Ma tahan varsti reisida Saksamaale ja Austriale.
I had written:
Ma tahan reisida Saksamaal ja Austrial varsti
And I'm reasonably sure I used the wrong case to say "travel to" as opposed to "travel in", and I think the "soon" was in the wrong place for an Estonian sentence (although I could be wrong - I am basing a lot of my interpretations of Estonian sentence structure on whether or not Google comes up with something ridiculous when I put my sentences into the translator, which could be erroneous).
While I'm writing sentences in target languages for practice, I may as well throw in a Saksakeeles attempt:
Ich will nach Deutschland un Östereich bald reisen.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Maria and the Captain
Go with me on this one. Maria is sitting on the seat outside the gazebo, feeling like she was a fool to come back. The Captain doesn't love her, and is marrying the Baroness.
Captain von Trapp comes to see her, and goes through that whole "I've called the wedding off, you see. I figure you can't marry someone when you're really in love with someone else" conversation, which leads them into the gazebo.
Then the music swells (orchestral, of course, with strings and brass), and he eases into song:
CAPTAIN:
It could work, right? I think it could work.
Captain von Trapp comes to see her, and goes through that whole "I've called the wedding off, you see. I figure you can't marry someone when you're really in love with someone else" conversation, which leads them into the gazebo.
Then the music swells (orchestral, of course, with strings and brass), and he eases into song:
CAPTAIN:
I've seen you twice, in a short timeMARIA:
Barly a week since the party
It seems to me, for every time
I'm getting more open-hearted
I was an impossible case
No-one ever could reach me
But I think I can see in your face
There's a lot you can teach me
So I wanna know..
What's the name of the game?
(Your smile and the sound of your voice)CAPTAIN:
Does it mean anything to you?MARIA:
(Got a feeling you give me no choice, and it means alot)CAPTAIN:
What's the name of the game?MARIA:
(Your smile and the sound of your voice)CAPTAIN:
Can you feel it the way I do?MARIA:
Tell me please, 'cause I have to know
I'm a bashful child, beginning to growCAPTAIN:
And you make me talk
And you make me feel
And you make me show
What I'm trying to conceal
If I trust in you, would you let me down?
Would you laugh at me, if I said I care for you?
Could you feel the same way too?
I wanna know..
The name of the game
I have no friends, no-one to see
And I am never invited
Now I am here, talking to you
No wonder I get excited
Your smile, and the sound of your voice
And the way you see through me
Got a feeling, you give me no choice
But it means a lot to me
So I wanna know..
What's the name of the game?
(Your smile and the sound of your voice)MARIA:
Does it mean anything to you?CAPTAIN:
(Got a feeling you give me no choice)MARIA:
But it means a lot, what's the name of the game?CAPTAIN:
(Your smile and the sound of your voice)MARIA:
Can you feel it the way I do?CAPTAIN:
Tell me please, 'cause I have to know
I'm a bashful child, beginning to growBOTH:
And you make me talk
And you make me feel
And you make me show
What I'm trying to conceal
If I trust in you, would you let me down?
Would you laugh at me, if I said I care for you?
Could you feel the same way too?
I wanna know..
Oh yes I wanna know..
The name of the game
It could work, right? I think it could work.
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Thank You for the (Sound of) Music
First of all, let me say that I am bitterly disappointed with all of you. I deliberately got one of my facts wrong in my re-telling of The Sound of Music for my post on Wonder Woman as Sister Maria (because the point I wanted to make worked better with a slightly different version), and no one corrected me.
Maria was, of course, not raised in an all-girl convent-run boarding school. She grew up in a rural community on/near the mountains, through which she would rove as a child, and 'twas as she was running about on the mountains that she first saw the convent and heard the nuns singing and though "I'd like to do that when I grow up".
I was expecting at least one person to point out the error, but no one did. Shocking, really. You should all feel vaguely ashamed.
I watched the film again over the weekend just passed. 'Twas an interesting weekend, as I watched Mamma Mia the night before. Two musicals in two days can have strange consequences.
Saturday night I had a dream that they decided to re-make The Sound of Music using ABBA songs. In the dream, it didn't really go into more detail beyond having the kids perform "Super Trouper" with puppets instead of "Lonely Goatherd" (which worked surprisingly well - especially with the slight 'oom-pa-pa' flavour of the song).
As is the way with such things, I woke up thinking "that could totally work!", and spend the rest of the day realising it really couldn't. Not as a direct swap, song-for-song, at any rate. You'd have to re-write the script to put different songs into different places.
But, still, part of me really wants to see the Family von Trapp singing "Fernando" for their concert. Oh, and Liesl and Rolf should sing "SOS" for their Gazebo scene, while Maria and the Captain can sing "The Name of the Game" for theirs... Or maybe "I Do, I Do, I Do"...
Okay, so I can't think of a single ABBA song that can really replace "Something Good" for that scene. And, yes, all of the original songs are better than anything you could replace them with. Whatever.
Maria was, of course, not raised in an all-girl convent-run boarding school. She grew up in a rural community on/near the mountains, through which she would rove as a child, and 'twas as she was running about on the mountains that she first saw the convent and heard the nuns singing and though "I'd like to do that when I grow up".
I was expecting at least one person to point out the error, but no one did. Shocking, really. You should all feel vaguely ashamed.
I watched the film again over the weekend just passed. 'Twas an interesting weekend, as I watched Mamma Mia the night before. Two musicals in two days can have strange consequences.
Saturday night I had a dream that they decided to re-make The Sound of Music using ABBA songs. In the dream, it didn't really go into more detail beyond having the kids perform "Super Trouper" with puppets instead of "Lonely Goatherd" (which worked surprisingly well - especially with the slight 'oom-pa-pa' flavour of the song).
As is the way with such things, I woke up thinking "that could totally work!", and spend the rest of the day realising it really couldn't. Not as a direct swap, song-for-song, at any rate. You'd have to re-write the script to put different songs into different places.
But, still, part of me really wants to see the Family von Trapp singing "Fernando" for their concert. Oh, and Liesl and Rolf should sing "SOS" for their Gazebo scene, while Maria and the Captain can sing "The Name of the Game" for theirs... Or maybe "I Do, I Do, I Do"...
Okay, so I can't think of a single ABBA song that can really replace "Something Good" for that scene. And, yes, all of the original songs are better than anything you could replace them with. Whatever.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Kass
Meine Katze möcht Fische essen. Aber, sie möcht nicht alle Fische. Sie leibt Tunfische. Tunfische mit Huhn, Tunfische mit andere Fische, Tunfische mit Reis... Sie ist ein Tunfische Fanatiker!
Das ist in ordnung, aber sie möcht ihr Tunfische mit ihr Pfoten essen, und sie schüttelt ihr Pfoten. Das ist sehr unordentlich, und ein bisschen eklig.
Still flaky with the verbs (and a few other things), but I'm working on it
Mu kass meeldib kala. Aga ta ei meeldib kõik kala. Ta armastab tuun. Tuun kanaga, tuun teine kalaga, tuun riisiga... Ta on tuun fanaatik!
See on korras, aga ta meeldib süüa tema käppadega, ja ta raputab oma käppad. See on väga korratu, ning natuke jäle.
Still flaky with everything, but I'm working on it...
Das ist in ordnung, aber sie möcht ihr Tunfische mit ihr Pfoten essen, und sie schüttelt ihr Pfoten. Das ist sehr unordentlich, und ein bisschen eklig.
Still flaky with the verbs (and a few other things), but I'm working on it
Mu kass meeldib kala. Aga ta ei meeldib kõik kala. Ta armastab tuun. Tuun kanaga, tuun teine kalaga, tuun riisiga... Ta on tuun fanaatik!
See on korras, aga ta meeldib süüa tema käppadega, ja ta raputab oma käppad. See on väga korratu, ning natuke jäle.
Still flaky with everything, but I'm working on it...
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Bussid
Oh, yeah. I meant to tell you about the busses.
Since my last post on public transport in Townsville, several things have happened. Some quite useful, some not-so-much.
Shortly after my post complaining that it was impossible to walk up to a bus stop and find out what buses might stop there, the bus stops were magically updated with pieces of paper giving a rough idea of routes and buses. Some even provide maps to show where these buses might foreseeably go.
However, they also altered the time-tables so that buses which would once stop in my area at 20 minutes past the hour were now stopping at 20 minutes to the hour. Also, bus routes were altered (and given completely different numbers), so that buses which once lead from streets quite near my house to my place of employment now only go half so far, and one would need to change buses to make the rest of the journey. And while two buses that do go all the way to my work pass through my neighbourhood, they reach points equidistant to my house at the same time, meaning I can't miss one bus and hurry to catch the other (as I might have been able to do on the old time-table).
So, on the one hand, I know know exactly which buses I need to take to get to work, and where I need to be to catch them. Das ist gut. On the other hand, I now have to get up half-an-hour earlier and skip breakfast if I want to catch a bus that will get me to work on time, where I wouldn't have had to do that before. Das ist nicht gut.
So, my plans to take the bus to work and walk home have been stymied. I have, of occasion (since my last post on the subject), walked to work and taken the bus home. This has proven to be quite successful, in spite of the fact that every person I talk to looks at me as if I'm absolutely crazy.
Them: You walked here? (As they give me a look that implies I may as well have said I levitated the whole way)
Me: Yes.
Them: How are you getting home?
Me: I'm taking a bus
Them: Are you sure? (As they give me a look that implies they want to say: "But buses are the spawn of the Devil, and will certainly take you to your doom!")
The buses in Townsville are actually pretty good, close to 6pm. There's hardly anyone trying to catch a bus at that time, so the buses are usually running a bit fast, and largely empty. Plus, the buses are quite clean and well kept. The seats aren't that comfortable, but you get that.
This, of course, doesn't actually solve my problem regarding having to plan such trips a day in advance to make sure I have a change of clothes at work. I guess you get that, too.
Since my last post on public transport in Townsville, several things have happened. Some quite useful, some not-so-much.
Shortly after my post complaining that it was impossible to walk up to a bus stop and find out what buses might stop there, the bus stops were magically updated with pieces of paper giving a rough idea of routes and buses. Some even provide maps to show where these buses might foreseeably go.
However, they also altered the time-tables so that buses which would once stop in my area at 20 minutes past the hour were now stopping at 20 minutes to the hour. Also, bus routes were altered (and given completely different numbers), so that buses which once lead from streets quite near my house to my place of employment now only go half so far, and one would need to change buses to make the rest of the journey. And while two buses that do go all the way to my work pass through my neighbourhood, they reach points equidistant to my house at the same time, meaning I can't miss one bus and hurry to catch the other (as I might have been able to do on the old time-table).
So, on the one hand, I know know exactly which buses I need to take to get to work, and where I need to be to catch them. Das ist gut. On the other hand, I now have to get up half-an-hour earlier and skip breakfast if I want to catch a bus that will get me to work on time, where I wouldn't have had to do that before. Das ist nicht gut.
So, my plans to take the bus to work and walk home have been stymied. I have, of occasion (since my last post on the subject), walked to work and taken the bus home. This has proven to be quite successful, in spite of the fact that every person I talk to looks at me as if I'm absolutely crazy.
Them: You walked here? (As they give me a look that implies I may as well have said I levitated the whole way)
Me: Yes.
Them: How are you getting home?
Me: I'm taking a bus
Them: Are you sure? (As they give me a look that implies they want to say: "But buses are the spawn of the Devil, and will certainly take you to your doom!")
The buses in Townsville are actually pretty good, close to 6pm. There's hardly anyone trying to catch a bus at that time, so the buses are usually running a bit fast, and largely empty. Plus, the buses are quite clean and well kept. The seats aren't that comfortable, but you get that.
This, of course, doesn't actually solve my problem regarding having to plan such trips a day in advance to make sure I have a change of clothes at work. I guess you get that, too.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Bad Mother
The other day I happened to look at my hands, and noticed they looked like my mother's hands looked when I was a child.
I did some rough calculations in my head (nothing good ever comes of such things), and worked out that I'm the same age my mother was when I was about three years old. Those same calculations lead me to realise that my mother is almost the same age my grandmother was at the same time.
I had a strange feeling of nostalgia for what it was like with my mother and my grandmother when I was a small child and then, for some reason I can't quite explain, I suddenly felt overwhelmed by an impression that I was being a really bad mother. Here I was, denying any future children I might have the chance to know their mother while she was still in her early thirties, or to know their grandmother while she was still in her early fifties. This was something that had been a great benefit and pleasure to me, and my children would never know it.
Previously, I had only felt like I was being a bad daughter because I wasn't giving my mother grandchildren during her prime. Now I'm also feeling like a bad mother because I'm not giving my children their grandmother in her prime.
And the crazy thing about it all is: I don't want kids. I never have. I find the entire concept of pregnancy disturbing, the idea of being responsible for ensuring a baby survives childhood alarming and the thought of having to keep the thing for the next few decades daunting. Added to that, I have yet to find a candidate for the reasonably important role of "father of my children". Yet, even though children have never been on my list of things to do, I'm suddenly feeling like I've made a horrible miscalculation by not having them sooner.
At the back of my mind I've always thought that if I was ever going to have children, I'd prefer have a decent handful of them (like my grandmother) rather than just one or two. Yet I also know that having a large brood of children is a young woman's game. My grandmother had most of her kids in her twenties, and was in her thirties and forties when she had to deal with any teenagers - still young enough to chase them up a tree, if necessary.
Teenagers. Ugh. You know, babies eventually grow up to become teenagers. Babies are buckets of drool, poop and other icky, slimy substances. Teenagers are teenagers. You start with something unpleasant, and if you wait long enough, it will turn into something unpleasant. I really can't see the attraction there.
So, on one hand, when I think about it I find myself thinking: "Oh, no! I'm leaving it far too late to have children and there will be many negative things resulting from such poor timing"
And, on the other hand, when I think about it I find myself thinking: "But I don't want any of that."
Ah, the complexities of modern life...
I did some rough calculations in my head (nothing good ever comes of such things), and worked out that I'm the same age my mother was when I was about three years old. Those same calculations lead me to realise that my mother is almost the same age my grandmother was at the same time.
I had a strange feeling of nostalgia for what it was like with my mother and my grandmother when I was a small child and then, for some reason I can't quite explain, I suddenly felt overwhelmed by an impression that I was being a really bad mother. Here I was, denying any future children I might have the chance to know their mother while she was still in her early thirties, or to know their grandmother while she was still in her early fifties. This was something that had been a great benefit and pleasure to me, and my children would never know it.
Previously, I had only felt like I was being a bad daughter because I wasn't giving my mother grandchildren during her prime. Now I'm also feeling like a bad mother because I'm not giving my children their grandmother in her prime.
And the crazy thing about it all is: I don't want kids. I never have. I find the entire concept of pregnancy disturbing, the idea of being responsible for ensuring a baby survives childhood alarming and the thought of having to keep the thing for the next few decades daunting. Added to that, I have yet to find a candidate for the reasonably important role of "father of my children". Yet, even though children have never been on my list of things to do, I'm suddenly feeling like I've made a horrible miscalculation by not having them sooner.
At the back of my mind I've always thought that if I was ever going to have children, I'd prefer have a decent handful of them (like my grandmother) rather than just one or two. Yet I also know that having a large brood of children is a young woman's game. My grandmother had most of her kids in her twenties, and was in her thirties and forties when she had to deal with any teenagers - still young enough to chase them up a tree, if necessary.
Teenagers. Ugh. You know, babies eventually grow up to become teenagers. Babies are buckets of drool, poop and other icky, slimy substances. Teenagers are teenagers. You start with something unpleasant, and if you wait long enough, it will turn into something unpleasant. I really can't see the attraction there.
So, on one hand, when I think about it I find myself thinking: "Oh, no! I'm leaving it far too late to have children and there will be many negative things resulting from such poor timing"
And, on the other hand, when I think about it I find myself thinking: "But I don't want any of that."
Ah, the complexities of modern life...
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Two Worlds
Some time ago I wrote a post with a title borrowed from one of Juhan Liiv's poems: Kaks Ilma (two worlds). For some reason, this particular post (along with one entitled "Homonyms" and one entitled "The Watch") keeps getting targeted by those charming individuals who have nothing better to do than use your blog to Google-scam (which I've also seen written as "Google spam").
Basically, they submit a dummy comment full of links for webpages they are trying to push further up the list in Google search results. It's annoying, but at the same time intriguing. What is it about those three posts that attracts the spam? I can understand why "The Watch" keeps getting spammed with watch ads, but why do the other two keep getting hit time and time again with everything under the sun?
Basically, they submit a dummy comment full of links for webpages they are trying to push further up the list in Google search results. It's annoying, but at the same time intriguing. What is it about those three posts that attracts the spam? I can understand why "The Watch" keeps getting spammed with watch ads, but why do the other two keep getting hit time and time again with everything under the sun?
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Who is Wonder Woman?
While I'm rabbiting on about Wonder Woman, I thought I'd give my two-bits concerning what the essence of the character is, and what her writers should keep in mind.
I won't bother with the backstory, as I think it's enough to say William Moulton Marston's version should never have been tampered with. The practicalities of how she established her secret identity as Diana Prince, and exactly what rank and role she plays in the services can happily be adapted to fit modern times - as can the reason why Steve Trevor was flying over Themyscira in the first place. But the rest of it should stay in place.
No, what I want to talk about involves two elements of her character that are often forgotten and left behind by writers:
Firstly, Wonder Woman is (and hear me out on this one) Sister Maria from The Sound of Music. Essentially, her character is a girl who was raised by nuns in an all-girl boarding school and saw herself becoming a nun as part of a natural progression. She was sheltered from the "real world" for most of her life, and thought she would spend the rest of her life living like the women who educated her. However, she's so full of life and energy and adventure that she gets sent out from the community of the convent to undertake a mission - believing the whole time that she will return to the convent when her mission is completed.
The whole of the "real world" is something of an awfully big adventure, but she has a job to do and she's going to do it to the best of her ability. She's young and idealistic and believes she can make a positive difference in the lives of those around her. But she's also completely out of her depth - she was not raised in this society, she has never done this job before, and she's not entirely sure where the boundaries are. As a result, she occasionally steps over them and finds herself at loggerheads with the people who do belong in this world.
And, then, she really doesn't know what to do about that man. She's never met anyone like him before and she's starting to notice that when he's around she's experiencing feelings she's never felt before (she doesn't know what to do about those, either). She does know that she shouldn't be having feelings like that about him - there are all sorts of reasons for keeping a professional distance. For example: she works for him, they belong to different worlds and she's expecting to go back to the convent soon...
Yes, there's also superpowers and fighting bad guys thrown into that, but essentially that's where she's at in terms of her foray into man's world.
Secondly, like Superman, Wonder Woman constantly pivots around a love-triangle involving two people. Steve Trevor is captivated by Wonder Woman; Diana Prince is in love with Steve Trevor. For reasons that can change as often as they need to be updated for the "modern reader", Steve Trevor doesn't know that Wonder Woman and Diana Prince are the same person, and she's not allowed to tell him. Neither of her identities is real - she's lying to him on both fronts as she tries to support two secret identities, and has no one to share her true self with. So he's chasing her while she pines after him. She must keep her distance and keep a good working relationship with the man, while at the same time struggling with feeling confused about the whole thing. Is she jealous of herself? Can she waste time on this when there is a world to save? It's a delicate balance that can't really be tipped one way or the other. Untenable? Yes. Yet it must continue, and she must endure - for she is here on a mission, and when that mission is over she will be returning to her convent/island.
So here we have it: a young woman, new to the world and new to love, trying to keep her distance from the man who may very well make her happy as she tries to figure out how this place works, complete her mission, save the world, and return home feeling like she's accomplished something worthwhile. Always wondering if maybe, just maybe, she could stay and make a life here. Always knowing she doesn't belong in this place, and her home is very far away. Trying to fit into the world and save it at the same time, while also trying to figure out her own heart. Not an easy challenge, when you think about it.
Hmm. I suddenly feel like watching The Sound of Music again.
I won't bother with the backstory, as I think it's enough to say William Moulton Marston's version should never have been tampered with. The practicalities of how she established her secret identity as Diana Prince, and exactly what rank and role she plays in the services can happily be adapted to fit modern times - as can the reason why Steve Trevor was flying over Themyscira in the first place. But the rest of it should stay in place.
No, what I want to talk about involves two elements of her character that are often forgotten and left behind by writers:
Firstly, Wonder Woman is (and hear me out on this one) Sister Maria from The Sound of Music. Essentially, her character is a girl who was raised by nuns in an all-girl boarding school and saw herself becoming a nun as part of a natural progression. She was sheltered from the "real world" for most of her life, and thought she would spend the rest of her life living like the women who educated her. However, she's so full of life and energy and adventure that she gets sent out from the community of the convent to undertake a mission - believing the whole time that she will return to the convent when her mission is completed.
The whole of the "real world" is something of an awfully big adventure, but she has a job to do and she's going to do it to the best of her ability. She's young and idealistic and believes she can make a positive difference in the lives of those around her. But she's also completely out of her depth - she was not raised in this society, she has never done this job before, and she's not entirely sure where the boundaries are. As a result, she occasionally steps over them and finds herself at loggerheads with the people who do belong in this world.
And, then, she really doesn't know what to do about that man. She's never met anyone like him before and she's starting to notice that when he's around she's experiencing feelings she's never felt before (she doesn't know what to do about those, either). She does know that she shouldn't be having feelings like that about him - there are all sorts of reasons for keeping a professional distance. For example: she works for him, they belong to different worlds and she's expecting to go back to the convent soon...
Yes, there's also superpowers and fighting bad guys thrown into that, but essentially that's where she's at in terms of her foray into man's world.
Secondly, like Superman, Wonder Woman constantly pivots around a love-triangle involving two people. Steve Trevor is captivated by Wonder Woman; Diana Prince is in love with Steve Trevor. For reasons that can change as often as they need to be updated for the "modern reader", Steve Trevor doesn't know that Wonder Woman and Diana Prince are the same person, and she's not allowed to tell him. Neither of her identities is real - she's lying to him on both fronts as she tries to support two secret identities, and has no one to share her true self with. So he's chasing her while she pines after him. She must keep her distance and keep a good working relationship with the man, while at the same time struggling with feeling confused about the whole thing. Is she jealous of herself? Can she waste time on this when there is a world to save? It's a delicate balance that can't really be tipped one way or the other. Untenable? Yes. Yet it must continue, and she must endure - for she is here on a mission, and when that mission is over she will be returning to her convent/island.
So here we have it: a young woman, new to the world and new to love, trying to keep her distance from the man who may very well make her happy as she tries to figure out how this place works, complete her mission, save the world, and return home feeling like she's accomplished something worthwhile. Always wondering if maybe, just maybe, she could stay and make a life here. Always knowing she doesn't belong in this place, and her home is very far away. Trying to fit into the world and save it at the same time, while also trying to figure out her own heart. Not an easy challenge, when you think about it.
Hmm. I suddenly feel like watching The Sound of Music again.
Friday, July 9, 2010
Wonder Woman #600
Well, they're messing with Wonder Woman again. I shouldn't be surprised, really. Messing with Wonder Woman is what people do. It all stems from the history behind the title: for a while there, D.C. had to publish a Wonder Woman comic or they'd lose the rights to the character. So D.C. has been in a position where it must produce Wonder Woman comics even if it didn't particularly want to. It seems as though a rolling succession of writers and editors have tried to take a character they weren't interested in and turn it into something that would interest them. And yet, for some reason, WW still sells badly.
Stable mates Batman and Superman manage to keep multiple titles running quite smoothly, with a fan base that will happily follow them wherever they go. Wonder Woman? Well, readers come and go and rarely stick around for long, and D.C. struggles to keep one title running. It's an absolute miracle they made it to #600, and I half suspect that's more due to stubbornness than anything else.
What have Batman and Superman got that Wonder Woman hasn't? I'd say people who "get" them. The folks who write for Batman and Superman know they can't mess with them too much. When they need to make the characters more interesting - when they go through one of their interminable re-boots and retcons - they go back to the original story, grab the heart of it and try to tell that story in the most interesting way they can.
They know that Superman is Clark Kent - that he is the last survivor of a doomed world who was raised by humans and can fit into human society, but is not human and can't avoid that fact. They know that his character is essentially that of a boy scout - he wants to do what's right and be helpful. Sure he fights crime and smashes alien space fleets to pieces, but it's essentially his way of helping an old lady across the street.
They know that Batman is Bruce Wayne - that as a boy saw his parents murdered in the street and has always wanted to do something to fix that. They know that he is disciplined and determined and is capable of pushing himself past limits that would impede most men. They know that he is essentially the noble vigilante - trying to save his city the way he couldn't save his parents.
No body messes with that. Nobody changes it. Everyone gets the essence of Superman and Batman and no matter how often the characters are updated for "modern readers", they are still essentially the same. The worst that ever happens to them is they become a bit more human.
Wonder Woman? Well no one seems to know who she is. That's why every time they try to make her "more interesting" they decide to lose some of the "baggage" of her past. No one tries to lose Lois Lane, saying she's "baggage". No one tries to save Bruce Wayne's parents, saying their death is "baggage", but everyone keeps trying to take stuff out of Wonder Woman and put something else in to replace it.
Through the magic of Trade Paperbacks I've been reading Wonder Woman since the Forties, and I can tell you how much she's suffered over the years. In the Forties, she had a bright future ahead of her. In the Fifites, they treated her like she was some boring kid sister they had to babysit. In the sixties, they got tired of babysitting her and wanted to scrap her, but found they couldn't (legal reasons), so they killed off everyone in her back story and turned her into Emma Peel. In the Seventies she got her backstory resurrected (but badly), and promptly bounced between not-too-bad and oh-for-crying-out-loud. In the Eighties she started looking up... right up until they decided to scrap the universe and start again.
When Superman and Batman started again, the essentials were all in place. But Wonder Woman? Well, George Perez, in his infinite wisdom, decided to scrap half her story and lose half her personality. He came up with a corker of a story line, that was worth reading, but was essentially broken. Perez broke Wonder Woman by losing Diana Prince and palming off Steve Trevor. I've said it before and I'll say it again: Diana Prince is as much a part of Wonder Woman as Clark Kent and Bruce Wayne are parts of Superman and Batman. To lose her is to lose the core of the character. Steve Trevor is to Diana Prince what Lois Lane is to Clark Kent. You can't rend him irrelevant.
Since then I've been waiting for someone to fix it. I knew it was possible. I knew they would be able to have some time-flux-thingy or act-of-the-gods that could put the right pieces back into place... But no one ever did. Everyone kept trying to build on the broken version - and whenever they decided the broken version wasn't doing it for them, they'd just break it a little bit more.
It seems to be the universal solution to the "Wonder Woman Problem" - get rid of her supporting cast, put her entire history in the too-hard basket and try to make an interesting character, which we can then dress in something resembling a star-spangled swim-suit and call "Wonder Woman". Thanks to her writers, the character has rarely been the same person for more than a few years at a time. No wonder readers don't stick with her. You can't treat a character like a third-tier nobody and expect it to sell like a first-tier best-seller.
When they restarted her again in 2006/2007 with Allan Heinberg's Who is Wonder Woman story arc, someone finally started figuring out what had been going wrong all this time. They were finally starting to fix her. Heinberg put Diana Prince back into the picture (Huzzah!) and provided a Steve Trevor substitute in the form of Nemesis (bit odd, but I'll take it). He wasn't abandoning the broken version (bold) but trying to fix it, rather than break it even further (finally!).
In the introduction to the TPB for Who is Wonder Woman, Brian K. Vaugn mentioned how appropriate the title was - how no one seems to be able to get a handle on who Wonder Woman is. Well, duh! That's because Wonder Woman is Diana Prince, and everyone's been trying to ignore that for the last 30 years.
Oh, and then Jodi Picoult took over for the Love and Murder story. Jody Picoult gets Wonder Woman. She understands exactly who Diana Prince is, and how that makes Wonder Woman tick. If Picoult ever decides to write the story for the movie, I will be a happy girl.
I haven't read the next couple of stories yet, but I hear things went from brilliant to "eh" as soon as Picoult handed over the reigns. And now, of course, Strasinski's playing in the sandbox and wants to re-envision her for the 21st century.
How is he doing this? Why by scrapping he support cast and backstory, of course, and trying to create a character he finds interesting, who he can dress up in star-spangled togs and call "Wonder Woman". For one bright and shining moment things were better. But now the rollercoaster is dipping again, and the ride continues. Sigh.
Oh, and the "star-spangled togs"? Well, I don't hate the new costume. Quite frankly, I'm all for tweaking the suit to make it more practical. I don't mind the boddice (see, you can give the poor girl some straps), and I love the belt, but I don't like the boots-merging-into-tights thing they've got going, and I'd prefer if they lost the jacket and whent for something like the shoulder armour Donna Troy was wearing a few years back.
But, then, who am I to talk? What's my opinion worth? I don't write for D.C. and can't make a skerrick of difference - I just care about the character.
Stable mates Batman and Superman manage to keep multiple titles running quite smoothly, with a fan base that will happily follow them wherever they go. Wonder Woman? Well, readers come and go and rarely stick around for long, and D.C. struggles to keep one title running. It's an absolute miracle they made it to #600, and I half suspect that's more due to stubbornness than anything else.
What have Batman and Superman got that Wonder Woman hasn't? I'd say people who "get" them. The folks who write for Batman and Superman know they can't mess with them too much. When they need to make the characters more interesting - when they go through one of their interminable re-boots and retcons - they go back to the original story, grab the heart of it and try to tell that story in the most interesting way they can.
They know that Superman is Clark Kent - that he is the last survivor of a doomed world who was raised by humans and can fit into human society, but is not human and can't avoid that fact. They know that his character is essentially that of a boy scout - he wants to do what's right and be helpful. Sure he fights crime and smashes alien space fleets to pieces, but it's essentially his way of helping an old lady across the street.
They know that Batman is Bruce Wayne - that as a boy saw his parents murdered in the street and has always wanted to do something to fix that. They know that he is disciplined and determined and is capable of pushing himself past limits that would impede most men. They know that he is essentially the noble vigilante - trying to save his city the way he couldn't save his parents.
No body messes with that. Nobody changes it. Everyone gets the essence of Superman and Batman and no matter how often the characters are updated for "modern readers", they are still essentially the same. The worst that ever happens to them is they become a bit more human.
Wonder Woman? Well no one seems to know who she is. That's why every time they try to make her "more interesting" they decide to lose some of the "baggage" of her past. No one tries to lose Lois Lane, saying she's "baggage". No one tries to save Bruce Wayne's parents, saying their death is "baggage", but everyone keeps trying to take stuff out of Wonder Woman and put something else in to replace it.
Through the magic of Trade Paperbacks I've been reading Wonder Woman since the Forties, and I can tell you how much she's suffered over the years. In the Forties, she had a bright future ahead of her. In the Fifites, they treated her like she was some boring kid sister they had to babysit. In the sixties, they got tired of babysitting her and wanted to scrap her, but found they couldn't (legal reasons), so they killed off everyone in her back story and turned her into Emma Peel. In the Seventies she got her backstory resurrected (but badly), and promptly bounced between not-too-bad and oh-for-crying-out-loud. In the Eighties she started looking up... right up until they decided to scrap the universe and start again.
When Superman and Batman started again, the essentials were all in place. But Wonder Woman? Well, George Perez, in his infinite wisdom, decided to scrap half her story and lose half her personality. He came up with a corker of a story line, that was worth reading, but was essentially broken. Perez broke Wonder Woman by losing Diana Prince and palming off Steve Trevor. I've said it before and I'll say it again: Diana Prince is as much a part of Wonder Woman as Clark Kent and Bruce Wayne are parts of Superman and Batman. To lose her is to lose the core of the character. Steve Trevor is to Diana Prince what Lois Lane is to Clark Kent. You can't rend him irrelevant.
Since then I've been waiting for someone to fix it. I knew it was possible. I knew they would be able to have some time-flux-thingy or act-of-the-gods that could put the right pieces back into place... But no one ever did. Everyone kept trying to build on the broken version - and whenever they decided the broken version wasn't doing it for them, they'd just break it a little bit more.
It seems to be the universal solution to the "Wonder Woman Problem" - get rid of her supporting cast, put her entire history in the too-hard basket and try to make an interesting character, which we can then dress in something resembling a star-spangled swim-suit and call "Wonder Woman". Thanks to her writers, the character has rarely been the same person for more than a few years at a time. No wonder readers don't stick with her. You can't treat a character like a third-tier nobody and expect it to sell like a first-tier best-seller.
When they restarted her again in 2006/2007 with Allan Heinberg's Who is Wonder Woman story arc, someone finally started figuring out what had been going wrong all this time. They were finally starting to fix her. Heinberg put Diana Prince back into the picture (Huzzah!) and provided a Steve Trevor substitute in the form of Nemesis (bit odd, but I'll take it). He wasn't abandoning the broken version (bold) but trying to fix it, rather than break it even further (finally!).
In the introduction to the TPB for Who is Wonder Woman, Brian K. Vaugn mentioned how appropriate the title was - how no one seems to be able to get a handle on who Wonder Woman is. Well, duh! That's because Wonder Woman is Diana Prince, and everyone's been trying to ignore that for the last 30 years.
Oh, and then Jodi Picoult took over for the Love and Murder story. Jody Picoult gets Wonder Woman. She understands exactly who Diana Prince is, and how that makes Wonder Woman tick. If Picoult ever decides to write the story for the movie, I will be a happy girl.
I haven't read the next couple of stories yet, but I hear things went from brilliant to "eh" as soon as Picoult handed over the reigns. And now, of course, Strasinski's playing in the sandbox and wants to re-envision her for the 21st century.
How is he doing this? Why by scrapping he support cast and backstory, of course, and trying to create a character he finds interesting, who he can dress up in star-spangled togs and call "Wonder Woman". For one bright and shining moment things were better. But now the rollercoaster is dipping again, and the ride continues. Sigh.
Oh, and the "star-spangled togs"? Well, I don't hate the new costume. Quite frankly, I'm all for tweaking the suit to make it more practical. I don't mind the boddice (see, you can give the poor girl some straps), and I love the belt, but I don't like the boots-merging-into-tights thing they've got going, and I'd prefer if they lost the jacket and whent for something like the shoulder armour Donna Troy was wearing a few years back.
But, then, who am I to talk? What's my opinion worth? I don't write for D.C. and can't make a skerrick of difference - I just care about the character.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Get that man some pants!
Isn't' it odd how some of your favourite movie moments can come from movies you don't particularly like?
Take Two Weeks with Love, for example. I quite like many of the individual elements that went into making that movie, but find the movie itself leaves me unimpressed. Flat, you could say.
The Edwardian Era setting? Love it. Ricardo Montalban? Love him. Re-using sets, props and costumes from Annie Get Your Gun? Not sure if it's true, but love the idea. Debbie Reynolds singing about monkeys? What's not to love? I'm particularly fond of the dream sequence in which Jane Powell freaks out about being caught not wearing a corset and, of course, the moment when her understanding father stands up for a young man at the camp by insisting his father lets him graduate from short-pants to proper trousers:
"Get that man some pants!" Love it.
But... somehow the movie itself leaves me feeling underwhelmed. Maybe it's because all of the "teenagers" looked to old for their parts. Granted, the were in their early 20s, which is still pretty normal for movie teens, but I just couldn't buy Jane Powell as a sixteen-year-old.
Maybe its just that they were trying to hard to be mad-cap and "gay", and falling a touch short.
Maybe I just don't like Jane Powell's acting style/singing voice in this film. I didn't mind her in Royal Wedding or Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, but in this film she reminds me of Betty Hutton, who annoys the dickens out of me in every film I've seen of hers.
For many years I used to get those two confused. I thought Jane Powell was in The Greatest Show on Earth (which wasn't that great, let's face it). Then I watched Annie Get Your Gun and thought "Man, this Betty Hutton chick is as much of a ham as that Jane Powell girl from that circus movie". I think the confusion came from seeing both Two Weeks and Greatest Show at roughly the same time during my childhood. The two look similar enough for someone who isn't watching too closely...
Take Two Weeks with Love, for example. I quite like many of the individual elements that went into making that movie, but find the movie itself leaves me unimpressed. Flat, you could say.
The Edwardian Era setting? Love it. Ricardo Montalban? Love him. Re-using sets, props and costumes from Annie Get Your Gun? Not sure if it's true, but love the idea. Debbie Reynolds singing about monkeys? What's not to love? I'm particularly fond of the dream sequence in which Jane Powell freaks out about being caught not wearing a corset and, of course, the moment when her understanding father stands up for a young man at the camp by insisting his father lets him graduate from short-pants to proper trousers:
"Get that man some pants!" Love it.
But... somehow the movie itself leaves me feeling underwhelmed. Maybe it's because all of the "teenagers" looked to old for their parts. Granted, the were in their early 20s, which is still pretty normal for movie teens, but I just couldn't buy Jane Powell as a sixteen-year-old.
Maybe its just that they were trying to hard to be mad-cap and "gay", and falling a touch short.
Maybe I just don't like Jane Powell's acting style/singing voice in this film. I didn't mind her in Royal Wedding or Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, but in this film she reminds me of Betty Hutton, who annoys the dickens out of me in every film I've seen of hers.
For many years I used to get those two confused. I thought Jane Powell was in The Greatest Show on Earth (which wasn't that great, let's face it). Then I watched Annie Get Your Gun and thought "Man, this Betty Hutton chick is as much of a ham as that Jane Powell girl from that circus movie". I think the confusion came from seeing both Two Weeks and Greatest Show at roughly the same time during my childhood. The two look similar enough for someone who isn't watching too closely...
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Paul Rocks
Paul is currently my favourite octopus in the world:
http://www.tf1.fr/telefilms/news/thierry-lhermitte-est-doc-martin-5867167.html
http://www.tf1.fr/telefilms/news/thierry-lhermitte-est-doc-martin-5867167.html
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Vesi Pudel
Mein blau Flasche ist schrecklich. Sie ist nicht eine gut Wasser Flasche. Sie ist undicht, und das ist nicht gut.
Minu sinine pudel on kohutav. See ei ole hea veepudel. See on lekkiv, ja siis ei ole hea.
You know, it is surprisingly difficult to figure out how to say "does not hold water" using online dictionaries when you mean it literally.
Minu sinine pudel on kohutav. See ei ole hea veepudel. See on lekkiv, ja siis ei ole hea.
You know, it is surprisingly difficult to figure out how to say "does not hold water" using online dictionaries when you mean it literally.
Sesamstrasse
What's the Estonian answer to Sesame Street and Play School? That's what I want to know. There has to be a show that helps youngsters sing and play and spell and count in Estonian? What is it? Why is so carefully hidden on the net?
Monday, July 5, 2010
Ghana and Serbia
Okay, the fact that Germany has been pretty well caning every other team in the comp is making me feel much better about the pasting they gave us in the first round.
It's also making me respect Ghana a lot more. I had, previously, thought the fact that most of the goals they scored during the first round were practically given to them by the other teams doing something stupid (or, in the Socceroos' case, the Ref doing something unbelievable) meant they weren't very good. But when you consider that they managed to keep the German's at bay for so long, and Uruguay had to cheat to beat them...
Well I guess they have some chops. I still think Serbia should have staid in the competition, though.
It's also making me respect Ghana a lot more. I had, previously, thought the fact that most of the goals they scored during the first round were practically given to them by the other teams doing something stupid (or, in the Socceroos' case, the Ref doing something unbelievable) meant they weren't very good. But when you consider that they managed to keep the German's at bay for so long, and Uruguay had to cheat to beat them...
Well I guess they have some chops. I still think Serbia should have staid in the competition, though.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Support Language
Well I discovered something fun last night: I can change the support language on the Talk Now Estonian program from Eurotalk to German.
This is particularly groovy because the program is very image based, so I don't really need the English words (I already know what to call that banana-looking thing in English: "a banana"), but having the Estonian and the German side-by side is helping to reinforce both (and helping me pick up a bit more German while I'm at it).
It's also making me work a little harder to remember the correct Estonian word, because I now have the distraction of the German word working as a challenge. And it's interesting to see how often the German and Estonian words are actually quite close to each other - often, it's a minor spelling variation echoing a minor difference in pronunciation (eg, "kurk" and "Gurke").
I also appreciate the fact that the Talk Now software includes the definite article with the German words - so many other vocabulary lists seem to think we'll just be able to magically work it out.
Then there's the "phrase" section that I found a bit too intimidating when I first started using the program a couple of years ago. Coming back to it now, the combination of German and Estonian made it more of a game or a puzzle - using what I knew of each language to try to determine exactly what the meaning of the phrase(s) was.
By the way, the Eurotalk Talk Now stuff isn't a bad introduction to a language. I know a lot of these whizz-bang, we-use-innovative-innovations style teach-yourself programmes can be a lot of time-wasting hooey (and I have references from peer reviewed journals to back up that claim), but I appreciated the basic vocabulary grounding this one had. Sure, in terms of learning grammar or sentence structure it is completely useless. For example, in the "food" section it shows you a picture of some pears and offers the word "pirnid" - which is perfectly fine, given that we are looking at multiple pears, and therefore the plural is called for. It doesn't tell you that it is the plural of the word, and that the singular is "pirn" - nor does it ever once explain how to go about recognising or creating plurals.
This could actually be a wise move, as I doubt explaining the whole genitive/partitive word form thing is really part of the "language learning is fun!" vibe the program is going for. Also, if you really are at the complete beginner stage, or using teach-yourself material to try the language on for size, you need a few words under your belt first. Still, I would have thought that a few more of the basics would have been covered. Like the Estonian word for "is", for example, which is there, but not obviously so - or, indeed, verbs in general. The entire program is heavily noun-centric.
So, really, on the one hand, it actually kind of sucks. But one the other hand, I find I lot of the words I can recognise on sight are words I originally encountered through this program. And being able to play with the language is nice.
And now, of course, I'm finding new uses for the thing - and new ways to play. Or maybe I'm just talking myself into being happy about spending a lot of money on getting their whole German package based on the fact that the Estonian disc wasn't horrible. Who knows?
This is particularly groovy because the program is very image based, so I don't really need the English words (I already know what to call that banana-looking thing in English: "a banana"), but having the Estonian and the German side-by side is helping to reinforce both (and helping me pick up a bit more German while I'm at it).
It's also making me work a little harder to remember the correct Estonian word, because I now have the distraction of the German word working as a challenge. And it's interesting to see how often the German and Estonian words are actually quite close to each other - often, it's a minor spelling variation echoing a minor difference in pronunciation (eg, "kurk" and "Gurke").
I also appreciate the fact that the Talk Now software includes the definite article with the German words - so many other vocabulary lists seem to think we'll just be able to magically work it out.
Then there's the "phrase" section that I found a bit too intimidating when I first started using the program a couple of years ago. Coming back to it now, the combination of German and Estonian made it more of a game or a puzzle - using what I knew of each language to try to determine exactly what the meaning of the phrase(s) was.
By the way, the Eurotalk Talk Now stuff isn't a bad introduction to a language. I know a lot of these whizz-bang, we-use-innovative-innovations style teach-yourself programmes can be a lot of time-wasting hooey (and I have references from peer reviewed journals to back up that claim), but I appreciated the basic vocabulary grounding this one had. Sure, in terms of learning grammar or sentence structure it is completely useless. For example, in the "food" section it shows you a picture of some pears and offers the word "pirnid" - which is perfectly fine, given that we are looking at multiple pears, and therefore the plural is called for. It doesn't tell you that it is the plural of the word, and that the singular is "pirn" - nor does it ever once explain how to go about recognising or creating plurals.
This could actually be a wise move, as I doubt explaining the whole genitive/partitive word form thing is really part of the "language learning is fun!" vibe the program is going for. Also, if you really are at the complete beginner stage, or using teach-yourself material to try the language on for size, you need a few words under your belt first. Still, I would have thought that a few more of the basics would have been covered. Like the Estonian word for "is", for example, which is there, but not obviously so - or, indeed, verbs in general. The entire program is heavily noun-centric.
So, really, on the one hand, it actually kind of sucks. But one the other hand, I find I lot of the words I can recognise on sight are words I originally encountered through this program. And being able to play with the language is nice.
And now, of course, I'm finding new uses for the thing - and new ways to play. Or maybe I'm just talking myself into being happy about spending a lot of money on getting their whole German package based on the fact that the Estonian disc wasn't horrible. Who knows?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)