pepe, prawn

Vex Vox: Buy My Book!


Long story short: Some very silly people with a number of rabid followers have recently called for a boycott of Tor Books starting Friday, June 19, 2015. Why? Because they manufactured a controversy over a Tor employee’s personal comments on her personal Facebook page and then failed to get her fired for it. I won’t dignify their stupid witch hunt by naming names, because anyone who needs or wants to know what I’m talking about already knows.

As a relatively new Tor author, I am asking everyone who sees this to buy or pre-order on Friday, June 19, a book published by Tor, Forge, or their parent company Macmillan.

If you’d like a suggestion, let me recommend you pre-order my new Jack Bauer action-thriller, 24: ROGUE, scheduled for publication on September 8, 2015.

Here’s the cover art and back-cover copy:




The time is 8:00 PM.


24rogue_largeJack Bauer is a man without a country, a fugitive hunted by the most powerful nations in the world. He lives on the run, survives by his wits, and finds purpose in his exile by waging a one-man war against those who profit from the death and suffering of others.

On a self-imposed crusade to destroy the criminal empire of international arms dealer Karl Rask, Jack has infiltrated the crew of one of Rask’s freighters. But his mission is disrupted when the ship is hijacked by a band of suspiciously well-informed pirates off the coast of Somalia.

As Jack fights to free the ship, he discovers a deadly secret hidden in its hold: a prize the pirates were hired to steal, and that could be used to ignite a world war — unless Jack captures it first.

AN ALL-NEW 24 ADVENTURE BY
NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLING AUTHOR
DAVID MACK



Product Details

• Trade Paperback: 300 pages
• Publisher: Tor/Forge (September 8, 2015)
• ISBN-10: 0765377926
• ISBN-13: 978-0765377920



Again … just  suggestion. Order any Tor/Forge/Macmillan title. Thank you.



Reposted from:
http://www.davidmack.pro/blog/2015/06/19/vex-vox-buy-my-book/
Tags:
pepe, prawn

“If You Were a Puppy, My Sweet”

by Glenn Hauman & David Mack


If you were a puppy, my sweet, you would be a wild one. You’d be big and neutered, just like human-you. You’d bound from place to place, unburdened by any thought of consequences, full of energy and bereft of conscience. Some would delight in your antics, your perverse rejection of dignity. Others would quail from your manic slobbering and call you a nuisance, but you would be excused, because that’s just how puppies behave.


If you were a wild puppy, I’d hear you yelp. I’d bear your endless braying and wonder what you were going on about. Sometimes you’d growl at people passing by, innocent people doing things you didn’t understand or thought dangerous, and you’d bare your tiny fangs in an impotent snarl. Other times, you’d bark at shadows or at nothing at all, and I would imagine that in your head you were facing down dinosaurs with mighty roars. You’d be crazy-brave.


If you were crazy-brave, you’d be impossible to housebreak. No matter how many times I tried, you’d have a mad streak in you, which would become a different streak on the floor. You’d confound me by defecating in your own den, devouring your mess, and doing it all again. I would do my best to help you stop, but you would be defiant, my sweet. You would become angry and think I was trying to stop you from doing anything you wanted, at any place and any time. And that would make you sad.


If you were sad, I’d try to make you happy again. I’d add something solid to your imbalanced diet of red meat. I’d give you a chew toy to see if it cheered you up, hoping that having something to gnaw on would satisfy you. I would enter you in a dog show, but no award would suit you. You’re too proud to be placated by such small gestures; you would never be satisfied with any bones thrown your way. You’d resist my advice until you made yourself sick.


If you got sick, I’d take care of you. I’d take you to the vet and get you all the medicine you needed, and I’d be on the watch for any of the horrible diseases you could get: Lyme disease. Worms. Fleas and mites. Arthritis. Puppy strangles. Parvovirus. But you’d slip your leash, flee into the night, make friends with the wrong animals, and come home infected with rabies.


If you came home infected with rabies, I’d watch, helpless, as you twitched and foamed at the mouth. I’d stay back as you lashed out at nearby objects, attacking and biting anything in range, trying to infect everything around you with the very thing that has driven you mad. I would try to soothe you as your voice became dry and rough and hoarse, the spasms of the muscles in your throat degrading your bark to a miserable “chorf.” I’d be heartbroken as the disease consumed your brain, and I’d wish there was something, anything, I could do to free you from its madness.


If I could free you from your madness, we’d both see you’re not really rabid, that you do what you do with the power of reason. We’d know you were once a thinking human being, responsible for your own actions—an honor you sacrificed to become this gibbering beast I can’t understand. I still wouldn’t know what you hoped to become. I couldn’t tell if your plans went ass-over-teakettle or if you planned to become this all along. I’d know you once were human, but that you chose to turn your back on that for reasons known only to you… to become something different.


If you became something different, all you’d do is howl strange love songs to your legions of the spittle-flecked, and you’d respond to nothing but dog whistles. Even so, in spite of evidence and experience, I’d try to reason with you.


If I tried to reason with you, I would soon discover it to be in vain. I’d realize you thought your fury would make you big and strong, and maybe you’d fool more than a few, but I would see the truth: I’d see that you’d shrunk, your stature diminished by your swelling savagery. You’d still think yourself a creature of courage and strength and righteousness, whose claws and fangs intimidate your foes effortlessly, but your anger and delirium and weakness would only make you an object of scorn, a walking tragedy defined by wiser souls than you. Honor and glory would desert you, and all you would be left with are your regrets and your incurable rabies.


If you were afflicted with incurable rabies, no one could save you as you weakened and drooled, a grotesque public spectacle. I would be sad but resigned to your tale’s inevitable conclusion, and you and all your puppy friends would be sad, too.


If you were sad and rabid, I would bring you with me to the wide-open rampart, and we would watch the mighty spaceships fly. I’d tell you to look up, and we’d see those ships break our world’s surly bonds to depart for alien shores. We’d wish their crews well as they explored great wonders yet unknown. Then you’d fill the lengthening dusk with your pitiful whimpers as the shiny rockets soared away … without you … never to return.


with a tip of our hats to Rachel Swirsky


(Read the backstory behind this piece, and our apology to Ms. Swirsky here.)




Reposted from:

http://www.davidmack.pro/blog/2015/06/11/if-you-were-a-puppy-my-sweet/
pepe, prawn

Speaking Truth to Puppies

Glenn Hauman and I have just posted, on the Crazy8 blog, a piece of short … I guess one could call it fiction, though it’s more of an essay, while at the same time a work of parody. It’s titled If You Were a Puppy, My Sweet.”

sad-brown-puppyAs the title gives away to readers familiar with the recent Hugo awards kerfuffles, the story is written in a format that parodies author Rachel Swirsky‘s Hugo award-nominated and Nebula award-winning short story, If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love.”

Though our story mimics the style of Ms. Swirsky’s, Glenn and I want to make clear that we intend no disrespect to her or to her story. Our reason for choosing it as our template was the story seems to have become a lightning rod for the ire of Rabid Puppy and Sad Puppy supporters — two of whom today published a far more mean-spirited parody of it on the blog of Theodore Beale, aka Vox Day.

Also worth noting is the fact that while we informed Ms. Swirsky of our story before its public dissemination, she in no way endorses it or approves of it. We hope she can forgive our decision to proceed with its publication as a retort to the parody on voxpopuli.

At any rate, Glenn and I hope you all enjoy our latest stab at parody and that the court of public opinion doesn’t revoke our poetic licenses.


Reposted from:
http://www.davidmack.pro/blog/2015/06/05/speaking-truth-to-puppies/
Tags: ,
pepe, prawn

Write back (not) in anger (#SFWApro)

hugo_rocketTo be a writer is to invite criticism. It can be hard to decide with which critics, if any, one should engage. Polite critics can sometimes be acknowledged with courtesy, but as a general rule it’s best to accept their feedback in silence and not attempt to rebut their points, especially when one is discussing matters of subjective opinion.

Poison-pen critics should in nearly all cases be ignored, except when the author of such a letter offers one the possibility of a “teachable moment.” Even then, unless it’s a subject that seems in dire need of examination, most such impulses to retort to one’s detractors run the risk of leading one to self-immolation. In those rare instances when one elects to respond to a detractor, a measure of restraint still is called for.

Every once in a rare while, however, one must sound the trumpets and let slip the dogs of war.

Continue reading…Collapse )


#SFWApro



Reposted from:
http://www.davidmack.pro/blog/?p=5219
pepe, prawn

German eBook art for Wildfire, Part 1

Cross Cult, publisher of German translations of the Star Trek novels, has revealed the cover art for its eBook version of Part 1 (of 2) of my first novel, Star Trek: S.C.E. #23 – Wildfire.

For comparison, here is the original edition’s art on the left, and the new German edition’s art on the right (click on the images to see larger versions):

wildfire_1_art wildfire1_german_large

The German edition does not yet have a title. Apparently, the original title loses something in translation, so I have suggested they retitle it Feuersturm. No idea if they’ll take that under consideration, though.

Either way, the German version of Wildfire, Part 1 is scheduled for publication in July 2016. I’ll be curious to see how they re-imagine the cover art for Wildfire, Part 2.


Reposted from:
http://www.davidmack.pro/blog/?p=5213
Tags:
pepe, prawn

Imperator Furiosa: The Hero We Need

furiosa_warpaint

In a review of director George Miller’s new action masterpiece Mad Max: Fury Road, USA Today reviewer Claudia Puig describes actor Charlize Theron asThe best female action hero since Sigourney Weaver in Alien”. I think Puig should have cited Aliens for Weaver’s action bona fides, but I also think she missed the point. It’s true that Theron is a great actor delivering a bravura performance, but what matters most is the character itself: Imperator Furiosa is the best cinematic hero in years.

Let me tell you why.

Imperator Furiosa towers above most other so-called action-movie heroes because her character and the story of Fury Road invert a longstanding, worn-out Hollywood action-movie paradigm—but not the one you might think. The real genius of Fury Road isn’t that its hero is a woman. It’s that the hero is the one actually driving the story in the first place.

Furiosa’s prominence in the movie has been making some “men’s rights activists” (MRAs) apoplectic, leading them to complain the Mad Max franchise was hijacked for a feminist agenda, that they were tricked by cool explosions and a freak with a flame-throwing electric guitar into watching a feminist manifesto in which Max has been emasculated. They’re at least partly wrong.

A key factor in what’s perplexing the MRAs is that Imperator Furiosa is the protagonist and hero of Fury Road, but here’s the catch: she is not the movie’s main character. Max Rockatansky (played by Tom Hardy) is not a sidekick in Fury Road, contrary to this post by Rob Bricken on io9. Max is undeniably Fury Road’s main character, its point-of-view character. He is the only character to whose inner life we are privy; he is our narrator. That said, it is true he is neither the protagonist nor the hero of Fury Road, but these aren’t bad things. They aren’t even uncommon in movies.

imperator-furiosa-136004

In order to explain what I mean by all that, I’m going to ask that you put aside your preconceived notions of what protagonist, antagonist, hero, and main character mean within the context of dramatic writing. Let’s delve into some Dramatic Writing 101 neepery to define our terms, some of which will contradict what many of you might have been taught. James R. Hull provides a good primer on his Narrative First blog:

A Protagonist is the character whose action sets the narrative into motion. A protagonist is a person with a plan that challenges the status quo, for whatever reason.

The Antagonist is the character who most directly reacts to the Protagonist’s actions, works to thwart the Protagonist’s plans, and tries to uphold or restore the narrative status quo.

The Hero is the character we are meant to root for, the one we’re to perceive as “the good guy.”

The Villain is the character we are intended to root against — i.e., “the bad guy.”

The Main Character is the story’s principal point-of-view character, the one through whose filter we experience the story. This is also the character whose arc tends to exhibit the greatest degree of change in response to the events of the story.

When these terms are applied in the context of Fury Road, we find that:


  • Imperator Furiosa is the protagonist; by making a bid for escape with Immortan Joe’s concubines, she sets the main story in motion;

  • Immortan Joe is the antagonist; he reacts to Furiosa’s betrayal by marshaling every ally and resource at his command to recover what he considers his, and to exact his revenge;

  • Furiosa is also the hero of the story, the one with noble motives, and whose success we are meant to hope for;

  • Immortan Joe is also the villain of the piece, obviously; and,

  • Max Rockatansky is the main character, the person through whose experience we, the audience, perceive most of the major events of the narrative.

mad-max-fury-road-tom-hardy

In many action movies, the main character is also the hero. Just as often, the main character is not the protagonist: the villain is. In a great many action-oriented narratives, it is the story’s villain who acts first to upset the status quo, typically for selfish reasons. Once the actions of the villain come to light, the Main Character/Hero must act to oppose the Protagonist/Villain. This makes the Main Character/Hero function as the story’s Antagonist.

This is not a bad thing; I’m not saying that our favorite cinematic heroes are actually villains. I’m saying the heroes in action films are often depicted as reactive, while villains are more often proactive, within the bounds of the on-screen story. (I’m treating the revelation or suggestion of backstory that establishes characters’ motives as being separate from the principal diegetic action of the narrative.)

Here are just a few examples of reactive heroes in action cinema:


  • John McClane in Die Hard

  • Tony Stark in Iron Man

  • Neo Anderson in The Matrix

  • Alejandro in The Mask of Zorro

  • Ellen Ripley in Alien and Aliens

In Die Hard, the narrative engine comes from Hans Gruber and his team of thieves seizing control of Nakatomi Tower and taking John McClane’s wife hostage; McClane reacts to this threat by waging a one-man war against the bad guys.

The story of Iron Man originates in the actions of Obadiah Stane, who puts out a hit on Tony Stark as a prelude to a hostile takeover of Stark Industries; Tony reacts to his assault and kidnapping by developing the Iron Man armor and embarking on a redemptive quest.

Neo Anderson is the main character of The Matrix, but the protagonist is Morpheus, who does all he can to find Neo, liberate him from The Matrix, and instill in him the belief that he is “The One” who has come to free humanity from the machines.

In The Mask of Zorro, Alejandro Murietta (Antonio Banderas) is the main character, but the protagonist is clearly the villain, Don Rafael Montero, whose nefarious schemes and cruel henchmen motivated the first Zorro (Don Diego de la Vega) as well as the new Zorro.

Last but not least, Ellen Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) in both Alien and Aliens. In both films Ripley is the main character (though it was less clear in the first film, for various reasons). In neither one, however, is she the prime mover of the story. In both cases, the protagonist is the shadowy entity known as “the company” (The Weyland-Yutani Corporation) and its agents, which instigate the events that set these narratives into motion. Ripley reacts to the calamities that besiege her, but she is a reluctant participant in both cases.

Proactive main characters are more often found in antiheroes, such as Porter in Payback, Wilson in The Limey, or John Smith in Last Man Standing. It seems rare to find Protagonist/Heroes in action films. I think this is due at least in part to the fact that so many action-oriented movies are about defending the status quo of the story, whatever it might be.

That brings us to the true genius of Fury Road. Imperator Furiosa is one of the most compelling characters to hit the big screen in years because she is a true Protagonist/Hero. Her actions (in concert with those of Immortan Joe’s renegade concubines, aka Breeders) set the main story into motion. She is the one who lights the fuse on the action and becomes the prey in the chase—and she does so for noble reasons: to free herself and other women from slavery, to try to give hope to others, and to seek her own redemption. She is wounded inside and out, scarred and flawed, but also prepared to sacrifice everything to do what she knows is right.

furiosa-and-mad-max-136006

However, it would be wrong to argue, as some MRAs (and the previously cited io9 article) have, that this makes Furiosa the main character of Fury Road with Max a mere “sidekick.” It doesn’t. Max Rockatansky is still the main character of Fury Road. Viewers’ perceptions of events are filtered for the most part through Max’s experience. His journey is just as important as Furiosa’s.

Chase Magnett over at comicbook.com illustrated this point with exceptional clarity in his essay Why ‘Mad Max: Fury Road’ Really Belongs to Imperator Furiosa



Max enters the film as a true loner. He is unhinged from any one he has held dear and desires to live apart. His role does not reflect Joe’s patriarchal society, but someone who desires to abstain from and ignore problems that he does not consider his own. He only agrees to help Furiosa at first because he cannot escape Joe without her help. In the first half of the film, he treats women like competitors for survival, threatening and shooting at them multiple times. Only through shared experience does he learn to appreciate their talents and trust them.


The same essay also provides a superb analysis of the character arc for warboy Nux, and what his story, in conjunction with Max’s, tells us about the theme of Fury Road as a whole:



Max and Nux represent two types of men, those who don’t care about feminism and those who actively oppose. Both of their arcs follow the revelation that feminism is necessary not only for women, but for the creation of a better world. Furiosa’s cause results in the improvement of her own life and the bride’s, as well as the advancement of Max, Nux, and all of the Citadel. Her struggle for equality and self-determination is a rising tide, creating a better world for everyone.


It also is important to note that Furiosa herself is not changed as much by the events of Fury Road as Max is. He starts his journey as a haunted loner and a prisoner; through his alliance with Furiosa, he reclaims the nobler part of his soul from the wasteland, earning his freedom. This more pronounced degree of character change also clearly distinguishes Max as the film’s main character, even though he is neither its central hero nor its protagonist.

In many ways this parallels the ending of the second Mad Max film, The Road Warrior, in which Max regained his honor by volunteering to drive the rig for the refinery squatters. But where that film ended on a tragic note—the idea that we chew up our heroes and throw them aside, forgotten and unrewarded—Fury Road ends with Max restored and ready to return to the wasteland, not just to survive, but to live and be a force for good.

Lest this be mistaken as some kind of perverse betrayal of Max’s character by his creator, it should be noted that there are other notable examples of cinematic main characters who were not their tales’ heroes or protagonists.

Ellis Boyd “Red” Redding from The Shawshank Redemption was that movie’s narrator, and its chief point-of-view character—but Andy Dufresne was the Protagonist/Hero. In the end, it was Red who underwent the transformation of a man beaten down and institutionalized to one ready to reclaim hope.

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is the protagonist of Amadeus, but the main character is Antonio Salieri, who yearns to be lauded and remembered, only to find himself overshadowed at every turn by the prodigy Mozart.

flamethrowerGuitar

All this raises a question: How did writer-director George Miller and his co-writers Brendan McCarthy and Nico Lathouris succeed so brilliantly at inverting the stale Hollywood trope of the reactive action hero? I would posit that they did so by giving us a story in which the status quo is one not worth defending. In fact, the point of the story in Fury Road is that some states of existence deserve to be smashed down so that something better can be built in their place.

Maybe that’s why it seems so difficult to craft emotionally compelling action movies these days. On many levels, it’s becoming increasingly clear the status quo of our world, despite incremental progressive improvements over the years, remains mired in patriarchy, oligarchy, racism, sexism, ignorance, and fear. Our society seems to be hurtling towards becoming the one depicted in Fury Road, careening down the dusty dead-end of dystopia.

Could it be that when larger-than-life heroes fight to defend a status quo we know to be flawed, their victories ring more than a bit hollow? It sometimes feels as if the only way to sell audiences these ever more outrageous, testosterone-fueled spectacles is to persuade them that the New Order coming to replace the status quo is even worse (usually global annihilation), so if we manage merely to keep things the way they are, we should be happy we achieved that much and stop railing against things like rape culture or rampant economic inequality, or expend effort promoting an idea as obvious and innocuous as “diversity is good.”

That point of view isn’t good enough any more.

I think part of what makes Fury Road so impressive as a film and Imperator Furiosa so compelling a character is the truth that heroism sometimes means defiance and rebellion. When the social order itself has become part of the problem, the status quo needs to be brought down so that a better, more just way of living can take its place. It’s time for us to crawl under this sputtering war rig and turn our thumbs black fixing what we know to be wrong.

Let patriarchy and oligarchy die historical (and reviled) on the Fury Road; it’s time for us all to lift up Furiosa—long may she reign.


handshake-136007

#SFWApro


Reposted from:
http://www.davidmack.pro/blog/?p=5195
pepe, prawn

DISAVOWED is a Scribe Award nominee

Just learned (thanks to a Facebook post by my esteemed colleague Matt Forbeck) that my recent Locus Magazine #1 bestseller, Section 31: Disavowed, has been selected as a nominee for this year’s Scribe Award in the always hotly contested Best Original Speculative Novel category.


ST.Section.31.Disavowed.Cvr


If past experience is any guide, I’m not going to win, not in a field so rich with other deserving works by authors of great talent and experience. I mean, c’mon — my novel is up against works by Keith R.A. DeCandido (an IAMTW Grand Master), John Passarella, Greg Cox (one of the masters of the genre), Tim Waggoner (one of the best horror/fantasy writers around), James Sutter, and Christa Faust (a past Scribe winner for Best Novel – Adapted).


I know my book has no chance of coming out on top in a field this fierce. But once again, it’s nice to be nominated.


My heartiest congratulations and best wishes to all of this year’s Scribe nominees, in all the categories.


 




Reposted from:

http://www.davidmack.pro/blog/?p=5190
pepe, prawn

24: Rogue ARCs are here!

As the post’s subject header proclaims, I’ve just received 10 ARCs (Advance Reader Copies, aka Uncorrected Proofs) of my upcoming Jack Bauer thriller, 24: ROGUE, which is scheduled to hit shelves solid and virtual on September 8, 2015 … and I have no idea what to do with them.

ARC_24Rogue_blurred

The one thing I’m certain I can’t do with them is sell them, so don’t ask. Beyond that, I’m unclear on what I’m expected and/or allowed to do with these things.

Stage a contest/giveaway? Send them to reviewers? Abandon them in crowded subway cars? Light bonfires?

No one ever tells me these things.


Reposted from:

http://www.davidmack.pro/blog/?p=5186
Tags:
Vanguard

WIRED: Binge on DS9, then try Vanguard

The good folks over at WIRED publish a series of binge-watching guides for those interested in trying out classic TV series via streaming media. Today they unveiled the Wired Binge-Watching Guide to Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.

STDS9-1024x683

First let me say that I agree unreservedly with all their editorial recommendations with regard to the small handful of DS9 episodes that one might be able to skip and still enjoy the majesty of the series’ long-form story arcs. I also think they selected some excellent episodes to serve as “must-see” moments from the series.

I’m particularly chuffed to see that one of their “can’t miss” episodes was It’s Only a Paper Moon,” for which I co-wrote the story with John J. Ordover, and which was scripted by Ronald D. Moore.

vanguardThe icing on the cake? At the end of the article, its author, Graeme McMillan, wraps up the concluding section, “If you Liked Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, You’ll Love…,” with this choice paragraph:



“The best suggestion, however, isn’t another TV show at all; for those who fall for the mix of politics, science fiction, and derring-do that Deep Space Nine serves up, the ideal follow-up is actually the Star Trek Vanguard series of novels, which pretty much takes the DS9 approach and applies it to the original series’ era with just a little bit more of a bloodthirsty edge. Highly recommended.”

That’s one of the best plugs Vanguard has ever received. So if you haven’t read it yet, don’t take my word for how good it is — listen to Wired.

That is all.



Reposted from:

http://www.davidmack.pro/blog/?p=5183
pepe, prawn

Imagining a “New Hollywood”

Between drought and the ever-looming threat of a massive earthquake, it is hard not to think there might come a day when Los Angeles might become unlivable. If—the fates forfend—the drough worsens, L.A. goes dry, and then “the Big One” finally does in the City of Angels once and for all … what would become of the city’s film and television industry?


Even if L.A. were leveled, there would still be an insatiable public demand, around the world, for the visual entertainment the American film & TV industry provides. Already, many productions that are supervised in Los Angeles are shot elsewhere and finished in L.A., so it’s not inconceivable that, in an emergency, the industry could relocate if it had to. But to where?


I have a few ideas.


 


hwood_newyork


As a longtime New Yorker, this would be my top suggestion, for purely selfish reasons. I’d love to have access to the film & TV business without having to move to L.A. or fly out there every time I want to pitch or take a meeting. But what would be in it for the industry?


For starters, they’d get to be in New York, but let’s set that aside.


New York would offer the industry easy access to financing. Many TV networks maintain corporate headquarters here. The city has a lot of inexpensive, currently vacant warehouses, industrial buildings, and lots in western Queens that could easily be converted to soundstages, much as the Silvercup Studios were. Also, of all the possible cities where Hollywood could make a new home, few have a community of actors, filmmakers, and writers as robust and experienced as that found in New York.


Moving the film & TV industry to New York would probably gut San Diego Comic Con, but it would make New York Comic Con an even bigger behemoth than it already is. I’m not saying either of those is a good thing; they’re just possible consequences.


Added Bonus: We rarely get hit by major earthquakes, and we have some of the best drinking water in the United States. Also, great pizza.


Drawbacks: Our beaches suck, and winter here is absolutely awful. Rents are already astronomical, and traffic can be a nightmare.


 


hwood_seattle


The chief arguments to be made in favor of Seattle as a new home for Hollywood are that it would preserve the industry’s West Coast identity, while moving it closer to plentiful water supplies and away from the primary risk areas associated with earthquakes.


Added bonus: Better coffee.


Drawbacks: Several. Rainy weather. High minimum wage. Proximity to an active volcano. And, most damning of all, it’s not New York.


 


hwood_vancouver


One very good reason to move the entire industry north of the 48th parallel is that so much of our production already takes place there. Vancouver is already Canada’s Hollywood (much as Toronto is its New York). So why not just move Hollywood to Vancouver and be done with it? After all, there’s a strong community of actors, filmmakers, and writers there. The infrastructure is in place. And it’s got plenty of water.


Drawbacks: Permanently moving the entire industry to Canada would likely mean that many people involved in film and television — from agents and executives to the crews and casts — would need to become Canadian citizens. That might not sound like a bad idea to some, but I’d bet there are plenty of folks who’d rather remain Americans. But Canada’s regulations regarding how many non-Canadians can work on a production in the Great White North would make it an unavoidable issue.


Also, Vancouver shares a drawback with Seattle: gray weather. One should also consider that too many shows on TV look alike because they’re all shot in Vancouver, and add to that the sad truth that Vancouver is also not New York.


If Hollywood threatened to go north, I suspect the U.S. federal government would get involved to entice it to stay in the U.S., rather than see our nation’s most exportable commodity become Canada’s chief export.


OTHER POSSIBILITIES


At a glance, Miami might seem like an interesting choice. Warm, with good beaches, diverse cuisine, an eclectic music scene. But come hurricane season, this might prove to be a less than ideal base of operations.


Chicago shares most of New York’s strengths and weaknesses, but with a higher crime rate and a less robust mass transit system.


Perhaps a new Hollywood would find a welcoming home in Austin, Texas. Lots of great food, music, and people there. Reasonable real estate prices, lots of room to spread out. And the influx of entertainment industry folks could accelerate the long-prognosticated political purpling of The Lone Star State.


What do you think, readers? If Hollywood had to choose a new home, where would you recommend and why?




Reposted from:

http://www.davidmack.pro/blog/?p=5171