For the record

Review of three books, as submitted to a semi-academic journal at the weekend.

The Three Yugoslavias: State-Building and Legitimation, 1918-2005, by Sabrina P. Ramet
Endgame in the Balkans: Regime Change, European Style, by Elizabeth Pond
Peace at Any Price: How the World Failed Kosovo, by Iain King and Whit Mason

The Balkans haven’t gone away, and the legacy of the wars of Yugoslav succession still troubles policymakers. Christian Schwarz-Schilling, sent to Bosnia in the hope that he might be able to cut it free of international tutelage, will return to Germany in mid-2007 having failed in his mission; while the EU is anxiously bracing itself to confront Russia, and perhaps even division among its own members, over the future fate of Kosovo. The three books considered here each report on different aspect of this policy puzzle.

Sabrina Ramet has produced a weighty and scholarly contribution to the historical debate around the South Slavic territories. Her historical account of how the interwar kingdom (first the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, and then Yugoslavia) was founded on a flawed constitution, and proceeded to lose its way through political oppression and royal dictatorship, is comprehensive and convincing, based on archival research and a full survey of the available literature. Democracy never took root in the interwar period, and it is therefore not so surprising that it has had trouble consolidating in Serbia since 2000.

Her account of the second world war will be unwelcome in some quarters. She clinically dissects the relationship between the Italian and German occupiers, the horrendous NDH regime in Croatia and Bosnia, the quisling Nedic government in Serbia, and the Chetniks and Partisans, finding little in favour of any (except perhaps the last named). She also examines the role of Archbishop Stepinac and the Catholic Church, and finds little evidence for their complicity in genocide; although it is clear that both helped the NDH leaders to flee once the war had been lost, and that of course individual Catholics, including clergy, ignored their leadership’s position against atrocity.

Her account of the Communist period is again detailed and thorough, looking at the efforts of Tito and his successors to impose a socialist system on the country, and to weather the requirements of economic reform and nationalist tension. She is particularly effective in describing the “Croatian spring” of 1968-71, but does not ignore developments in the other Yugoslav republics, and Kosovo, in that period. And her blow-by-blow account of Milosevic’s rise to power, and how Serbia’s leadership brought the federation to disintegration and war, is authoritative and comprehensive.

Unfortunately her account loses steam in its coverage of the ten years since the end of the Bosnian war. The final chapters, one on Kosovo and the other on Slovenia, Croatia and Macedonia, are almost perfunctory. Very little secondary literature has been used, the narrative appearing in some sections to be drawn entirely from online news archives, and there is not enough original analysis to make up the difference. In the chapter on Kosovo, not a single Kosovo Albanian source is cited, Ramet having relied instead on Belgrade media and the international press. She is too good a scholar for this to make her account a biased one, but it is very noticeably incomplete; the strength of the earlier sections of the book, its careful examination of first-hand sources in the language formerly known as Serbo-Croat, here becomes a weakness.

Ramet has chosen a provocative framing device for the historical narrative: she moors her analysis in a discussion of state legitimacy, rooted in principles of liberal universalism: that state structures can only survive if they enjoy political, moral and economic legitimacy. It is a thought-provoking approach, and she examines each of the three Yugoslavias – the inter-war kingdom, Tito’s state, and the Milosevic union from 1992 – in that light and finds each of them wanting. It is, however, notable that her examination of post-Dayton Bosnia takes a different tack, comparing the international administrators to either Kemal Ataturk or the politicians of Weimar Germany, without the same thorough evaluation of Dayton’s legitimacy in itself.

And while this theoretical framework is indeed attractive and on the whole convincing, it is a difficult one to apply to societies and states which are ethnically divided. At a couple of points, Ramet suggests that one of the fundamental problems was “ethnic politics”, by which she seems to mean the emergence of political parties which are representative of single ethnic groups. Leaving aside the question of how, precisely, this development might be avoided or reversed, I am not convinced that it is so important in itself. Tito’s Yugoslavia, and King Alexander’s earlier rearrangement of the country into banovinas, failed in part precisely because they attempted to ignore or minimize the ethnic dimension; meanwhile the former Yugoslavia’s neighbours, Romania and Bulgaria, appear to have achieved a certain level of stability despite having political parties which represent ethnic minority groups. Most ethnically heterogeneous societies need to develop a way for different ethnic groups to mobilize, and political parties are surely not to be excluded.

Ramet’s lack of reflection on the scholarship relating to the most recent period, and her too brief treatment of Kosovo, are remedied by the two other books reviewed here. Elizabeth Pond, in her survey of the Balkans and EU integration, considers not only the former Yugoslavia (sans Slovenia) but also its neighbourhood in her excellent survey of the state of scholarship on the entire region since the fall of communism. She has carefully sifted through the best political analyses available, and pulled them together country by country: Romania, Bulgaria, Kosovo, Croatia, Bosnia, Macedonia, Albania, Serbia and Montenegro. In each case she looks at the very country-specific problems of nation- and state-building, and the prospects for sustainable stability in the Euro-Atlantic context.

Pond’s book would make an excellent introduction to the region for, say, a newly appointed international official, or an interested student. Its one weakness is that, while the regional perspective is clearly and lucidly presented, there is rather less about the real policy debates in European capitals, and between the two sides of the Atlantic, which will set the terms of the Balkans’ integration. She also has no time for the sorts of conspiracy theorist who can be found on any internet site dealing with the Balkans, but this is less of a loss.

[This section heavily cut from here.] Iain King and Whitney Mason, themselves former employees of the UN Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK), have written a damning indictment of the international efforts to put that territory back on its feet since the NATO campaign of 1999. From the very beginning, international officials conceded to thuggery on the ground, committed by both the ethnic Albanian majority and by the remaining ethnic Serbs. UN officials retreated into a colonialist mentality, failing to implement their mandate and questioning their own ability to do so. (Kosovo's electricity supplies now are in worse shape than they were before the conflict.) The highest ever per capita expenditure by the international community on post-conflict reconstruction has delivered indifferent results.

King and Mason have a list of prescriptions as to what could be done better in future. The two key points for me are, first, that any such international mission needs to move fast to establish the rule of law as a matter of extreme urgency; and second, that the end goal must be clear right from the beginning. The determination to put off deciding on Kosovo's future independence led directly to the discrediting of the UN mission within Kosovo and the violence of March 2004, and has exacerbated uncertainty in the wider region. I think this is the first book-length piece on the Kosovo protectorate, and it's a thorough analysis.

Posted in Uncategorised

February Books 15) The Invisibles [#1]: Say You want A Revolution

15) The Invisibles [#1]: Say You want A Revolution, by Grant Morrison (.co.uk, .com)

After this discussion I tried my local comic shop in Leuven and found very few of the titles recommended there. I did remember discussion of The Invisibles, strongly recommended by

 and

, equally strongly disrecommended by

 and

. I am surprised that any of them managed to get worked up about it either way. Dane McGowan, high-school drop-out from Liverpool, is recruited by the Invisibles, a motley group of eccentrics with super-powers working (presumably for the forces of Good) behind the scenes of world politics. There is a storyline set in a hidden London reminiscent of Neil Gaiman’s Neverwhere – I see that actually dates from two years after The Invisibles first came out, so I wonder if Gaiman has acknowledged any inspiration? Difficult to believe he hadn’t read it. There is then another storyline set in the French Revolution with the Marquis de Sade playing a key role, but this got a bit self-indulgent and had a peculiar sub-plot involving Percy and Mary Shelley which didn’t seem to fit in with the rest. Perhaps it is all revealed in subsequent volumes, but I won’t rush to buy them.

Top UnSuggestions for this book:

  1. The five people you meet in heaven by Mitch Albom
  2. The devil wears Prada by Lauren Weisberger
  3. The secret life of bees by Sue Monk Kidd
  4. White Oleander by Janet Fitch
  5. The Joy Luck Club by Amy Tan
Posted in Uncategorised

February Books 14) Preacher [#4] Ancient History

14) Preacher [#4]: Ancient History, by Garth Ennis (.co.uk, .com)

The second half of Volume 3 in this series was devoted to the reminiscences of one of the main characters; Volume Four gives us three backstories about some of the background characters – the Saint of Killers, Arseface and Jesse’s redneck relatives Jody and T.C. – altogether more enjoyable than any of the previous volumes, I thought, and in fact I would recommend readers wanting to get to know the series to start with this volume rather than any of the previous three.

Top UnSuggestions for this book:

  1. White Oleander by Janet Fitch
  2. My sister’s keeper : a novel by Jodi Picoult
  3. The red tent by Anita Diamant
  4. The purpose-driven life : what on earth am I here for? by Rick Warren
  5. The world is flat : a brief history of the twenty-first century by Thomas L. Friedman
Posted in Uncategorised

February Books 13) Murder at the Worldcon

13) Murder at the Worldcon, by J.D. Crayne (FictionWise)

This is basically a country-house murder mystery except that the setting is not a country house but a mid-1960s WorldCon. To be honest the identity of the murderer is fairly obvious from the first chapter, once you work out who of the characters described in detail is the Detective, the Sidekick and the Villain. But it’s a fun and fairly brief read.

Also I look forward to someone publishing a key to the identities of the real-life characters identified here by pseudonyms. Big-Hearted Howard isn’t even a pseudonym, really, and I am guessing that Gary Corneille is Jerry Pournelle, but I don’t immediately identify any of the rest; also the murderer’s surname is very nearly an anagram of a well-known (but now deceased) famous SF author.

V’z abg ernqvat gbb zhpu vagb gung, nz V? “Dhragva Ebqrffn” ybbxf gb zr yvxr n ersrerapr gb “Cbhy Naqrefba”, nygubhtu gur fheanzrf ner sne sebz orvat cresrpg nantenzf.

Posted in Uncategorised

On the East Coast

I am in the US next week finishing up here, but landing tomorrow afternoon, with a whole day to kill in New York on Monday (it’s a federal holiday). Given that almost everyone I know is out of town or busy, any recommendations for what I should do?

(Recovering from jetlag and book-shopping can be taken as read.)

Posted in Uncategorised

Two scans

Sheer egoboost:

(I’ve been an Honorary Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Governance since March 2002. That was a five-year appointment, and anyway they have rejigged the way they do honorary titles, so it’s now going to be a Visiting etc etc at the School which the Institute was part of.)

Carnival costume:

(Strictly speaking Carnival is next week, but that’s also half-term so F’s school celebrated yesterday. As he explains:)
“This is what i dressed up as in the Carnival yesterday; It is Horus the egaptian god.”
(An unusual choice, but why not?)

Posted in Uncategorised

Eagleton on Dawkins; me on astrology

 points us to Terry Eagleton’s review of Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion, from the London Review of Books back in October. It won’t surprise you that I am on Eagleton’s side of this debate; since I’m up early due to B waking us at 5.30, I have been looking through the ‘net for other reactions. Marilynne Robinson did a less polemical, longer, and more intellectual takedown of Dawkins for Harper’s. Nobel Prize winning physicist Steven Weinberg, writing for The Times, defends Dawkins:

Terry Eagleton in the London Review of Books sneers at Dawkins for his lack of theological training. Are we to conclude that opinions on matters of philosophy or religion are only to be expressed by experts, not mere scientists or other common folk? It is like saying that only political scientists are justified in expressing views on politics. Eagleton’s judgement is particularly inappropriate; it is like saying that no one is entitled to judge the validity of astrology who cannot cast a horoscope.

Actually, that’s not what Eagleton is saying; expressing opinions is fine. Everybody votes, but I would prefer to read a book on politics by someone who is professionally engaged in it rather than someone who just happens to have strong views. Most people in the world have formed their opinions on religion without reading Aquinas or even Dawkins first. But before you write a book-length essay debunking something, you should make the effort to understand it in its own terms; otherwise you run the risk of becoming polemical and cartooney, as Dawkins appears to have done (I haven’t read his book or seen the TV series, and don’t feel especially inclined to, based on what I’ve read from both supporters and opponents).

And this applies also to astrology. As it happens, I have studied astrology, and do know how to cast a horoscope; my M Phil dissertation was on a twelfth-century text by the little-known scholar Roger of Hereford. One of the best known astrologers and mathematicians of his age, he argued for a rigorous mathematical approach to the subject. As a result of my in depth research, I am even more convinced than I ever was that astrology is bunk; but also because I went to the trouble of getting into Roger’s mind and trying to understand what he thought he was doing, I would like to feel that my views are better informed, maybe even more authoritative. I wrote this history of astrology for this encyclopedia many years ago, but the best analysis I have read is this book, taking it on its own terms and demonstrating its utter inconsistency.

Dawkins’ failure to engage with religion and theology on similar terms is to his discredit.

Posted in Uncategorised

“25^H^H 20 comics that can change your life”

Nerve.com lists the following “25 20 comics that can change your life” – I would like views from my all-knowing f-list as to which are really worth pursuing.

Alias by Brian Michael Bendis and Michael Gaydos
Preacher by Garth Ennis and Steve Dillon (which I am reading, got to #3)
“Bomb Scare,” Optic Nerve #8 by Adriane Tomine
Hate by Peter Bagge
Transmetropolitan by Warren Ellis
Heavy Liquid/100% by Paul Pope
Diary of a Teenage Girl by Phoebe Gloeckner
Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi (I loved this)
Blue Monday by Chynna Clugston
Fun Home: A Family Tragicomic by Alison Bechdel (already recommended to me by )
Like a Velvet Glove Cast in Iron by Daniel Clowes (I was disappointed by this though I very much like some of his other work)
Fortune and Glory by Brian Michael Bendis
Kabuki by David Mack
Love and Rockets by Los Bros Hernandez (I remember reading, and enjoying, ‘s copies of these, years ago)
Sandman by Neil Gaiman, et. al. (but of course!)
Miracleman by Alan Moore and Neil Gaiman
Zippy the Pinhead by Bill Griffith
Usagi Yojimbo by Stan Sakai
Fantastic Four Issues #1-#102 by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby
Planetary by Warren Ellis

So, what should I get next?

ETA: Thanks to for pointing out that I can’t count!

Posted in Uncategorised

Banknotes – the answers


This is a 500 forint note from Hungary, correctly guessed by 11 out of 14 of you.


This is a 50 dinar note from Serbia, although it is described as Yugoslavia on the currency. I allow either answer; even so, it was correctly guessed by only 5 out of 12 people. (, I’m surprised at you – surely you know that Croatia doesn’t use Cyrillic?)


This is a 20 pound note, in good old UK pounds sterling, issued by First Trust Bank in Belfast, Northern Ireland. Despite the geographical bias of my friends list, only 8 out of 15 of you got this, with two guesses for Malta (where they would write in Maltese as well as English, I suspect). The six shields on the left-hand note represent the six historic counties of my native statelet.


This is a 10 denar note from the Republic of Macedonia, correctly guessed by 7 out of 12 (allowing and a point for the “FYR Macedonia”, whatever that is). ‘s response of “Somewhere where they keep peacocks” is insufficiently precise.


This proved the most difficult, with only 4 correct answers out of 13. In fact as many people opted for Algeria as for the correct answer, Lebanon. I can see why – if you are asked to think of a country that might have both French and Arabic on its banknotes, you might well try Algeria first. The diagonal white box on the image on the left was where I cut out a map which would have otherwise been a dead giveaway.


5 out of 12 correctly guessed this as a single Georgian lari. Given the unusual alphabet, ‘s guess of Ethiopia, ‘s of South Korea and ‘s of Armenia are not unreasonable. Again, I fear ‘s “Somewhere with a history of weird beards” is insufficiently precise to give him a point.


I was surprised by how difficult this was, with 4 correct answers out of 11. This is a 10 ruble note from Russia. and were not far off, orthographically and linguistically, with Bulgaria but still wrong I’m afraid. I cannot allow any points for “Somewhere with a famous bridge”.


This is a banknote for 50 convertible marks from Bosnia and Herzegovina. 5 out of 13 got it right. and – there are two alphabets on this banknote, but neither of them is Armenian. , you get a bonus quarter of a point for specifying which part of Bosnia issued the note.


Yes, 8 out of 14 of you got this: 10 Croatian kuna. This includes . Once again, ‘s answer of “Somewhere with Roman ruins” is not sufficiently precise to get any points.


5 out of 12 of you guessed correctly that this is 10,000 manat from Azerbaijan (and I’m giving an extra quarter point for almost spelling it correctly in Azeri, Azərbaycan). , not a bad guess, but Kazakh still uses Cyrillic. , also not a bad guess but the TRNC doesn’t produce its own banknotes. , “Somewhere very boring without any design flair” is not very precise and anyway a bit unfair – have you seen their carpets?


As with the Hungarian banknote, 11 out of 14 of you got this: 5 new Turkish lira. As with Lebanon, I had to excise a map of the country here.
, I don’t know what Marx brothers films you have been watching recently…


This note is a recent casualty of European integration: 100 Slovenian tolars replaced by the euro as of 1 January this year. 5 out of 11 got it, with, alas, ‘s answer of “Somewhere with even stranger beards” still getting no points.

So, the final scores on the doors, in the traditional sense of who got the most answers right, are:
0
1
1
2
3
3
4
5
5
7
7¼
7
9
11
12¼

So, congratulations to with his more than perfect score, and thanks to everyone, especially , for playing along.

Posted in Uncategorised

What has it got in its pocketses?

I realised that I have been carrying a round a lot of extraneous stuff in my wallet, including currencies for countries I don’t go to regularly (and indeed in one case have never been to). But hey, it’s a good excuse for a quiz. Under the cut you will find a poll; all the banknotes have had the name of the country, the name of the currency, and other obvious clues like maps of the country or the address of the central bank removed. But I have left in things like national symbols and the words for numbers in the local language. Feel free to answer either using the text boxes or in screened comments.

Answers tomorrow evening.

Posted in Uncategorised

Doctor Who: The Mutants

Let’s start with a quote from Salman Rushdie’s controversial novel, The Satanic Verses

It seemed to him, as he idled across the channels, that the box was full of freaks: there were mutants – ‘Mutts’ – on Dr Who, bizarre creatures who appeared to have been crossbred with different types of industrial machinery: forage harvesters, grabbers, donkeys, jackhammers, saws, and whose cruel priest-chieftains were called Mutilasians; children’s television appeared to be exclusively populated by humanoid robots and creatures with metamorphic bodies, while the adult programmes offered a continual parade of the misshapen human by-products of the newest notions in modern medicine, and its accomplices, modern disease and war.

Fan Lore has it that Rushdie is specifically referring to the 1972 Doctor Who story, The Mutants (where the Mutants of the title are indeed referred to as “Mutts”), and that he

…implies that its characterisation of mutations as evil just because they look different from human beings encourages racist attitudes. He thereby completely misses the point of the story, which in fact has an anti-racist message. (Howe and Walker)

This enables fans to feel superior to Rushdie, in that they can buy into the anti-racist message of the Doctor Who story and pat themselves on the back for being able to see the point better than Rushdie did. I cannot imagine that Rushdie is terribly bothered about this, in that The Satanic Verses gave him bigger headaches to worry about, but I think that Fan Lore is wrong. Rushdie is not attempting to give a blow by blow commentary on the themes of Doctor Who, or a critique of this particular story; it is an incidental illustrative detail in his story (and indeed the description of the semi-mechanical creatures with priest-chieftains that Rushdie gives does not especially resemble the inhabitants of the planet Solos).

In addition, though I haven’t read The Satanic Verses, my research (backed up by this essay) indicates that the book is largely about the ideas of hybridisation, merging, changing, which indeed the Doctor Who story also addresses. Rushdie’s character watching Doctor Who is the viewpoint character Saladin Chamcha, who has himself been transformed into a semi-human figure and back again, and here he is musing on popular representations of mutations which, let’s face it, tend not to be always positive. Rushdie himself states:

The Satanic Verses celebrates hybridity, impurity, intermingling, the transformation that comes of new and unexpected combinations of human beings, cultures, ideas, movies, songs. It rejoices in mongrelization and fears the absolutism of the Pure.

To accuse Rushdie of “missing the point of the story” by attacking it for racism actually completely misses the point of Rushdie’s book.

(Incidentally later in the same paragraph, Rushdie reports that “Lycanthropy was on the increase in the Scottish Highlands.” An interesting foreshadowing of the 2006 story Tooth And Claw?)

Alas, one can easily write three times more about one paragraph of Rushdie than about the six episodes of The Mutants. Fan Lore may be wrong about the Rushdie detail, but it is right about this story in general. I watched it because I recall rather enjoying the Target novelisation (inevitably by Terrance Dicks) thirty years ago, but this is not good TV. The politics of the story could have been interesting – the colonial military government, scared that the rug is being pulled from under their feet, move towards a Rhodesia-style UDI but are stopped by the Doctor’s intervention; however, the allegory is far more heavy-handed than similarly political Pertwee stories such as The Green Death and The Curse of Peladon, with the evil Marshal completely one-dimensional and the natives either noble savages or deluded collaborators. (Also the anti-racist message is somewhat blunted by the dismal acting of the one black member of the cast, playing an Earth soldier who gets left in charge at the end.) There are also themes here of how dangerous it is to mess around with ecology, and of the importance of not judging by appearances, but it is all lost in the desperate filling of six episodes for a plot which New Who would comfortably do in 45 minutes.

To be honest the only two things about this story that work for me are i) the portrayal of the planetary surface on Solos (played, in a storming performance, by a quarry near Northfleet in Kent, which has been built on since and is now the Bluewater Park shopping centre, supposedly the largest retail and shopping complex in Europe); and ii) Geoffrey Palmer, who is the one good guy among the Earth colonials and of course is killed off before the end of the first episode.

Posted in Uncategorised

February Books 4-7) Four Doctor Who novels

There being so many Doctor Who spinoff novels out there, there is no way that I can read them all; but occasionally I will have an idea for getting hold of several that share a common theme, or have been recommended in the same place, or whatever. Most of them are easy enough to get via second-hand shops or eBay, and some (including one of the four below) have been put online by the authors because they are out of print. I bought/downloaded all four of these because they are the only Doctor Who spinoff novels featuring the First Doctor’s somewhat obscure companion Dodo Chaplet. I will probably do another post at some point on Dodo’s life and times in the Whoniverse, but each of these books was actually rather good in its own different way, the pluses definitely outweighing the minuses in each case.

4) [Doctor Who] Salvation, by Steve Lyons (.co.uk, .com)

At the end of the televised story The Massacre, Dodo wanders into the TARDIS while it is parked briefly on Wimbledon Common in 1966; by the start of the next story, The Ark, she is perfectly happy to believe that the TARDIS has taken them to a different part of contemporary England, but has difficulty grasping the possibility of time travel. Also (to the mockery of generations of fans) her accept has completely changed, from something rather north of England to something more uncertainly southern. Salvation rewrites Dodo’s first scenes in the TARDIS as part of an encounter with godlike aliens in 1966, which takes her, the Doctor and Steven to New York. Lyons has invented vast amounts of back-story for Dodo here, all of which makes the character (and her accent quirks) much more believable; he does the same to a lesser extent for Steven, catching Peter Purves’ characterisation of him perfectly while also adding to his background. And his Doctor is very Doctor-ish, taking charge of the confused officials trying to deal with the situation, confronting and defeating the bad guys while also determined to minimise casualties. The exploration of humanity’s relationship with gods, and with belief, is a bit pale compared with Neil Gaiman, but then isn’t everything? My biggest criticism is that while Lyons gets New York’s physical geography, he does not really capture the city’s vibrant multi-ethnicity very well; most of the American characters might as well have been English, which is a bit ironic given that he saves the phenomenon of Dodo’s accent.

5) [Doctor Who] Bunker Soldiers, by Martin Day (.co.uk, .com)

In some ways a very First Doctor-ish story: the crew land in Kiev in the year 1240, with the city about to be attacked and sacked by the Mongol hordes, and its defenders internally divided about how best to respond. However there is an element from later Who as well: under the city lurks an alien killer, working to its own agenda. Lots to like in this book: the descriptions took me back to my visit to Kiev in late 2005, and there is much good characterisation – even the bad guys have comprehensible agendas, and everyone gets something to do (the Doctor, at one point, riding off to plea for peace with the Mongol horde). Also, while Salvation was in part about belief, Bunker Soldiers addresses religion – the defenders of Kiev are weakened by tension between bigoted Christians and loyal Jews. About half the story is told in the first person by Steven, a tactic used also by in her novels (at least, in her novels that I have read). I’ve been very critical of this approach in Doctor Who novels elsewhere, it nearly works here, but not quite for me. (Also NB that the liturgical language of Kiev was not Latin.)

6) [Doctor Who] The Man in the Velvet Mask, by Daniel O’Mahony (.co.uk, .com)

Once again, (and immediately following Steven’s departure in The Savages) the TARDIS lands in what appears to be a familiar Earth environment, in this case post-revolutionary France. But all is not as it seems; the supreme leader is not Napoleon, but a mysterious Minski, under the patronage of none other than the Marquis de Sade. The Doctor gets involved with trying to work out What Is Really Going On, while Dodo falls in with a theatre company and takes on the lead role in The Misfortunes of Virtue, managing a fling with one of the other members of the cast along the way. I never really did work out What Was Really Going On, but very much enjoyed the ride; reminiscent of the crazy Managra, in a good way.

7) [Doctor Who] Who Killed Kennedy?, by James Stevens and David Bishop (.co.uk, on-line)

An unusual spinoff novel this: investigative journalist James Stevens (fictional, though listed on the cover as a co-author) decides to write up The Truth about UNIT and the mysterious set of individuals going by the code name of “The Doctor”. He ends up playing a very “Rosencrantz and Guidenstern are dead” role, as the man on the far end of the Brigadier’s yelling at journalists in seasons 7 and 8; and Bishop explores what the TV adventures would have looked like from the outside point of view – how the authorities would have covered it all up. Dodo comes into the picture because the very first Doctor Who story set in the “present day”, The War Machines, sees her brainwashed and written out of the series by being sent to the countryside to recuperate. Who Killed Kennedy? picks up her tragic story from several years later. Bishop describes her as “a late addition to the cast of the [book] and was originally only going to appear in [one] chapter, passing on information to Stevens. But once she appeared on the page Dodo wanted to stick around. It’s a strange experience when a character takes charge of their own destiny while you’re writing and Dodo was the first time this had happened to me.” Certainly the relationship between Dodo and the narrator is a core element of the story, in a way that (as the author admits in his on-line notes) the actual assassination of JFK, which is after all the title, is not. Some would probably accuse this novel of too much “fanwank”, ie obsessive references to continuity with the TV series, but I think that would be unfair; Bishop is actually doing something very different here, telling familiar stories from a different angle, and I think it largely works.

His commentary and notes for the online publication of the book seemed to me more engaging than any others I have read. I wonder if this is because Bishop, a native Kiwi, was writing for the New Zealand Doctor Who Fan Club, rather than for the BBC

Anyway, all four of these were rather good. More thoughts on Dodo for a later day. But I refuse to discuss whether the First Doctor had only one heart (O’Mahony/Man in the Velvet Mask) or two (Lyons/Salvation).

Posted in Uncategorised

Out of the madhouse

Was out for a couple of beers with colleageus from my previous job this evening. My successor said, “You look really unstressed, in fact, so much younger!”

I replied “That’s because I’m no longer doing the job you’ve just started!”

And the other ex-colleague added, “Why do you think I didn’t apply for it?”

Posted in Uncategorised

Einstein in Brussels

I work here at the heart of the EU district in Brussels; I tend to conceive of the geography of the area in terms of international politics – my own office building is home to Belgium’s permanent representation to the EU at the bottom, and Scotland’s EU office at the top. If you pull out a bit, you can see the distinctive four-pointed star of the European Commission’s headquarters, the Berlaymont, building on the northwestern side of the roundabout, and (less clearly, though it is pretty unmissable in real life) the EU Council Secretariat, complete with helipad, across the Rue de la Loi.

Move southwest a bit and you can see the green space of the Parc Leopold, intruded on by the oval shape of part of the European Parliament’s complex (the “Caprice des Dieux” building). But look for a moment at the three buildings between the Parliament and the ponds in the park. The southernmost of the three I know well – the former Solvay library, it is now a conference centre where I have attended many events (and even organised one). The other two are typical Art Nouveau buildings, rather beautiful to look at but not part of my daily life.

Well, I shall look more closely at the northernmost of the three buildings next time I go through the park. Now a school, it was built as the Institut Solvay by the Belgian industrialist and philanthropist in 1895, and from 1912 hosted the Solvay Conferences. It was in this building in 1927 that Einstein, mocking Bohr’s attachment to randomness in quantum mechanics, asked him sardonically “…ob der liebe Gott würfelt?” (usually translated as the flat statement, “God does not play dice”). Bohr’s reply, that it was not up to Einstein to tell God what to do, tends to get lost in standard accounts of the exchange.

See pictures and a home movie of the conference, here.

Posted in Uncategorised

Thursday miscellany

wants to know which of the Livejournal virtual Valentines is worst. It’s a tough call.

is marking essays about vampires.

Neil Gaiman’s hair.

Someone on my f-list posted a link in a locked entry to New Scientist’s coverage of the astronaut love triangle story. Apparently:

Most astronauts are relatively young and in excellent physical health, putting them in a demographic that is unusually sexually active. In addition, most have higher than average levels of education. “That often translates into higher levels of sexual activity and adventurousness,” says Ray Noonan, a professor of human sexuality affiliated with the State University of New York, US.

So the more education you have, the more sexually active and adventurous you are? Sounds to me like something New Scientist’s readers will be pleased to hear about themselves, but that doesn’t make it true!

Posted in Uncategorised

February Books 3) About Time: The Unauthorised Guide to Doctor Who, 1966-1969

3) About Time: The Unauthorised Guide to Doctor Who, 1966-1969, by Tat Wood and Lawrence Miles (.co.uk, .com)

I read the first in this series last month: a wonderful cornucopia of facts and analysis of the early years of everyone’s favourite Time Lord. I think the second volume, dealing with the last two William Hartnell stories and the Patrick Troughton era, actually exceeds the high standard set by the first volume. Again, we have the exhaustive picking apart of each story looking for its sources of inspiration, broken up by substantive essays on more-or-less relevant topics – the one near the end, "Does Plot Matter", has considerable analytical depth and genre-wide interest – I hope someone (like perhaps Strange Horizons?) might consider approaching the authors to put it on-line for general information.

Lots of things I loved about this book. The vicious wit with which the authors savage any aspects of their favourite series that they disapprove of. (The chapter on every single story has a section devoted to Things That Don’t Make Sense. Sometimes these sections are long, and sometimes they are longer.) Wood and Miles seem to particularly enjoy being able to argue at forty years’ distance with Innes Lloyd, who was producer of the programme for much of this time, on the grounds that he betrayed the original Verity Lambert concept. Lloyd has been dead since 1991 and so can’t argue back. But the tone is witty rather than polemical and myself I think a more balanced view of Lloyd’s achievements emerges from these pages despite the authors’ efforts.

Two minor mysteries that had troubled me in the last few months are explained: i) Colin Baker’s narration of The Macra Terror is terrible not because Colin Baker is reading it but because John Nathan Turner wrote it; ii) Ian Marter’s novelisation of The Enemy of the World is incomprehensible because the publisher slashed large chunks out of it to bring it down to the right page count. There is learned discussion of i) whose accent is the worst in the entire history of Doctor Who, ii) whether or not anyone in the TARDIS (Doctor excepted) ever had sex, and iii) the possible alchemical significance of mercury in the works of David Whitaker. There is constant mockery of Victoria. And there is a very thoughtful piece on why The Power of the Daleks is such a good story. I read it all except the chapter on The Mind Robber, because the authors insist very strongly that you should see it in all its glory first.

(One small nit-pick – The Third Man is set in Vienna, not Berlin, which was divided into four parts, not three. But this is tangential to its likely influence on The Invasion.)

I cannot imagine that future volumes in this series can possibly be as good as this one – but I shall buy them anyway.

Posted in Uncategorised

The Ribos Operation, Earthshock

Just short notes on these; I re-watched them after having read the Ian Marter novelisations, so not a lot new to say about either.

The Ribos Operation (.co.uk, .com): Re-watching it confirmed my view that Ian Marter left out two of the best bits in his version, the banter introducing Romana to the story, and the deep sense of cold pervading the entire production – yes, we know it is only polystyrene snow, but it really sets the scene. Here we have, for the first time since Zoe was taken from the Doctor by the Time Lords at the end of The War Games in 1969, a companion who matches him intellectually; indeed he is actually hiding from her behind K-9 at first. Lots of other little typically Robert Holmes touches in it, but it’s the beginning of the story that sticks in your mind. Nothing about The Ribos Operation is outstanding, but taken together it is done well.

Earthshock (.co.uk, .com): As it happens I’ve just been reading Tat Wood and Lawrence Miles on the first two Cyberman stories, The Tenth Planet and The Moonbase, and it’s interesting that Cyberman stories seem particularly lacking on plot plausibility or scientific credibility (particularly as the scientific credentials of their co-creator Kit Pedler were widely touted by the BBC). I think the Cybermen are particularly naff here (but I haven’t seen Silver Nemesis, so there may be worse in store for me). Their plan makes no sense at all, they are less strong than their android slaves, and their failure to shoot all their enemies when they have the chance is totally illogical. In addition the Cyber-controller comes very close to displaying emotions (“Excellent!”).

Another annoying thing about the story is the way in which the troopers and scientists all merrily crowd into the TARDIS, which has normally been the private space of the Doctor and companions (indeed, we see Adric’s own teenage private space in the first episode – he likes decorating it a lot more than Susan did). Once Cybermen start wandering all round the TARDIS shooting people (like the unfortunate Professor Kyle, played by Clare Clifford who was later to try and seduce Anna/Daniela Nardini in “This Life” – and wouldn’t you?) it almost feels like just deserts for being over-hospitable to armed earthlings. Earlier Doctors would never have allowed it. (When Salamander violates TARDIS sanctity in The Enemy of the World, he gets sucked into the vortex.)

One good thing about the story, and a striking contrast with The Tenth Planet and The Moonbase, is the number of women in leadership roles – Professor Kyle, Beryl Reid as starship captain, plus numerous others. And unlike some commentators I thought both Janet Fielding and Sarah Sutton turned in good performances in their roles.

I remember at the time, when the first episode was broadcast, being slightly startled by Adric suddenly developing a personality after a year and a half of appearing without one. Of course this was build-up to him being killed off in the last episode, and that sequence, the credits being rolled in silence over a picture of his gold star for mathematical excellence, is still effective now; shame they didn’t spend more time on building up the character over the previous months.

I was going to review these two together with The Mutants from the Pertwee era, but that has got six tedious episodes, and also raises real world issues that I will want to write about at length, so requires a separate entry once I have finished with it.

Posted in Uncategorised