Writing Research: Good Characters

For me, the best part of writing is getting into other character's heads and working out what makes them tick. It can be really cathartic to go through someone else's experiences and how they deal (or don't deal) with the problems they encounter. But for some people, creating characters can be a really big hurdle, and there are a few different ways to deal with this.

One that works for many people is planning out their characters backgrounds, details, likes and dislikes, etc. on a character planning sheet. This can be basic details or really in depth. You can use a pre-existing template (easily found with a quick search) or make your own. This can work very well when you have a lot of characters to keep a track of.

I find this doesn't work too well for me, and can often serve as a distraction to actually writing. Now, I tend to do this only for secondary characters, who don't necessarily need a detailed back-story or motivations, but just need to be kept consistent.

My preferred method for developing characters is through writing itself. Some of the early pieces might never make it into the finished piece, but for me, it's the most useful way of getting inside the heads of my characters and working out what makes them tick. Generally I'll be thinking about a character's childhood, or the moment that pushes them to begin their story, or an isolated incident that makes them reflect on or change who they are.

The most frustrating character I have ever had to write was Talli, the protagonist in a project I started for ScriptFrenzy way back in 2011. No matter what I tried, she seemed so boring and lacklustre compared to literally everyone else (including minor characters). While I finished the plot, she still seemed undeveloped and unmotivated, even as she was in the heart of it.

So, what did I do? Essentially, I took a break from her. I developed more of the backstory and followed around the antagonists and worked out what made them and this world tick. I wrote about how and why the events of the story took place, from other people's viewpoints. I worked out some of the more complex entanglements of the plot - information that Talli wasn't privy to. It took me four years to eventually getting back into her head and rewriting the events that she was part of.

But when I finally got there, something clicked for me. Instead of Talli being a character that this 'had to happen to', she became more of a driving force in her own story. Instead of passively reacting to events, she started actively trying to effect and change what was happening to her. By knowing more about why things were happening, and what motivations everyone else had, I had more freedom for her to push against these forces.

Another factor, for me, is that Talli was a character who was meant to be, for lack of a better word, average. The idea meant that she needed to be surrounded by forces that were more powerful than her, and trapped in a seemingly helpless situation that she could eventually triumph over. I strongly believe that back when I started the project, I simply didn't have enough experience to write that in a compelling way, but over time, having experienced similar things and honing my craft, I have learnt how to approach the humanity in 'normal' characters.

So, for writers in similar situations, I would advise trying to come at the world from a different angle. Work out what compels you about this idea, and what different perspectives you can find on it. But don't worry if things don't magically fall into place. Some stories simply don't want to be written now, or not by the person you currently are. Give it time, work on something new, and it will be waiting when you are ready for it.

A Guide to Going to University in London

As my fiancée is currently looking at coming over to London to study as an overseas student, I wanted to write a little something about what to expect from London as a student, and things new students can do to maximise their time here.

Bear in mind that rent will be high. While you might be staying in halls for the first year of your course, it's unlikely that you will have that for the entire course, and renting in the area can often be a similar or lower price than university run halls. The ideal situation is to find a few friends to rent with and split a larger house/apartment between you, saving money over a one bedroom flat and giving you some support and friendship at home.

Travel is also expensive. For most people, public transport will be the best way to get around, and a prepaid Oyster card will be the cheapest way of using the city's buses, trains and underground network. Depending on how far away from campus you are, consider investing in a pass for your Oyster card - not only will you know you can travel to class every day without wondering if it is topped up or not, but if you want to explore the city or pick up a job, it's a good option to save some money.

Check out all the free things! By which, I mean that there is a vibrant museum culture in the city, and all the larger museums (and some of the smaller ones) are free to enter. If you are studying the arts or history, they're invaluable sources of research, too. They can be lovely places to enjoy the culture, out of the loud and crowded streets. Midweek is a great time to go to avoid lots of tourists (unless you're unlucky enough to encounter a school trip.

Do socialise and check out the nightlife! This one might need no prompting for a lot of people, but you should definitely seek to find friends within your course and the wider university. Not only will it make university more fun and a good support network to have when things get hectic, but this might be the last time in your life that you have to socialise outside of a 'professional' setting. It's so much harder to meet new people after university, so take the opportunity. Don't feel pressured to drink, either - any pub or club will be happy to serve you a soft drink or juice instead of alcohol. There are many valid reasons for not drinking - religion, mental and physical health, not wanting to get drunk outside of a safe area or simply not liking the way alcohol makes you feel. Do what you want to do, and if anyone gives you a hard time over it, they probably aren't the friends you wanted to make.

Consider picking up a part time job. This depends on whether you can handle the workload of your course and still spare the time to work, but if you can, it's a good extra stream of income, gives you experience working and you have a set of colleagues outside of university to socialise with. If you aren't particularly hurting for money, I would suggest finding an internship or work placement scheme in your field of study - in most fields, just being a graduate is not enough to get you a job right away, but experience and knowing people in the industry will help you a lot to get a foot in the door.

Explore London. There is so much to the city beyond the famous sights and tourism-fuelled areas. Try looking up Time Out's suggestions on things to do and places to go. Try tiny little cafés for a drink sometime. Visit the markets. Wander around in one of the many parks.  Remember that the only one accountable for your time is you. You can definitely go out to the 24-hour supermarket for icecream at 3am. Or watch the sunrise from Tower Bridge. Feed the ducks in Regent's Park. You could even catch a train out to the countryside or the sea for a change of pace.

Try taking your essays and studying outside. Chances are, you have a pretty nice setup at your place - Internet on tap, films and games and books galore...pretty much any distraction you want, you can have. Which is why you might want to consider writing essays and studying for exams outside of your place. If it's nice weather, try a park. If not, a cafe or library. The change of pace and the limited access to distractions can be a massive help for actually getting work done. If nothing else, using the promise of a good drink or a treat to motivate you might help!

If you have any advice, comments or questions about going to university (within London or within the UK in general), please leave them below!

Christmas Greetings

It's that time of year again, where frenzied buying and sales become the normal course of affairs in the run up to Christmas. Many people have started early, but in case you are yet to do your Christmas shopping, please bear this in mind: retail workers are people, too.

Everyone, from the person stocking and arranging displays to the till worker selling you your items and the barista serving you your drink after a long day; they are all worthy of your respect. They, like you, are working a job they don't necessarily like in order to pay the bills.

If you've had a long day of frantically buying gifts for everyone in your life, and you feel a bit weary and snappish, please remember that a single day for any of these positions typically lasts eight hours. Eight hours of not being allowed to sit down or rest. Eight hours dealing with the tired and stressed shoppers. Eight hours of the same repetitive phrases and motions. And then they have to do it all over again the following day. For about two months. Then they have to gear up for a month of post-Christmas cleanup and sales.

They are probably only just getting minimum wage, or a little over, to deal with all of this, too. You're likely ringing up more money with one transaction than they will get per day of dealing with this nightmare. They often can't guarantee which days (if any) they'll have free in the run up to Christmas. They might only have a couple of days off over the entire Christmas period. They may not be able to visit family however much they want to.

Trust me, no one hates Christmas more than people working in the retail sector. So before you complain about queues or some tiny imperfection that you wish to rant and rave about in the hopes of some small extra management may be able to give you for the inconvenience, consider just not doing it. It saves you time and effort, it saves people from literally lying to your face in order to placate you, and it just makes things generally more pleasant for workers, other shoppers and ultimately, yourself.

Next time you're out, try saying please and thank you, even when you feel really tired/stressed/hungry/whatever. The gratitude you will get for basic human decency might just be the pick me up you need.

Writing Research: How to Write Fight Scenes

As a writer, I'd consider my biggest weakness to be fight scenes, and I know I'm not the only one. It's one of the reasons I like to write scripts and screenplays, where you can describe the fight itself in a couple of lines, and leave the detailed scuffle up to the storyboard artists, directors and cinematographers as and when it's needed. However, as I write short stories and novels, too, it is a necessary part of what I do. So this post is a bit of a brief how to, for myself and other writers out there who struggle with this.

First of all, the basics of sentence structure. This is vital. Short, sharp sentences give the immediate feel of every impact, whereas longer, bloated sentences will drag out the action. At best, sentence structure will serve to enhance a fight scene, but at worst, it will confuse and disorient the reader.

Research is a must. To make your universe credible, it must follow it's own internal logic. If swords are used, research different types of swords and the styles of combat they are used in. If a character has trained with a specific type of weapon, improvising with a different weapon will put them at a disadvantage. If they have sustained injuries, that will also impact the fight. If magic is a force, what are the rules around it and how easy/difficult is it to wield in a combat situation?

A tavern brawl will be very different to a duel. The brawl will be chaotic, people are unlikely to be seasoned fighters, there will be little to no concept of 'fair' fighting. People might not know the initial cause, but stuck in the middle of the fray, they have no choice to fight back to escape or survive. In a duel, the fight will likely be more organised, with a form of judge ensuring some form of rules. The stakes will be more personal, and more complex than simply 'fighting to survive'.

Every fight should feel unique and different. You wouldn't repeat the same section of dialogue for no reason, so why should you write the same type of fight scene twice? What would be the point?

Different characters will respond differently to battle. The character who is willing to survive at any cost would have no qualms taking the easiest route out of a fight, even if that is to avoid it completely. The character who values personal honour over pragmatism may rush into ridiculous situations without really considering the outcome of their actions.

Do not disorient the reader. Fight scenes can easily become a blur and make it difficult to work out what exactly is going on. Many readers will skip them if they become too challenging to follow. Make sure that the fight is easy to read.

Alternatively, consider deliberately making it disorienting. Battle can be overwhelming, especially if the characters aren't trained for combat. Reflect that in the characters. Make them confused. What are the consequences? Injury? Losing a character or important item behind in the chaos?

Above all, practise. If you are aware that fight scenes are a weakness for you, go out of your way to write a few fight scenes. Writing, like any art, is a craft you hone over time and hours of practise. There's no shame in admitting that this element of your craft needs more work.

A few extra resources for additional reading:

Vary your sentence length to make your writing more interesting: A good primer on how and why to vary sentence length with some specific examples in both text and audio, talking about the musicality of the written word.
Here's how to write a damn good fight scene: More about the specifics of language used in a fight scene and specific techniques to try out.
Writing Fight Scenes: Specifically for fantasy writers, and covers a little bit of everything, including suspense and build-up before the fight has truly begun and how to develop characters through fight scenes.
5 Essential Tips for Writing Killer Fight Scenes: More about the motivations behind specific fight scenes - understanding why they are (or aren't!) necessary for your plot is the first step to tackling them.

MCM Expo: The Good and the Bad

I've been going to MCM London for about 6 years now. It's a biannual comic, video game and manga/anime convention in the heart of London's docklands. I've worked there as a member of staff on stalls and attended as a regular fan, amateur photographer and cosplayer. It's a couple of bright spots in my year, and one of the few times I really make the effort to get out there and be sociable.

In terms of sheer size, it's the biggest convention in the UK in the number of attendees - and it keeps growing every year! The last con in October 2015 boasted 130,560 con goers, in comparison to May 2015's 122,600. This growth in numbers is fairly typical of MCM, and as the expo expands in terms of contributors, stall holders and guests, it's draw only increases.

 

With such a large community, some of whom have been attending year after year, you are always bound to find someone with similar interests to you. Cosplay has always been an integral part of the event, from amateurs simply displaying their love of a franchise or character to professional cosplayers competing in EuroCosplay. It's common to see people travel to the event in cosplay over the weekend, sometimes leading to very amusing sights on public transport. It's not uncommon to see zombies on the Tube, trolls on the buses and Stormtroopers on the DLR!

 

Of course, the draw of MCM isn't wholly about community, although that is a large part of it. Stalls boast hard to obtain collectors items and geeky goods, signings with celebrities are always available, and panels from television's most popular shows run throughout the weekend. 

However, as MCM has grown larger, a couple of issues have come up, and chief amongst those is one of communication. I understand that running a convention of this size and scale is never easy, however important announcements of guests and attractions are left until the last minute. This is difficult for those who have to travel great distances to attend, and makes buying tickets difficult as when it is so close to the event, online tickets are limited, if they are indeed even still available.

The rising cost of attending is also becoming prohibitive. In May 2014, an early entry/priority entry weekend ticket cost £29.50. In October 2014, that rose to £35. In May 2015 it became £45, and October 2015 is the highest yet, with £50. Over one and a half years, a price increase of 69.49% seems pretty steep. On the one hand, people can obviously still afford it, if the increase in attendees is anything to go by, and the extra money does appear to be going to more floor space inside, more time within the center and more events and signings over the weekends. However, the cost of attending is making me question how frequently I'll be able to attend in the future. I'm sure I'm not the only long-term attendee facing that choice, either. In addition to the event itself, availability and cost of hotel rooms, the cost of travel and food, and a spending fund for any merchandise you might want to buy and MCM expo starts looking very expensive indeed.

There is often an issue with communication within the event itself. Many of the staff working at MCM are volunteers, and the security bought in for the event are an external company. In the past, this has lead to unscrupulous security staff 'confiscating' attendee's personal items, general misinformation over how to enter and renter the venue, where to go for specific events and what tickets you need to access them. In my experience working on a stall, stall holders are given very short set up and take down times in comparison to other similar events, and admin errors regarding staff passes issued aren't uncommon either.



Outside space - a boon for everyone in hot costumes or needing some air - has become increasingly limited over the last couple of expos. In October 2015, this was due to temporary railings to keep only those with wristbands inside and keep people who hadn't bought tickets outside. While there are people every year who do not buy tickets and enjoy the atmosphere from the outside, it seems suspect that this system was implemented the year when ticket prices became £50 for the weekend.

Despite all this, I have a soft spot for MCM Expo. They do try and fix issues, even if not always in effective ways. Every time attending over the past few years has resulted in a different method of obtaining wristbands, a different queueing system each day, a different door to renter by (often using three different doors on the same day). After the fiasco with the security firm, MCM hired a different firm. MCM has diversified and invited more guests over a wide range of fandoms. MCM is certainly improving, and on balance, I will probably wind up attending as long as I am able to afford to. At the end of the day, I've made and kept more friends through the event than any other single source in my life. So, despite all its flaws, I'll keep coming back to MCM for the community.

MCM London Comiccon's tickets and event info can be found here. 
Pictures © Amelia Springett

Nintendo NX: Speculation on a new console

All of this is pretty pure speculation, as is every other article around right now. We only know a limited amount of information, but if it is to be believed, Nintendo are going to release a new home console by the end of 2016, and it currently goes by the working title, Nintendo NX.

The first major point is that it may have the possibility to be as much handheld gaming as home console. The Wii U already features the ability to play games solely on the handheld gamepad, as long as you are within range of the console itself, allowing you to not use the television as your main screen. If the NX allowed internal processing in the 'gamepad', then it could become a handheld console for use out and about, and a home console, all in one.

If it keeps similar hardware to Wii U, and is more a cosmetic or extra functionality upgrade (eg DSi compared to DS, or new 3DS compared to old), Wii U games would be cross compatible with NX, developers working on Wii U titles wouldn't be left in the lurch and people who have a Wii U wouldn't need to upgrade immediately. As unlikely as this is, it would be a smart move by Nintendo, as long as the upgrade to functionality was enough to warrant buying the new console, but small enough that current Wii U owners were able to keep their existing hardware.

There are rumours that the Nintendo NX may return Nintendo to using 'cartridges' to sell their games physically. However, they wouldn't be the bulky cartridges of the N64 and earlier. It would be using digital media, like SD cards (similar to existing DS/3DS cartridges). This may seem strange at first, but considering that with Blu-Ray style discs, we have just about explored the limits of how much information can be stored without increasing the writeable surface area of the disc, and that SD cards are becoming increasingly cheaper, physically smaller and are capable of holding more information every day, and it suddenly makes a lot more sense. This could be alongside downloading games from their internet-based store, as it is currently.

Pricing is set to be lower than the Wii U and competitors. This has always been a good selling point for Nintendo consoles, both for within the home and handheld. It has led, along with it's first party titles, to the reputation Nintendo has for being family friendly, and was one of the driving factors behind the success of the Wii.

However, the timing is way too early - the PS4 and Xbox One have only just gotten out of their launch title slump, and the Wii U has only just received its first batch of really influential titles - Mario Maker, Splatoon, Yoshi's Wooly World. The Wii U will only have been out for 4 years by late 2016, in comparison to the 6 years that the Wii was the main console for, and the 5 the Gamecube was available for. If it winds up being a more cosmetic upgrade, this may be a moot point, but in the event that it is an entirely new console, fans would have to invest in new hardware sooner than they were expecting - even with cheaper price point, they may lose trust that this console will be useable longer than a handful of years. It's that broken trust that would be the worst thing for Nintendo; people buy their platforms for their unique IPs (such as Mario, Legend of Zelda, Metroid, etc.), but if a platform fails to deliver on those IPs because the next platform is being rushed into development, then fans will feel cheated, and wonder why they should invest in a new platform if the same will happen again.

If third party developers don't adopt it, then it will be the same situation as the Wii U currently faces - good first party support, but no games other than Nintendo's unique IPs to choose from. There are a number of reasons why third party developers may choose not to develop for the Nintendo NX, including investing in learning and testing an entirely new coding language, expenses of developing on the new platform, the risks of developing on a new unproven platform, especially after the premature ending of the Wii U's retail cycle.

If dev kits are already in hands of developers, then it may get decent 3rd party support at launch. Most of the rumours currently circulating are due to developers who already have a kit. We aren't currently aware which developers have dev kits and what titles they are currently working on, but at the very least, it is a decent hope.

At the end of the day, though, this is all wild speculation based off a handful of facts. Speculation where Nintendo are concerned is risky at best, due to the unpredictable nature of the company. Wide speculation of the Wii condemned it to failure, yet it became a ridiculously successful console. The same can be said of the idea of the DS. So at this early stage, all we can say for sure is that whatever Nintendo do wind up doing, it is sure to be a surprise, despite our best efforts to guess at it.

Linkle

It's been a big week for Nintendo news. With Cloud announced for DLC on Super Smash Bros, rumours of a new console coming out next year and...Linkle.

Linkle will be a new playable character for Hyrule Warriors Legends, but it has people speculating over just where she may fit in the Legend of Zelda universe. Could she be a player character option in the new home console Legend of Zelda? A star of a new game completely?



I'd love to see more female playable characters in games as a whole, but Linkle is...well, I have my fair share of criticisms. Not least regarding the name. 'Link', to me, sounds gender neutral enough that it could have been used for this character, too. I understand not wanting to label her as fem!Link (and thus the idea that male is intrinsically default), but if that was their reasoning, why give her a diminutive form of the name? If she is meant to be a totally different character, maybe reflect that in the roots of the name?

Her outfit design is questionable, too. Link has iconically worn a green tunic since his inception, but over time, his design has adapted to being more complicated, incorporating elements like chain mail, pouches, weapon sheaths and decorative patterns. He still wears the green tunic, but we can see how practical and useful it is, while still remaining true to those roots. Linkle, by contrast, is simply wearing what seems to be a short riding cloak over some basic clothing.



Linkle isn't actually a new idea. Concept art for her was displayed in the Hyrule Warriors art book last year. In these designs, we get a little more of an idea of a practical heroine; covered legs and arms, sword sheaths and gauntlets. Especially in the top right example below, we see the possibility for a 'Link who happens to be female' as opposed to a feminised Link.



I don't mind that the current design for Linkle is 'cute'. It's better than a fan service character in a ridiculously skimpy outfit being touted as female representation. But I want to actually believe that this version of Link can get stuff done. That she can save the day just as competently as her male counterpart. If nothing else, I'd like to know how she's going to reload those duel crossbows she's wielding with no spare hands!

In short, I love the idea of Linkle, but the execution has been pretty poorly done. It may be that over time, Nintendo will adjust designs according to feedback and their future plans for games, but if nothing else, I'm reasonably certain we are stuck with that name. Sighs all around.

RSS Feeds

RSS feeds are a very useful and yet almost completely overlooked feature of the Internet. It's a real shame, since I love the way in which they work and can be used to track many different sources of information without subscribing to a million different websites, all with individual accounts and logins.

So, what is an RSS feed? In really simple terms, it's a way of collecting and displaying posts from the Internet in one feed 'reader', usually as shortened links. In more complicated terms: "RSS (Rich Site Summary) is a format for delivering regularly changing web content. Many news-related sites, weblogs and other online publishers syndicate their content as an RSS Feed to whoever wants it."

Some computers have RSS readers built in, and many web browsers can have them installed. If you would prefer to use a browser based reader, there are sites like Feedly (which I'll be using as an example).

RSS feed URLs typically look like: http://www.[website name].com/feed. They can sometimes be tricky to find, and don't always follow this pattern, but luckily for us, Feedly is a little more user-friendly.

To add a feed to Feedly, take the URL of the blog and paste it in the searchbar, like so:



And pick 'RSS' from the choices given (Atom will also work, and in practice, they are very similar).

You will then see a collection of posts from that blog in a shortened format, like this:



All you have to do is press the green '+feedly' icon, and then you're done!

Now you can track content from your favourite blogs, news sites, forums, webcomics etc. without joining a mailing list. What's more, since they're all collected in one place, it's much easier to check for new updates than loading a lot of different webpages whenever you remember to check!

Let's Talk Tea

I have always been more of a coffee person than a tea person. The richer flavours of coffee appealed to me more than the 'posh hot water' of my mother's teas. Over time, though, I came to a very important realisation:

I have been drinking the wrong kinds of tea.

Enter Beastly Beverages, a creator of fandom-inspired luxury teas. I must admit, I was first drawn in by the fandom aspect, with the beautiful artwork on the labels, but as I was encouraged to smell the bags by the wonderful staff at an MCM expo stall, I realised that maybe I could give tea another chance. I am so glad I did.

Every tea I've tried has a series of layers of taste, some more unusual than others, yet all satisfyingly refreshing. It's what I imagined tea should be, and why more generic brands simply felt bland and boring. From 'The Trickster' (sweetly butterscotch) to 'The Morning Star' (fruity and sweet with a slight chilli tingle) to 'Exit Stage Crowley' (smoky and complex) and 'The Boy King' (calm and soothing), you can be sure there's something to suit everyone's palate. Personally, I've not encountered a tea from Beastly Beverages that I didn't like.

Which makes it all the more amazing for me that this all comes from an independent tea creator based in London. The way in which teas and flavours complement each other is handled so skilfully that I would have imagined a team with centuries of experience behind them had I not known! They also only use organic ingredients, which is wonderful news for those of us who enjoy our luxury without putting aside our ethics.

The Patreon for Beastly Beverages can be found here, and offers rewards such as samples of new teas, money off coupons, the chance to get a tea made especially for you and many more goodies. The Etsy store is here, and while the selection of teas is gradually being restocked, there is still a vast range of beautiful fandom teas to buy!

If, after all this, you are still more of a coffee person, I have good news - Beastly Beverages does also sell flavoured coffees. They are a little rarer, as each batch takes time to flavour fully, but they are crafted with the same care and attention to flavour as the teas are, and well worth keeping an eye out for.

A Note about NaNoWriMo

Ah, NaNoWriMo, that time of year when the writers go into deep hibernation and start wondering how to stretch out their word counts without resorting to too much purple prose. This year, I will be attempting to hit the 50,000 word mark, along with my fiancée.

This means one of two things: there will either be much more blog activity, or much less. More, if I procrastinate on fiction writing to write blog posts (and still count it within my wordcount) or less if I focus solely on my fiction project.

It's no easy thing to commit to writing a small novel's worth of words in a month, especially with the pressures of everyday life, but this year is looking to be the most likely one yet!

For everyone else participating in NaNo this year, good luck!

Criticism about Literature Studies

I’ve been thinking about the way in which we tend to study literature in the UK (and from what I’ve seen, the US, too). Our cultures tend to mark out certain types of historical literature that are ‘worthy’ of study and overanalyse them. The result is a very narrow definition of what counts as ‘real literature’, and generations of people who think that reading isn’t for them, all because they’ve only been exposed to a comparatively narrow range of texts.

If you had only ever heard classical music, or seen independent films, you might be forgiven for thinking that music or film wasn’t something you were interested in, either. Being exposed to just one small section of any artform doesn’t do the art as a whole justice. You may like that particular niche, but many more won’t, and will see the small amount being represented as an indication of the entire art.

I've worked with intelligent people who proclaim that they 'don't do books' in the same way that I don't do live television; other people do and they don't judge them for that, they just don't see the benefits for them. On talking to them (because I certainly wasn't going to let that topic die out there!), I learnt that they'd never really read books as a child, and their main exposure to literature was through formal study. Given that, I cold hardly blame them - if I thought every book would demand a level of concentration akin to Shakespeare, I wouldn't be an avid reader, either.

The problem is that most literature teachers (and courses) in schools are deeply analytical of classical texts themselves, but not the culture of the time that produced that text. Things that would have seemed obvious to an Edwardian audience will not be obvious to a modern audience, whether it's a reference to food, politics or even slang. Over hundreds of years, these references become easily dated and often bewildering to a student.

For example, do you know the difference in how to pronounce "covered" and "cover'd" in a 19th century poem? It's critically important to the rhyme and meter of poetry that you are reading the poem in the way the poet intended, but all too often, small details like this are omitted by teachers - if they even know of them themselves! (Answer: if the full '-ed' suffix is used, it adds an extra syllable, so "covered" is pronounced "cover-ed", whereas "cover'd" would be the modern pronunciation of "covered")

How about the fact that many of the characters suffering various torments in Dante's Inferno were contemporary politicians and religious leaders. No casual student can be expected to understand the nuances of 14th Century Italian politics and so, much of the satire Dante's original audience would have perceived is lost without careful study of the history and culture surrounding him at the time. Inferno also suffers from being a translation - no matter how faithfully it has been translated, the rhyme and rhythm is lost in translation.

Shakespeare's plays were always intended to be seen and experienced as entertainment and spectacle, not read falteringly from a book in small chunks. While often deeply profound, they can be whimsical and very funny; students deserve to see that side of the Bard, too. Some of his comedies have just as much to say about the breadth and depth of human nature as his tragedies, and yet all too often, it's Romeo and Juliet, or Hamlet, or Macbeth that is studied, simply from the book, or if very lucky, a filmed adaptation.

The narrow range of literature choices often intimidates students, too. As an introduction to the world of literature, it's woefully restrictive. Some students only read fiction through school, for various reasons (parents not placing an emphasis on reading for leisure, the expense of books, lack of a reading culture in their family and/or peer group), and to be met with dry material that isn't relevant to them often puts students off the idea of reading as an enjoyable thing to do. Reading becomes seen as a chore, not the joy it should be.

For me, the greatest tragedy is that, as a writer, I hope that people enjoy my work, not analyse and debate why I've used one particular word or phrase ad infinitum. In light of this, I'd like to leave you with the wise words of Mark Twain:

“Persons attempting to find a motive in this narrative will be prosecuted; persons attempting to find a moral in it will be banished; persons attempting to find a plot in it will be shot." - Mark Twain, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

Gaming Rec: Tales of Symphonia

Confession time: I love the Tales of series of games. I bought Tales of Symphonia back on the Gamecube knowing nothing about the series, but it had been reviewed really well by a magazine, and I had some Christmas money to spend...and I loved it. It took embarrassingly long for me to play anything else in the series, but when Tales of the Abyss got rereleased on the 3DS, I was all over it and it did not disappoint me.

Since then, I've played through Tales of Graces/f, which unfortunately wasn't the best offering, due to budget and time restraints; and Tales of Xillia/2, which I regard as a good couple of games, with some really good strengths, and just a couple of weaknesses that are unfortunate, but not a dealbreaker for me. I'm really looking forward to getting my hands on Tales of Xestria soon, as it looks like they've ironed out a few things I found disappointing with Xillia.

I've been picking apart why I fell so completely in love with Symphonia lately, thanks to a replay I've been doing with my fiancée on Chronicles. I love the little new additions to the game - the trophy system helps to further reward my completionist streak and point out little sidequests I'd missed/forgotten about. The extra scene in Altamira will definitely secure a few more replays in my future. I question some of the wisdom of the casino, mind, but I know I will be aiming for the extra goodies in there despite the criminal exchange rate of money to chips. The bonus costumes are a nice touch, and I love how they have tied together characters with similar story elements via the costumes. I audibly gasped when I realised Kratos' similarity to Ludger, and then had to play it off as nothing, as my fiancée has yet to play Xillia/2. In short - Chronicles helps to shine a new light on some older elements without overshadowing what made Symphonia so good in the first place.

The thing that really surprised me about our recent playthrough is that we both knew the game ridiculously well, having played it many times over many years, and yet we both had different events and knowledge to share with each other, and new scenes to show each other. It astounds me how complex the narrative of Symphonia is, and how well it rewards you for purposefully taking events out of order with extra snippets and side information. Even aside from that, the vast wealth of sidequests and extra titles, achievements and scenes that you can find definitely warrants multiple playthroughs (actually, it is impossible to see and do everything in one runthrough).

The big draw of this game for me, all those years ago, was the plot. It still is. Symphonia is a beautifully crafted story with a cast of genuinely loveable characters and a refreshingly complex plot. It feels wonderfully paced, starting with introducing the characters and world and the aims of the characters; then in true Tales style, it subverts the expectations of the player and begins revealing new and often surprising information about the world and even the characters themselves. To say anymore would spoil one of the best aspects of the game. However, I will say that a lot of additional details about character motivations and fleshing out the world are included as part of sidequests, so it's well worth exploring the world thoroughly for those little gems.

Symphonia isn't afraid to ask the big questions, either. The characters are constantly questioning elements of their world, such as racial discrimination, classism, the power structures inherent in religion (without throwing the pure intentions of religion away), the history and myths of their cultures. This a something that has been carried through the Tales series with varying levels of effectiveness, but it's a narrow fight between Abyss and Symphonia as to which tackles the complex issues best, but both do it with such empathy and skill that it barely makes a difference.

The fighting system is a refreshing change to most JRPGs, too; no turn-based battle, but an active, free-flowing system that's simple enough for beginners to hack and slash their way through, but complex enough that experts can refine a fighting style that works for them. There are truly challenging post-game elements, such as an optional dungeon and a lot of sidequests to sink your teeth into. Exploring the world fully always feels like it's encouraged and rewarded, rather than funnelling you through a strict progression of plot events.

I thoroughly recommend Tales of Symphonia for any gamers that like an engaging, complex story and want something a little different from a typical JRPG. While original Gamecube copies are rare, it is available on PS3 as part of Tales of Symphonia Chronicles (where the sequel is also included...just don't raise your hopes too high for it, okay?), a different anniversary bundle that also includes Tales of Graces/f (not the best game, either) and it will be available on Steam as a digital download for Windows in 2016.

Digital Revolutions

I'm always irrationally angry every time I see an article about a 'new media' killing a more traditional form of media. Partially because it's usually just another way of the writer saying "the world is changing and I don't like it" and partly because it's simply untrue, and their argument is based on a very shallow understanding of the media in question.

Back in the 1950s and 60s, the increasing popularity of television began to scare the film industry - if people have access to entertainment in their own homes, why would they pay to see a film in theatres? Later, in the 70s and 80s, Betamax and Videocassette Recorders meant that people could record television to watch and rewatch at any time - including films that had been broadcast. Again, the film industry were concerned that people would simply record films off the television and would not buy a copy for themselves.

Why am I mentioning this? Well, six decades after their initial concerns, the film industry is still alive and producing content. Thriving, even. Now, however, their big concerns are over digital streaming, downloads and pirating media.

Digital streaming will not kill television or film. In fact, Netflix and Amazon have gone beyond simply being a content streamer, and have become substantial producers of new content. Pirating won't even kill media, despite the scaremongering. Figures used to show massive losses to the film and television industry work under the impression that every pirated copy is a loss of one legitimate sale. Yet many people pirate things they have no intention of buying, or intend to buy at a later date but cannot currently afford. Many people also pirate media that is unavailable for a legal purchase in their own country.

A small example using the long-running CW show, Supernatural. At the time of writing, the 11th season has just begun to air in the US. In the UK, season 9 has been airing on Freeview television stations (stations that require no additional subscription service, such as cable or satellite to view), and season 10 will be made available at roughly the same time for Brits as season 11 will be for Americans. Previously, it was only televised by Sky, requiring an additional costly subscription to view. Season 9 was only made available in the UK on DVD and Blu-Ray in June 2015, and there is no release date for season 10, despite being released in the US on DVD and Blu-Ray. In short, there has not been a legal way to catch up to the current season of the show in the UK, unless you have an extremely expensive subscription to satellite television. This is just one of many television programmes, from the perspective of just one country.

In a similar way, eBooks will not kill physical books and even if they did, stories would still be told. Authors will still write, novels will still be published and people will still read it. Digital music isn't killing the music industry, either - if anything, the ability to buy single tracks instead of entire albums has boosted music sales, not diminished them.

Essentially, my argument is that new technology will never change the media being created, only the way of consuming that media. Digital downloads don't require physical space, and are easily portable. I can carry a library of books, a few dozen films and many hours of music in my pocket, and entertain myself literally anywhere - how is that a bad thing? It's an amazing sign of how quickly we've developed technology; twenty years ago, we could only just send short text messages from phone to phone; now we can stream media from anywhere with a semi-decent signal or internet access.

If anything, digital media of all forms is diversifying media as a whole. Digital publishing has made self-publishing obtainable for the vast majority of writers; streaming services have made it possible for musicians to record and release music independently of a recording label; film makers can release their work on video streaming sites. If anything, the digital revolution has cut out the middle man - the producers, the distributors, the publishing houses and the record labels. This is what large companies should be more afraid of; technology giving artists the tools to produce and distribute their own work on their own terms. As more and more independent success stories happen, how long will traditional media cling to their current business models? Will they adapt with the times or become relics of the past?

The truth is, things are always going to change. Technology doesn't remain stagnant for long, and with technological advances come cultural shifts. People and companies need to adapt to and embrace these developments, not shun them simply because they are new.

Piggate and British Politics

By now, the claims of David Cameron's initiation exploits have hit every corner of the online world, regardless of how true or not they actually are. It's important to mention that this story is likely not true, but at this point, the truth isn't exactly the important element of this story.

The fact of the matter is, most of the British public know that this is likely a fabricated story from a bitter politician in order to tar Cameron's name. Lord Ashcroft, the person behind the claims raised a vast amount of money for the Conservative party, and thus felt he was owed a more senior role (whether this was implied by dealings with Cameron or not is besides the point, but it was likely an informal agreement based on past political convention). When he was passed up for this role, details of this story were leaked to the biographer working on David Cameron's life story. There's certainly a motive for fabricating this story.

The British public want to believe this story based on David Cameron's politics. For those outside the UK, here's a very brief primer of what's going on. The Conservative party is a right wing political party (somewhat like the US Republicans), primarily made up of privately schooled, middle and upper-class career politicians. The majority of their politicians come from very wealthy, privileged backgrounds, and there is a wide-spread feeling that they alienate themselves from poorer and working-class families because of this. Their policies include: increasing tax thresholds for the very wealthy, separating from the European Union, 'competitive' taxes for large corporations, reducing immigration rates, scraping the Human Rights Act and increase military spending. In short, if you have money, it'll be easier to keep it; if you don't, it'll be more difficult to earn it; if you want to live and work in the UK having come from anywhere else, it will be more difficult; you lose the basic human rights that have been internationally agreed upon; and more money will be spent on waging war. These policies were taken from their 2015 manifesto - i.e. these are the policies they will openly admit to aiming for.

Keep in mind that they had already spent 4 years in power prior to this. When David Cameron was re-elected as PM, amidst some controversy, protests immediately started outside 10 Downing Street. In short, in quite a broad section of Britain, he isn't popular and he is seen to be damaging the most vulnerable people in society to the benefit of the wealthiest.

The British public aren't exactly strangers to political controversy, either, from Members of Parliament claiming ludicrous expenses on behalf of the taxpayer; Andrew Mitchell allegedly insulting a police officer by calling him a 'pleb'; and the 'Cash for Access' scandal where politicians allegedly accepted money in exchange for individual's access to influential politicians. This is all within the last five years, and is just the scandals that have enough proof to be reported on without newspapers and media outlets put in danger of being sued for libel. If something more nefarious were going on, without very significant proof, it could not even be hinted at within news outlets without risk of being libellous.

The fact of the matter is, whether or not it's true, people want to believe that the Prime Minister has taken part in a clandestine ritual involving a dead pig in exchange for acceptance into the rich and powerful 'elite' because it's easier to believe that there's this metaphorical deal with the devil that the rich need to do in order to get the power that they have. There is certainly an element of 'otherness' in how powerful people see poor and working class members of their own society, and this is a way in which that can almost be turned around, and see politicians and influential people as 'other' to them. It's a dehumanising act, and it's almost easier to believe that a person that is so instrumental in cutting support and benefits for vulnerable members of society isn't truly 'human' in the way that many of us would think of humanity.

It's easier to paint people as inhuman monsters than accept that people like this do exist, and are not only accepted in society, but run it. Piggate isn't the problem, but the fact that we can all look at Cameron and think "yeah, he totally could've"...that's the problem, and unfortunately, it's not one that has a simple solution.

How Not To Adapt Books to Films: The Golden Compass

I may have mentioned a few posts ago that I prefer to focus on positives over negatives in media. But every once in a while, there comes a film so terrible, so badly thought out and so insulting to its viewers that it sends me into a frothing rage just thinking about what could have been, yet sadly wasn't. So, with that in mind, let's talk about The Golden Compass.

In 2007, New Line Cinema took a stab at adapting Phillip Pullman's epic children's fantasy 'The Northern Lights' for cinema. What it achieved, like so many book-to-film adaptations, was a mediocre family blockbuster. It lacks the controversial and darker tones of the books in order to maintain both funding and a PG rating. That's not to say there weren't things I enjoyed in the film.

Dæmons were handled particularly well, both in the way actors reacted/didn't react to them and the meticulous CGI used throughout - in fact, the film's only Oscar was for Best Achievement in Visual Effects. My only nitpick is the occasional use of real animals, presumably to cut down costs, which jarred me out of the world a little bit. I'd prefer one method or the other, not a mixture.

Dakota Blue Richards as an actress deserves high praise, and indeed many of the awards the film has received have been specifically for her. She is a pitch perfect Lyra; gifted liar, often proud, yet selfless and brave despite being convincingly terrified. Given how difficult it is to find gifted child actors and to work with them around schooling and ethical concerns, this was no easy feat, and they deserve the credit that is due for this.

What a shame it is, then, to contrast that with Nicole Kidman's bland performance. Every single line she delivered felt obviously 'acted' and lacked all the subtlety of her character. Since when can you get Nicole Kidman to fail at being a simmering, manipulative seductress? She was, however, let down by some of the scripting, but I felt as though she almost anticipated how the film was go and was distancing herself from it as soon as she could.

I winced every time a character said 'Golden Compass' as an obvious name drop, usually immediately before or after the device's real name - alethiometer. I was all ready to go into a rant about American publishers/producers changing names to make it simpler for American audiences, too (like Harry Potter's Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone), but apparently it's a very subtle reference to Paradise Lost (let's not argue that it refers to 'golden compasses' as in the geometric tool instead of the navigation one). The fact that it just happens to be easier to remember than alethiometer is a coincidence...anyway, in this particular case, I am willing to give them a pass. This is the only one they're getting.

I'm aware that this is such a minor thing to be irritated over, but the music is so bland I've already forgotten it. I love collecting and recognizing various movie soundtracks, but if you were to play me any part of that soundtrack, I wouldn't be able to remember where it was from. It doesn't have anything instantly recognizable about it, in the same way that The Lord Of The Ring's score would instantly link you to Middleearth, or Harry Potter's score takes you to Hogwarts. This is a shame, mostly because a lot of care has been taken to give Lyra's world a very distinct visual feel which is so different to our world, but it's not supported by the music. It's just incredibly generic and of no consequence, good or bad.

The small exposition scene with Lord Asriel in the Arctic honestly adds nothing to the plot, and only serves to show off Daniel Craig's action movie credentials. The book didn't need it, so I'd have preferred the screentime and budget to have been spent on...almost literally anything else.

There's one line: "the alethiometer says they'll hurt Roger" added purely to add suspense. Apart from being very lazy writing, if it was asked about anything in relation to Roger, the whole 'being sacrificed to form a gateway between worlds' would definitely have come up, even in vague terms. Of course, in the film, they never actually get to that point, which makes me wonder how they were planning to tackle the second and third books without covering Roger's death. Or, indeed, any of the darker themes of the books in general.

There is exactly no mention of Stannislaus Grumman (AKA Jopari, AKA John Parry, AKA Will's father) at all, most notably in the retiring room. I can understand why they wouldn't want to whip out a frozen decapitated head in the opening sequence of a family film, but not even hinting at his existence would have made things problematic come the second film. It would have made things seem far more coincidental than they already were. "Oh, so Will's father was missing because he was in Lyra's world? Didn't see that coming. And Lee Scoresby just happens to be bringing him to the right place to be reunited with his son? Pft."

All the complex characters who had complex motivations or situations had them changed to either paint them as wholly good or wholly evil. Iorek gets his own section below, but off the top of my head: Lord Asriel does terrible things in the books, but here he's painted as a heroic adventurer capable of no wrong. Similarly, the Master at Jordan College no longer has any part in Asriel's attempted poisoning, blackmailed or otherwise. Mrs. Coulter is just a straight up villain, now, whereas the book portrayed her in more shades of grey - doing villainous things, certainly, but there are some hints about more complex reasons as to why. Her motivations are something that is completely glossed over in the film.

Oh, Iorek. Poor, proud warrior king, what did they do to you? You were exiled for being beaten by another bear? (for non-book readers, or those in need of the refresher, he was exiled because he killed another bear by accident - while fights are common to establish hierarchy, murder is against their laws. More specifically, Iofur drugged the other bear, so he didn't give in where he would have done normally. Resulting in Iorek – the rightful ruler of Svalbard, but that got glossed over in the movie – being exiled and Iofur taking control) Aside from being an insult to his very character, it makes no logical sense. If 50% of all bears who have ever been in a fight get exiled, why aren't more of them wandering lonely around the Arctic? How is Svalbard still populated, what with them being a proud warrior race where fights are fairly frequent? And of course, it makes armored talking bears a lot less cool. All this, presumably for the sake of the PG rating. Again, I wonder how they would have handled such themes as death, all out war between worlds, killing God, original sin, etc. in the later films...it's almost lucky this film was as bad as it was, because the films could only diverge more from the books from here on out.

In the vein of panserbjørne, how did Iofur (now name changed to Ragnar) gain power as a bear king? By poisoning the previous king. Let's not think about the fact that panserbjørne cannot be tricked unless they're acting like a human. Between this and the way the circumstances behind the exile changed, Iorek has no more claim to rule the bears than any of the nameless bears of Svalbard.

Many things have been sacrificed in order to keep the PG rating as low as it is. Here's some things that weren't: Iorek punching off Iofur's/Ragnar's lower jaw, Iorek ripping Iofur's/Ragnar's throat out, Lyra almost having her soul cut away, Mrs Coulter being violent and abusive, and Lyra's dæmon being touched without consent. Oh, and the massive fight with the gyptians, witches, bears and kids verses the Bolvangar guards.

Changing the order of events in the plot isn't necessarily a bad thing. When done well, it's seemless. This was decidedly not. Essentially, when Lyra is kidnapped, she is taken to Svalbard instead of Bolvangar (which makes no sense; at Bolvangar, they would have been greatly rewarded, whereas at Svalbard, she's merely 'a gift for the king'), the events happen sort of similarly to the book, then Iorek takes Lyra over to Bolvangar. This means the bears get involved in Bolvangar in a way they didn't in the book, and weren't holding Asriel captive as per Iofur's agreement with Coulter, and so, essentially, the bears aren't part of the film's plot in any meaningful way. They could have been removed entirely, if they weren't the best selling point of the film.

The whole thing is a mess, really. It boils down a thoughtful, intricate children's series with layers of complex themes, imagery and symbolism to the most basic of storylines, relying on beautiful imagery over a well-thought out script. It's nothing short of an insult to the books and the people who love them. I can't help but be thankful that they never got around to butchering the entire trilogy.

Isn't it Time we Got the Pokémon Game we Deserve?

Disclaimer: I began writing this before Pokémon Go was announced. All of this post is still valid for the game I describe, but holy hell, I hope Pokémon Go is going to live up to the hype. Because in theory, it's everything I ever wanted as a child (and let's be honest, as an adult) and while it would be so easy to get it wrong, I have faith that GameFreak are looking at the mistakes competitors are currently making and avoiding them themselves.

That this is all opinion and daydreaming on my part. I'm not in any position of power to nudge GameFreak into doing any of this, and I'm well aware that I don't speak for everyone. But I've been thinking a lot lately about how amazing a current-gen console Pokémon game would be, and what I'd like to see in it.

First and foremost: a freeroaming exploration. None of this travelling between set locations via cutscene and catching Pokémon off other trainers that was such a letdown in Coliseum. You can still guide people in the right direction - the tree blocking a path or man refusing to let you past until he's had his morning coffee are staples in the series, and while I would prefer something more subtle, I can acknowledge the need to gently encourage people in the right direction, especially if there is a storytelling element. However, games don't need to channel you down the right path. Do you want the plot to progress? Then maybe go to the last place that got mentioned to you and see what's going on, there. Or maybe, the plot could be experienced in a slightly more organic way; hints and whispers of criminal activity going on wherever you happen to go first? Multiple plans over different places, that when foiled lead you into the wider plot through key items and dialogue?

What would be really impressive to me would be levels of wild Pokémon and trainers tracking your level for a true free-roaming experience. It would provide a larger incentive to explore over level grind and explore strategies and a varied party over simply over-levelling before Gyms and the Elite Four. Perhaps provide a few areas with static levels for people who want to EV train, but for everyone who wants to experience the game, this could be a very good system. Of course, your own Pokémon will always have a slight advantage over wild ones of a similar level due to Effort Values, so it wouldn't stop people from level grinding if they wanted that extra advantage. It would just allow people who wanted to progress quickly and explore the tools to get out into the world a little quicker.

Imagine this: you start out in your little village hometown, where the graphics are gorgeous and picturesque, but trees make the field of view seem small. Then you step out onto the first route, and a large rolling plain is spread before you, teaming with movement and new monsters to battle and catch. I want it to give that 'first time on Hyrule Field' goosebumps. I want that slow realisation that that far point in the distance can be walked to, and explored, and look beautiful while doing it.

The Wii U can give very pretty graphics when handled correctly. Look at stills of Mario Kart 8 - lots of detail packed into a charming style. Look at the demos of the new Legend of Zelda game - utterly gorgeous. I want that level of detail in a console Pokémon game. I would still keep it stylised - hyper realistic would not work for the Pokémon franchise, and would look dated incredibly quickly.

Battle, as a large part of any Pokémon game, would be incredibly important. There's a lot of depth and complexity in the main, turn-based series, which I love, but the idea of being able to control your Pokémon beyond four attack moves is also appealing. Of course, there is the arcade-fighter, Pokkén Tournament, which shows that they have played around with fully controllable Pokémon and Pokémon moves connecting properly with their target, but I see this as unlikely to happen in a main game unless as a minigame (similar to the Beauty Contests in the main series). Why? One, Pokkén Tournament is being made with Namco Bandai, who have experience with fighting games and systems, but a collaboration on a main game seems unlikely. Two, the console game will probably be (and should be) cross-compatible with the handheld series. Changing the fighting system too drastically would result in a nightmare of trying to code Pokémon so they still work on both games, and a good fighter on one game could be a poor choice on the other. With this in mind, I would still keep the turnbased battles intact, though I would love better detailed battles - moves that connect with the opponent fully, gorgeous backgrounds and settings that add to the world and makes you really feel like you are on a epic journey.

Despite wanting to maintain the status quo with regardless to battles, I do want to get rid of one staple of the franchise - Hidden Move machines, or HMs. In the handheld series, they're used to guide the player to the next area, but if the plot shifted to accommodate freeroaming, along with the levels of encounters adjusting to the party, suddenly limiting the use of them seems odd. I mean, logically, all flying type Pokémon can fly, they don't have to learn it from a machine. The same with water-type Pokémon swimming - though I have always wondered why player characters seem unable to swim, when they so often live near bodies of water and other people are seen swimming, frequently as young children. What I'm suggesting here is that any Pokémon which logically should be able to preform that move can, innately, without having to learn a move. This will encourage team diversity a little more naturally and will stop one (or more!) Pokémon in the party being kept around just for their HM abilities.

A console game should integrate well with the handheld games and vice versa. This would be a perfect opportunity for Nintendo to promote Pokémon Bank, their subscription-based storage facility. I mean, I'm not a fan of paying monthly to transfer Pokémon between games, but if more games in the series used it, it would feel less like a rip-off. Of course, there is a better way for Nintendo to cash in on extra stuff - Amiibos. Both the Wii U and the new 3DS can read and write data stored on Amiibos - why not use them as 'shuttles' between games? It wouldn't be backwards compatible with the current gen of handheld games, but could be a fun idea in the future. At the very least, kids can take their team with them in an Amiibo to challenge their friends when they go and visit and play Wii U together (so can adults, I mean, I would, but I'm also a massive dork who would charge into the room, Pokéball held in an outstretched arm yelling "Trainer Ame wants to battle!")

Along with more free-roaming elements, I'd like a way for you to feel accomplished in the world of Pokémon even if battles aren't your biggest passion. Sure, have a Gym/Elite Four network there, and be rewarded for challenging them and winning, but also be rewarded for other actions. Fully exploring hidden areas, catching particularly difficult Pokémon, breeding particularly great IV'd Pokémon. Even little challenges like completing the game without using legendary Pokémon or having a team of all the same elemental type that still kicks butt. I want to see challenges that shake up the way competitive play is done (for the uninitiated, international Pokémon tournaments are a pretty dull e-sport, as most top ranked players use similar teams and plays, because they've worked out that, mathematically, it's the least risky way to win. In the end, it comes down to which player exploited the mathematics behind the game the most, which kinda sucks all the fun out of it). Basically, encourage players to have fun with the mechanics and the idea and wonder that the world of Pokémon still holds today.

A complete bonus from me, but I would adore it if it would ever happen: remember Pokémon Snap? Can you imagine Pokémon Snap, a game where you take pictures of Pokémon while riding through predetermined routes, but in a current gen world, with no rails? Can you imagine having it as a fun sidequest that you could always dabble in for extra money, but don't actually need it for progression - it's literally just for your own enjoyment? I mean, the Wii U would be perfect for this - you could move the controller like a camera and use the screen as your view through the lens, you could share them on Miiverse if you're so hell bent on making social networks a thing...come on, Nintendo, you gave us Link selfies, you can realise my dream of becoming a wildlife photographer in the world of Pokémon!

Fanfiction and Fanart: What is 'Real' Art, Anyway?

Every fan-artist or fanfiction writer has heard a variation of this at least once: "Why don't you do real art instead?" Sometimes it's phrased more like concern: "You're really talented, and you'd be successful if you only stopped drawing/writing 'x'" or "You'll never make a career out of fanworks".

I don't like this at all. It devalues not only creative endeavours, but the people who create them. It's a a social problem, and it needs to stop. You probably think I'm overreacting, and right now, that's fine. Just read on a bit before you make up your mind completely.

Fanart is seen as 'lesser' because it draws on existing work and doesn't require the artist's own imagination or creativity.

If anything, people are more critical of fanfiction and fanart because it draws from an existing work, one that people admire enough to find and read fanworks of. Characters are judged against the standard of the original - if they are too different, works easily become out of character and unappealing to fans.

It takes a lot of close analysis to truly understand complex characters - to not only understand what they do, but why. This 'why' is essential to fanworks, to understand how a character may react in circumstances they aren't shown in in the original media.

Original art and writing has the privilege of being judged on it's own merit, outside of a pre-existing idea of setting, tone and character. It's far easier to work out the motivations of your characters - you should know them intimately, having created them - than the motivations of another's characters, where you only have what limited knowledge the creator has made public about them.

If fanart was somehow a 'lesser' art form, you would be writing off a vast proportion of art through the ages. Every biblical and mythological painting would be inferior, because it's just fanart (often commissioned fanart) of the Bible and classical myths. Not to mention the wealth of literature you'd be passing up. Tolkien was inspired by Shakespeare, Shakespeare was inspired by Chaucer and Plutarch. All classical literature were inspired by word of mouth tales, embellished over years of oral storytelling tradition, before writing and reading were commonplace.

The Arthurian tales are a good example of this: Celtic folkstories were passed down by word of mouth over hundreds of years, finally being written down in the Mabinogion. These tales were later embellished by Geoffrey of Monmouth, and framed in a way to be more appealing to French audiences. These chivalrous tales became reinterpreted time and time again - Thomas Malory, Alfred Lord Tennyson, Mark Twain, Marion Zimmer Bradley - they've all had a hand, big or small in changing the way we perceive the Arthurian legends. This is of course, without mentioning the many film and television adaptations of the myths; from Disney to Monty Python, so many people have reworked and re-imagined the tales. It is a truly successful fanwork, in it's current state. It bears little resemblance to the original Celtic myths, barring a few recognisable details, and yet it's known internationally.

Of course, delve a little deeper, and you'd see that there aren't many 'original' works of art, anyway, even in modern media. Films are predominantly sequels and adaptations of other media. Any long running television show has to employ writers to carry on the existing story, as it is too much work for one writer to do alone. Long running comics and graphics novels are in a constant cycle of renewing artists and writers to carry on the story as previous artists and writers move on to different projects. Even games are often sequels or remakes of existing games. In fact, if you wanted to eschew any unoriginal ideas, you'd have to search for obscure content creators - independent film festivals, small press books, small art shows - it'd be a huge boost for independent media, until you noticed the reoccurring tropes in all these things, even as original as they are.

The thing is, art doesn't exist in a vacuum. It's meant to ask questions, to be explored and responded to. The problem is, the people who are against fanworks aren't really against the idea of fanworks. They want their favourite series to continue, and they want to keep enjoying film adaptations even if they aren't aware of the original media it came from. If they were against the idea of fanworks, these logical arguments would have won out against them a long time ago - I'm certainly not the first to make these points. The world would also be much poorer for the amount of art that got spurned as they rejected anything that could be feasibly termed a fanwork.

No, they're really against the people who make fanworks. Fanfiction and fanart is primarily a term applied to female artists within fandoms. It's certainly not to say that male don't create fanworks - they do, and face a lot of the same criticisms, but the problem is caused by the way society sees and codes fandom as female. There is a long history of bias towards work that is coded as 'feminine' as being valued less than work coded as 'masculine'. Fandom creators become seen as amateurs, creating work for free - ignoring the fact that some creators are professionals, and dabble in fanworks as exercise, for publicity or even just because it's fun - and further devaluing the idea of fanart in capitalism (the argument being that if creators are so talented, why aren't they making money from it, which implies that money is the materialistic end goal for all creative endeavours).

When a caricaturist draws a celebrity, it's not fanart, it's just art. When a woman does the same, it's fanart. When a screenwriter writes the script for the latest book adaptation, it's not fanfiction, it's just a script. When a storyboard artist or a concept artist or a digital painter is doing the work that makes any movie possible, often referencing earlier designs or movies or media, they are creating art, not fanart. All of these positions are male-dominated, where female artists are the exception, not the norm. There are social, economic and cultural barriers in order to limit the amount of women in these jobs (and this is not limited to the art world and creative jobs, either). It's not the fault of any one person, but a system of exclusion that is upheld to maintain the status quo as much as possible. Disregarding fandom and fanworks as 'not real' art helps maintain that status quo.

While I have many issues with '50 Shades of Grey', it's undeniable that it is an example of fanwork that has become successful. It's far from an isolated incident, either; many authors have been discovered through fanfiction, many fanartists have gained work through their fanart. I only hope this becomes more usual, and that the stigma around fanworks ceases for good. It helps no one to put down fanworks - not the artist creating them, nor the established artists making a name for themselves through 'original' works.

Representation Matters: Studio Ghibli

I like to focus on the positives rather than the negatives in media. Partly because there are plenty of people already calling out mass media for what they're not doing well, and those people are doing pretty well at raising awareness and getting their voices heard. But partly because I feel like if we fail to recognise the stuff that is done well, many things become seen as unsuccessful, and makes similar projects much harder to finance and make a reality. The best way to support messages that you want to see is by throwing your financial and social support behind it - the money lets executives know that this kind of idea is profitable, so they'll continue doing it, and the social support makes the message more widespread and hopefully encourages other people to support it, too.

With that in mind, I want to look at Studio Ghibli and their presentation of female characters over the years. Due to the nature of the post, there will be some spoilers, but I will endeavour to keep them to a minimum. Still, this is your early warning: there are spoilers within!

Studio Ghibli is a Japanese animation studio famed internationally for their gorgeous imagery and complex storytelling. They range from cute, family-friendly stories like Kiki's Delivery Service to darker works like Princess Mononoke. They won the Best Animated Feature Oscar in 2002 for Spirited Away, the only non-English-speaking animated film to win the award to date (the majority of winners comes from Disney/Pixar, with the occasional Dreamworks film).

Even a cursory look at the Studio's history reveals a wealth of female lead characters rarely found anywhere else: of the 22 main feature films released by Studio Ghibli, 11 have the lead 'view point' character be female and a further 5 have stories that have either an even amount of importance between the male and female lead or the female driving the plot, despite a male viewpoint. Even in the stories where women don't drive the plot, they still appear: as maternal characters, sisters, friends, family - in short, as people, with ambitions and skills and their own point of view.

But for examples of something a little more specific, I'm going to be looking at a couple of my favourite films that they've made, and point out instances of what I mean.

Princess Mononoke is one of the films where the viewpoint character is male (Prince Ashitaka) however women are a vastly integral part of the world and the plot of the film. San, the titular Princess Mononoke, is a woman raised by the god-wolf Moro, and shares Moro's distaste of humans, whom she sees as polluting the land and destroying the forest. San takes an active stance in this fight, directing her wolf-brothers into fights and attempting to assassinate Lady Eboshi.

Lady Eboshi herself is a strong woman who rules Irontown (Tatara in the original Japanese) fairly, rescuing and creating a safe haven for ex-prostitutes and lepers, and using the local resource of iron to maintain a strategic advantage over her neighbours. What I love about the film is that nothing is absolute in terms of morality. While it would be easy to completely vilify Lady Eboshi, we are shown that she is sincerely only acting in the best interests of her people, and she's highly compassionate towards the least valued members of society, not only offering them safety, but work and shelter. The women of Irontown work the bellows that smelt the iron they use for trade and weapons, and the film shows it to be hard work, but work they chose over their old lives. When men try to put them down for their work being safer than theirs, the women have the power to retort back. Without them, the economy and trade of Irontown would be diminished, if not downright broken.

Moro, the god-wolf and mother figure to San is a wonderful example of the ferociousness of a mother who is threatened. She's smart - smart enough to see what humans have done to other animal-gods, and smart enough to recognise the humans luring the boars into a trap, and to know that the boars will still charge in blindly even if they knew. She's protective of her adoptive daughter in the same way as her wolf-sons. She fights to protect her land and those dependant on her in a very similar way to Lady Eboshi.

If anything, it is Ashitaka who takes a passive role for much of the film, observing the differing points of view and only interfering when absolutely necessary. In fact, he openly acknowledges that he is watching and trying to stay neutral in the conflict. It doesn't stop him from doing the right thing, and acting to make the situation better, but it does stop him rushing 'to the rescue' of these women without understanding how and why they're in conflict, like so many films would.

The film portrays the early stages of a romance between Ashitaka and San, yet this doesn't reduce San to just a romantic interest. The characters complement each other and help each other grow - Ashitaka opens San to the idea that not all humans are bad and helps her come to terms with her own humanity, yet her goals and ideals remain the same - protect the forest. One of his major contributions to San is convincing her that she shouldn't throw her life away in mindless defence of the forest and that her life matters as an individual, not just a cause.

On all levels, the film is very respectful of women and the choices that female characters make, from background flavour characters to the women who drive the conflict and the plot forward. There are no blameless heroes, nor truly vilified characters, and all of the women have a complex nature that makes them stand out as fully formed characters, not two-dimensional stereotypes.

Spirited Away, arguably their most famous work, stars Chihiro, a young 10-year old girl moving to her new home. She begins the story reluctant to uproot her life, a little sullen and nervous and self-centred - things that are perfectly normal for a young girl, especially when facing such a big change in her life. Even this is quite a leap forward from many children's movies - she's allowed to be flawed in a way that isn't so extreme to be unrecognisable. Everyone's encountered a shy child, or a self-centred one or a nervous or sullen one. There's a good chance that was you, when growing up.

When the plot truly begins, and the 'abandoned' themepark is revealed to be a bath-house resort for the gods, Chihiro is scared and runs to her parents for support, but finds them transformed into pigs. This kickstarts her character growth, forcing her to become more emotionally independent and confident in her own abilities. The whole film explores this growth, and allows you to see a slow and steady improvement from clingy, nervous, self-centred child to a confident, generous young girl. She has to muster up courage, resourcefulness and put in a fair bit of hard work, and she's still the same person, but it is very clear that she learns a lot through the course of the film.

Chihiro is a wonderful character for children to learn from - she is faced with things children find scary, and she is scared herself, but she finds a way to be brave and get through it. She loves her parents dearly. She learns to be respectful of all kinds of people, no matter how weird or alien they might seem at first. She grows while learning to remain true to herself. She's not afraid to shoulder her fair share of the hard work, despite not being practised at it.

The supporting cast are good, too, from Lin, who acts more brusque and mercenary than she truly is, to Yubaba, the money-motivated owner of the bathhouse who would do anything to keep her baby safe. They all have their own motivations and goals and actively achieve things on their own.

These are just two brief examples from a very long list of wonderful female characters in Studio Ghibli. I could have mentioned the pirate matriarch in Laputa: Castle in the Sky, the sisters in My Neighbour Totoro, Kiki and the baker whom she rents her room from in Kiki's Delivery Service, Sophie in Howl's Moving Castle...I honestly could have thrown a dart, and as long as it didn't land on Tales from Earthsea, I would have had something positive to say.

This is (quite obviously, I hope) something that's pretty dear to my heart. I don't want all films to be only about and for women. But I do want to see women as being represented as more than an accessory for a male character. More than a 'sexy lamp'. As we can see, it's not impossible - it's not even difficult. Just treat your characters - all your characters - as human, with their own strengths and flaws and backgrounds and motivations.

In the words of Miyasaki himself: “Many of my movies have strong female leads - brave, self-sufficient girls that don’t think twice about fighting for what they believe in with all their heart. They’ll need a friend, or a supporter, but never a saviour. Any woman is just as capable of being a hero as any man.”

Thoughts on Princess Peach

This is a little bit of an alternative character interpretation, and not something I usually do, but I've had this thought lately, and I feel like the only way to get it out is to write it down.

Basically, the thought is: what if Princess Peach (of Mario franchise fame) isn't all that interested in Mario?

In the main series, Peach and Mario have very little interaction with each other directly. Peach gets kidnapped, usually by Bowser, Mario comes to the rescue, and she's saved, sometimes offering a cake back at the castle, a kiss on the nose and then the credits roll. That does not necessarily scream romantic interest to me. Gratitude, yes, romance...not quite. There is an argument there for the game's intended audience and how anything else could be inappropriate for a family-friendly game, however.

In the RPGs and other 'side games' we get to see a little more of Peach as a person. In Paper Mario (N64), she works within the confines of being captured to get Mario more information on how to beat Bowser (thus rescuing her and restoring the kingdom to it's normal state). In Super Paper Mario (Wii), she's a playable character in her own right, standing beside Mario, Luigi and Bowser to help save the day.

Small romantic gestures can be written off as obligation in this way - stuck between a captor who repeatedly abducts her and proclaims romantic intent, and her consistent rescuer, there's a certain sense of obligation to repay him in some way for his efforts. Especially as, inevitably, she will be kidnapped again - it's in her own best interests not to snub the one man who reliably rescues her, when her own staff and seemingly no one else in the kingdom is even willing to try.

There's also her position to think about. As Princess of the Mushroom kingdom, there are all kinds of people apart from her invested in this relationship. Talking to many of the NPC Toads in the Paper Mario, and the Mario and Luigi games reveals that her relationship to Mario is the subject of a lot of gossip around the Mushroom Kingdom. Simply declaring that she has no interest for Mario won't work, not when so many others are invested in the outcome.

The only other notable time when Peach is approached in a romantic/sexual way by anyone apart from Bowser or Mario that I'm aware of is in Super Paper Mario, where Francis (gross butterfly collecting dudebro) talks to Peach as though she is a character in a romantic visual novel. This goes about as well as can be expected, and Peach, gratifyingly, doesn't pander to his expectations, but it does come some way to explaining how the few people who don't see Peach as an untouchable figure treat her as a mute object to possess. With that in mind, how many other options does Peach really have?

In Super Mario 64, the game opens with Peach's letter, asking Mario to come to the castle because she's baked a cake for him. This could be read as a romantic gesture, but it's not as though Mario is alone in having had Peach cook for him. Gourmet Guy in Paper Mario also receives a cake from Peach, albeit in order for her to get more information about Bowser's schemes. Even Bowser receives a cake for his part in saving the Mushroom Kingdom in Bowser's Inside Story (DS). Maybe she just likes baking?

Mario is invited to numerous events, such as the Star Festival in the Super Mario Galaxy games (Wii), tea parties in New Super Mario Bros. U (Wii), but usually with others present (like Luigi or Toads), so it's rarely them together alone. To me, this reads more as inviting friends to events, over inviting a significant other to a date.

This is, by no means to say that this is true or it's the best interpretation of her character. Merely an alternative to the obvious and easy plot of damsel in distress falls in love with her rescuer. There are other possibilities, too. Perhaps she doesn't have romantic affection for him, but a sisterly affection? There is nothing to say that she doesn't hold platonic feelings towards him, just as there's nothing to say that her feeling aren't romantic, despite everything I've just said. Characters are open to interpretation of subtext and events and especially in a franchise like Mario's, small details are often the only clues we get about a much more complex character than we initially thought.

Hating on Banksy: A New Trend

With the opening of Dismaland, there's been a trend on some social media networks to badmouth Banksy. I went into this with a reasonably open mind - while I've seen and enjoy a lot of his pieces, I wouldn't consider myself an avid fan, and I was perfectly willing to listen to the arguments against him. If he were genuinely problematic, I'd prefer to know about it and inform myself. But the more I listened to other people's genuinely angry discourse, the more I felt like they were wrong. They bought up a variety of points, some which were nonsensical, and others which, while they had a very strong point, felt somewhat unfair to use as an attack on a person, when they were addressed to a culture as a whole. So, for my own benefit, I'm going to look at the key arguments against and explain why I feel this isn't a constructive movement to criticise both Banksy himself and the wider art world.

He's marketable and successful

On the surface, this almost makes sense. After all, his art is openly and repeatedly critical of capitalism and how it hurts people, so how can an artist profit from the system they despise? Except the problem is that we live in a capitalist society. You can't dismantle a system from within without using the tools of that system. In order to change anything, you need power. And for the most part, in a capitalist society, power comes from money. Now, you can be critical of what Banksy does with his money - does he use it as a force to help others or not? But I haven't seen anyone touch on this, possibly because of Banksy's own anonymity. However, while researching, I did come across this story of how he helped a homeless man who was displaced by his art. I'd like to believe that's typical of his actions, but I have no way of knowing for sure. Just as I have no way of knowing that he doesn't do more actions like this.

By being marketable, his art is getting into the hands of the people who should, by all rights, be the biggest proponents of capitalism. Banksy's works have been sold in Sotheby’s in London (extremely upper-class auction house for art). They were selling for hundreds of thousands of pounds. Not exactly pocket change for the buyer - this is the kind of money that could outright buy a house in most areas of the country. These are people who have greatly profited from capitalism buying anti-capitalist art...there's a certain level of irony there. His success has given his anti-capitalist ideas a platform that he wouldn't otherwise have had. You can bemoan the evils of capitalism all you like, but if no one listens, what's the point? This way, at least people have thought about his art, and maybe gone on to learn more and work towards making a change. Art is a starting point for discussion, but no one can discuss it if they never see it.

So at the end of the day, this is an argument that goes roughly: I don't like that this artist gets paid for his art. I don't like that his career is successful and that he can afford to support himself on the back of his art. And that feels like nonsense to me, especially when said by the same people who openly support artists, stop art theft and think artists should be paid reasonably for their work.

He's popular/He creates art that takes no skill

Much like the argument above, it attacks him personally for something he has fairly little control over. It also comes with the implication that there are other artists more deserving. But mostly it smacks of 'hipsterism' to me. Liking things because they aren't mainstream, even if that means abandoning artists once they achieve a level of notoriety. And that's ridiculous.

However, the implication that other artists deserve more attention is actually a good one. Because I can't argue. Art is subjective; people are never going to agree on who the most 'deserving' artist is. There are almost certainly artists with better ideas than Banksy, and greater technical skill than Banksy. It's not fair that he makes a lot of money off his work while others don't. It's not fair that there are artists who are living in abject poverty while he isn't. The world isn't fair.

If you really feel that strongly that other artists deserve more attention/exposure/money, then rather than hate on one artist, and tear him down, love on the artists you like. Elevate them up. Blog about their art. Buy their work. Recommend them to friends. Make a positive difference.

He creates art that's too easily accessible

I've seen this alarmingly often. It has the smack of artistic gatekeeping to me. My inability to agree with this argument is the same reason I really dislike a lot of modern art. I really hate what I feel is pretension around art. I have a degree in film, and I can't stand this. This is a very personal one for me, and I'm fully willing to admit I'm wrong on this point.

Basically, if you have a message in your art, and it's an important message, why would you ever want to make it more difficult to understand?

Modern art is apparently full of hidden depths and means. I use the word 'apparently', as I wouldn't have guessed without reading the caption besides the piece. There's actually a lot of pieces that I wouldn't have guessed were art without reading the captions besides the pieces. That's okay. I've long known most modern art isn't for me. I'm still convinced that the modern art world is something of an 'emperor's new clothes'-style delusion, and that by interpreting new 'meanings' to a piece, we somehow aren't meant to see its lack of skill or originality or intent.

All this means that I really don't mind that an artist's work is easy to understand. At least I am sure that they had a meaning and a driving force behind creating it.

He is celebrated for making art when other artists (predominantly black) are criminalised for exactly the same thing/He's white and male

This is a genuine problem. It's racism, and it's all kinds of hypocrisy to reward one person for their behaviour, while criminalising the other, based solely on the colour of their skin. However, this is a cultural problem, not an individual one. This isn't helped by attacking the artist who benefits. Bring up an awareness of it, definitely. Point it out. But you don't need to be hostile towards the people who can't control it.

Again, take constructive actions. Get involved in politics. Write letters to politicians. Form petitions. Raise awareness. On smaller levels, look into local arts projects and see how they systematically exclude certain types of people. Raise awareness of gentrification of areas and what that means for many types of people. Notice who profits from the system being organised in this way.

Banksy made graffiti art popular and a lot of businesses are employing artists to decorate their buildings as a result. But they predominantly only want graduate artists. Why? It systematically cuts out a large proportion of artists. Write to them. Ask why they wouldn't hire an artist who hasn't been lucky enough to afford a degree. Put pressure on them to change.

He built an art exhibition on that site when he could have done something useful, like build a home for poor people

He's an artist. He has the skills and experience and contacts needed to set up an exhibition. I doubt he does have the relevant contacts to get a building planned, approved and built. Even if he did, the cost of a safe, permanent building would be many times more expensive than a temporary 5 week exhibition, much of which is outdoors.

Even setting that aside - Dismaland has drawn people from all over the world to go to Weston-Super-Mere. That's insane. For those who don't know, Weston-Super-Mare used to be a popular seaside town before budget holidays meant you could go to Spain as easily and cheaply. Now it's a rundown town with a small population and a sizeable drug problem. It's not a place you travel to, you travel through it. I've gone through Weston-Super-Mare more times than I can count, but I've never stopped there. And now people from all over the world want to go there. Not to mention that where there are people, there's money. Dismaland is estimated to result in £6 million being spent in the area from the influx of people. An extra £6 million in 5 weeks. That's phenomenal. That's actually going to make a good deal of difference to a lot of local businesses in the area.

If he'd built housing there, even assuming that he got planning permission to build a permanent structure and everything else that's so unrealistic: how many people would have benefited? Maybe 4000, in a block of flats. How long would the benefits have lasted for? Who would be responsible for maintaining the housing? How are the people who're going to live there going to eat? What jobs are available in the area? It's run-down and has very little industry. It would be a temporary fix to a very longterm and complicated problem.

-------------

In short: are any of these reasons worth attacking an individual over? By all means, don't like his art. Discuss the issues surrounding the art. No art exists in a vacuum, and it's good to have these discussions. But can't we be civil about it? Can't we just have the courage to say we dislike something, without personally attacking the creator for it? Or can we at least direct the anger to where it actually belongs - upwards.

One last point that I didn't feel were relevant to any particular argument, but relevant as a whole:

Dismaland isn't filled with Banksy's work. He has 10 pieces in there. He's displaying work from other artists, including people of colour, and if anything, he's using his name as a way of promoting the exhibition. I can virtually guarantee you that only the most dedicated of art buffs would have trekked out to Weston-Super-Mare for an art installation if his name hadn't been attached, and it wouldn't have attracted national news, let alone international news.