afford the clearly arbitrary high prices that things have, who have to pay them anyway. It’s annoying for me, but for someone else it might mean skipping a meal or two, or more, here and there. It doesn’t seem fair, and it doesn’t seem right.
It is NOT required reading for this story arc, BUT! They're referencing a canon event from the EGSNP storyline Double Date. An inevitable "wait, what" moment will prompt elaboration at some point.
Though the EGSNP story is there, as is the specific moment:
This sort of thing is why I'm more hesitant to have canon EGSNP storylines of significance, though this sort of "it happened in a side story" does come up sometimes in a lot of series, but it can make me nervous.
Anyway, it's been at least a week in-universe since Catalina had to be saved by convoluted magickery. That's genuinely not super critical information, I just know someone somewhere will wonder. That does mean it took quite a while for these four to finally go on a double-date after Rhoda "suggested" it, but to my mind, that's a realistic thing that happens with people.
"We should do this thing!"
—One million years later—
"We're doing the thing!"
Maybe I just know a lot of procrastinators and socially awkward people, but it feels legit to me.
Names!
It was only after I had finished a LOT of this page when I realized that, even after previous pages of making sure names got used, not a single name was used on this page.
Not wanting to redo a bunch of it, I decided to resort to the name narration labels.
Though, now that I think of it, I didn't due that with Ellen and Elliot in the last page...
BAH! I'm making sure people remember what Lucy's name is. If people forget Ellen and Elliot's names, or are jumping in mid-story, that's just going to be a thing for now. Besides, they've got flightless winged elephants to think about.
Tiredness and distractions (non-comic commentary)
This page was delayed due to me not feeling well, mostly due to tiredness.
I think one reason for that is that I simply haven't been allowing myself actual rest for months now. I've been taking breaks, but I've always been doing something. There's always background noise, there's always browsing social stuff, looking up things... I haven't been properly disconnecting from constant distraction for a while now, so even my "resting" hasn't really been proper resting.
If there's constant input, that's just more and more for the mind to process. I believe this results in a mental backlog and increases stress, which pretty much affects everything. Time needs to be taken without so much input.
This is something I've believed for a while, and I was working on reducing constant distractions and background noise.
After I had to take a break a while back due to personal tragedy, however, I felt like I needed those distractions. It became habit again.
I'm writing this in part because maybe it will help someone else, but also because sharing this sort of thing makes me feel a greater obligation to do better. Is it good to rely on perceived social pressure for such a thing? I don't know, but humans are social creatures. Maybe that's just how we roll sometimes.
When you see a possibly terrifying mythical creature, is your first thought, I’m totally gonna pet that? If so, then Sara Omer, author of The Gryphon King, might have something in common with you.
SARA OMER:
At its core, The Gryphon King is about a horse girl on a quest for vengeance versus a man with cat-related PTSD. But before I can get into the infernal horse and lion biology at play, I have to gush about the monster-riding story more generally.
Just as children wish for puppies, children reading fantasy books wish for dragons. The unbreakable bonds between fire-breathing beasts and reluctant heroes populate epic fantasy stories, but if giant flying lizards aren’t your style, there’s any number of mythic monsters that might be mountable (monster romance implications of that statement aside). I love a dragonrider story as much as the next person, probably more than most people, but there’s a whole ecosystem of underutilized fantastic monsters out there that deserve some time in the spotlight. In the empire of Dumakra in The Gryphon King, there is at least one stable full of flying horses that didn’t ask to be ridden into battle or form lifelong bonds with power-hungry morally gray disaster princesses, but we can’t always fight the fate we’re dealt.
Growing up, having my own horse was as much a fantasy as having my own dragon, but I like to think I lived a tangential horse girl experience. I wasn’t yet in kindergarten when I learned to ride horses, taught by the grandfatherly carriage driver Mr. “Grandpa” Clint, who drove his carriage around the town square. After learning how to drive a carriage at an age that was definitely not road legal (to the chagrin of many other children), Grandpa Clint taught me how to ride a horse at his stable. The horse for the job was an ancient old white gelding living a life of comfort in retirement, and who I enthusiastically urged to a flying gallop my first time on the trail. I had a wonderful time as my mom and Mr. Clint raced after, concerned I would be terrified or die, probably. Surprise, I lived. I think everyone should experience that exhilaration, and a few hundred feet off the ground while you’re at it.
I had a formidable collection (army) of Breyer horses, although unlike Nohra in The Gryphon King, I didn’t grow up with an imperial stable. But some family friends had their own horses and boarded them nearby. Sometimes I would get to go ride or hang out at the stable and in the pastures. Rambo, their stubborn paint gelding, was barely tall enough to even be considered a horse rather than a pony, and I vividly remember a time he got kicked, presumably for being an asshole, and the bloody branding of the hoof that slowly healed. For this and other reasons, I’m convinced every horse is a little like a dragon.
There are multiple breeds of mythic horses I added to the bestiary that is The Gryphon King. Because why stop at sky horse when you can have water horse? And when I really got to thinking about the biology of pegasuses, I wanted to explore their avian side. What better way to celebrate the incredible Eurasian horses and the birds of prey in the region than combine them into one omnivorous monster that has an appetite for blood? As if horses weren’t already dangerous enough, now they really, really want to eat your fingers and the barn cats. And—oh, look—the battlefield became good grazing once the fighting’s quieted down. Really, pegasuses are a little terrifying, and they’re not even the most threatening strain of horse in Dumakra.
The moral is that if you make a bird big enough, humans begin to look like the small animals scurrying through the tall grass, evading tooth and talon. And what’s more terrifying than horse-eagle? Lion eagle.
I have utmost respect for anyone who can make a big cat with a massive wingspan seem docile and friendly; I just think, considering the injuries a falconer could incur and compounding those with what might befall your average lion tamer, you should have to sign a few release waivers to approach a gryphon.
Maybe I made all my animals ferocious because nature is ferocious and dangerous, and when people play at power, they don’t come close to the might of beasts. But their actions have often irreparable impacts on nature nonetheless.
Fear and respect can coexist. Add a little human curiosity, and I would never fault anyone who decided to ride a murder horse. The Gryphon King is for the readers who would go out of their way to pet a man-eating monster, who would risk it all to bond with a creature that could kill them a few different ways on purpose or by accident—I’m a little scared for your wellbeing, but I respect the drive and share the dream.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
senmut![[syndicated profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/feed.png){kind=small}
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
