Mike Doyle is a graphic artist. His blog can be found at mdoyle.blogspot.com. He also happens to be an avid board gamer. He has teamed up with (among others) an up and coming game company called Valley Games to produce new and highly sought after out of print games. And the results are largely breath taking.
Check out what he's done with the classic Avalon Hill game Titan on his blog. I love the way the board looks like it's made of semi-precious stones. Glorious.
One of the new games he's got in the works is Supernova. I've played the prototype of Supernova and it's an innovative expand and conquer styled game. Mike's work on the game can be seen here.
The problem with game art is that there is traditionally only two sorts. First is art aimed at the family crowd. This art makes games look fun and interesting for the whole family. The other is "genre" art, or cheesy over-the-top art depicting space marines, women in chain mail bikinis and, of course, zombies.
I'm not saying traditional game art is bad, per se. It's just been done to death and there is no sign of letting up. Mike Doyle is the only game artist who's really shooting for a refined, beautiful and adult look to board games.
I hope he keeps it up.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Monday, February 25, 2008
Review of H. P. Lovecraft
I’ve recently been fascinated by pulp fiction and have read The Best of H. P. Lovecraft: Bloodcurdling Tales of Horror and the Macabre. If you’ve never heard of him here’s a quote from the man himself describing his modus operandi:
"All my tales are based on the fundamental premise that common human laws and interests and emotions have no validity or significance in the vast cosmos-at-large."
H. P. Lovecraft is probably the only writer that gives me the creeps. I think it’s primarily due to his ability to make the advancement of knowledge and science a horror. I typically view the quest to understand the universe as one of the noblest undertakings anyone can pursue. In Lovecraft’s fiction there are only two options, ignorance or insanity.
Despite the fantastic nature of his stories many should really be considered Science Fiction. The conceit is that there are super advanced beings that exist in the universe. Fortunately for lowly humans, these beings don’t care about us one way or the other. But sometimes humans get caught up in the affairs of these beings and invariably regret it.
Here’s a list of the short stories found in Bloodcurdling Tales of Horror and the Macabre with my short review and a score out of 10 to show my relative enjoyment.
The Rats in the Walls – This is one of the creepiest stories in the book. A ghost story about a man investigating his distant ancestors only to discover there’s a good reason his more recent relatives abandoned all genealogical endeavors. Imagine, if you will, the sound of thousands of invisible rats crawling in the darkness. Has a rather gory climax. 9/10
The Picture in the House – A trite tale of the macabre. Predictable and short. 1/10
The Outsider – A story that’s great simply for its weirdness. 7/10
Pickman’s Model – Classic Lovecraft. The reader is never made aware of what exactly is going on. That is the only way to write a scary story and I love it! The narrator learns just enough that he doesn’t want to spend any more time in Mr. Pickman’s art studio. 9/10
In the Vault – Similar to “The Picture in the House” in scope. It’s like a mediocre episode of the Twilight Zone. 3/10
The Silver Key – Oddly life affirming and even beautiful. This story is about a man’s search for meaning. This is part of Lovecraft’s “Dream Cycle” of stories and shows his world view had a few bright points in it. 10/10
The Music of Erich Zann – I like the mystery in this one as well. The whole thing is dreamlike. 8/10
The Call of Cthulhu – One of Lovecraft’s most famouse stories and Cthulhu is certainly his most famous monster. Davey Jones, from the Pirates of the Carribean movies, was obviously inspired by the great Cthulhu. The plot is the standard Lovecraft arc: the protagonist tries to understand a certain mystery and is made aware of such eldritch horrors that he longs for ignorance. Among geek circles, Cthulhu is as common as Paris Hilton is in the tabloids, so it’s hard to get into the story. 7/10
The Dunwich Horror – Has more of a plot that a lot of Lovecraft stories do. In Lovecraft’s mythology, the rural Northeastern U. S. is a land of absolute terror. Is one of the best plotted stories in this collection and comes to an exciting and dramatic conclusion. 9/10
The Whisperer in Darkness – Another “attack of the monsters from rural New England” story. Absolutely spooky trying to imagining the buzzing whispers of the various recordings discussed in the story. And the final condition of the narrator’s correspondent is great, in a pulp fiction sort of way. 9/10
The Colour Out of Space – In my opinion this is the most disturbing and scary story in the book. There’s no violence or gore, just a family confronted by inexplicable, abstract horror that manifests as an indescribable color. 10/10
The Haunter of the Dark – A man decides to go snooping around an abandoned church and gains the attention of undesirable entities from beyond space. Great for what is left unsaid. 8/10
The Thing on the Doorstep – The Lovecraft gimmick is starting to wear thin here and is pretty predictable. He makes it a little too obvious what is going on. 5/10
The Shadow Over Innsmouth – Another of Lovecraft’s more famous works. It’s definetly weird and bizarre, but not that scary. The final denouement is what makes this story interesting but feels too much like it comes out of left field. 7/10
The Dreams in the Witch-House – Lovecraft tries to scare us with quantum mechanics. This story is about a man who learns how to teleport himself through time and space. This part of the story fills me more with a sense of wonder than dread. The witch that keeps bugging him seems totally out of place. Gory and disturbing images in the final scenes. 6/10
The Shadow Out of Time – One of the more interesting stories in the book. Again, no gore or violence. Just an incredibly odd premise that, in and of itself, shouldn’t be that scary: aliens that attack through time rather than through space. It’s more an exploration of Lovecraft’s fictional universe. Having said that, the final scenes are creepy. 8/10
In conclusion, Lovecraft tends to refrain from lots of gore and violence, though such things make their appearances at times. Typically the terror comes from creating a sense that there is indescribable horror “out there” that can never be understood. And what’s more frightening than ignorance?
His skill as a writer is debatable. It’s his ideas that are compelling. Primarily for the utter lack of hope to be found, I would not recommend Lovecraft to children.
"All my tales are based on the fundamental premise that common human laws and interests and emotions have no validity or significance in the vast cosmos-at-large."
H. P. Lovecraft is probably the only writer that gives me the creeps. I think it’s primarily due to his ability to make the advancement of knowledge and science a horror. I typically view the quest to understand the universe as one of the noblest undertakings anyone can pursue. In Lovecraft’s fiction there are only two options, ignorance or insanity.
Despite the fantastic nature of his stories many should really be considered Science Fiction. The conceit is that there are super advanced beings that exist in the universe. Fortunately for lowly humans, these beings don’t care about us one way or the other. But sometimes humans get caught up in the affairs of these beings and invariably regret it.
Here’s a list of the short stories found in Bloodcurdling Tales of Horror and the Macabre with my short review and a score out of 10 to show my relative enjoyment.
The Rats in the Walls – This is one of the creepiest stories in the book. A ghost story about a man investigating his distant ancestors only to discover there’s a good reason his more recent relatives abandoned all genealogical endeavors. Imagine, if you will, the sound of thousands of invisible rats crawling in the darkness. Has a rather gory climax. 9/10
The Picture in the House – A trite tale of the macabre. Predictable and short. 1/10
The Outsider – A story that’s great simply for its weirdness. 7/10
Pickman’s Model – Classic Lovecraft. The reader is never made aware of what exactly is going on. That is the only way to write a scary story and I love it! The narrator learns just enough that he doesn’t want to spend any more time in Mr. Pickman’s art studio. 9/10
In the Vault – Similar to “The Picture in the House” in scope. It’s like a mediocre episode of the Twilight Zone. 3/10
The Silver Key – Oddly life affirming and even beautiful. This story is about a man’s search for meaning. This is part of Lovecraft’s “Dream Cycle” of stories and shows his world view had a few bright points in it. 10/10
The Music of Erich Zann – I like the mystery in this one as well. The whole thing is dreamlike. 8/10
The Call of Cthulhu – One of Lovecraft’s most famouse stories and Cthulhu is certainly his most famous monster. Davey Jones, from the Pirates of the Carribean movies, was obviously inspired by the great Cthulhu. The plot is the standard Lovecraft arc: the protagonist tries to understand a certain mystery and is made aware of such eldritch horrors that he longs for ignorance. Among geek circles, Cthulhu is as common as Paris Hilton is in the tabloids, so it’s hard to get into the story. 7/10
The Dunwich Horror – Has more of a plot that a lot of Lovecraft stories do. In Lovecraft’s mythology, the rural Northeastern U. S. is a land of absolute terror. Is one of the best plotted stories in this collection and comes to an exciting and dramatic conclusion. 9/10
The Whisperer in Darkness – Another “attack of the monsters from rural New England” story. Absolutely spooky trying to imagining the buzzing whispers of the various recordings discussed in the story. And the final condition of the narrator’s correspondent is great, in a pulp fiction sort of way. 9/10
The Colour Out of Space – In my opinion this is the most disturbing and scary story in the book. There’s no violence or gore, just a family confronted by inexplicable, abstract horror that manifests as an indescribable color. 10/10
The Haunter of the Dark – A man decides to go snooping around an abandoned church and gains the attention of undesirable entities from beyond space. Great for what is left unsaid. 8/10
The Thing on the Doorstep – The Lovecraft gimmick is starting to wear thin here and is pretty predictable. He makes it a little too obvious what is going on. 5/10
The Shadow Over Innsmouth – Another of Lovecraft’s more famous works. It’s definetly weird and bizarre, but not that scary. The final denouement is what makes this story interesting but feels too much like it comes out of left field. 7/10
The Dreams in the Witch-House – Lovecraft tries to scare us with quantum mechanics. This story is about a man who learns how to teleport himself through time and space. This part of the story fills me more with a sense of wonder than dread. The witch that keeps bugging him seems totally out of place. Gory and disturbing images in the final scenes. 6/10
The Shadow Out of Time – One of the more interesting stories in the book. Again, no gore or violence. Just an incredibly odd premise that, in and of itself, shouldn’t be that scary: aliens that attack through time rather than through space. It’s more an exploration of Lovecraft’s fictional universe. Having said that, the final scenes are creepy. 8/10
In conclusion, Lovecraft tends to refrain from lots of gore and violence, though such things make their appearances at times. Typically the terror comes from creating a sense that there is indescribable horror “out there” that can never be understood. And what’s more frightening than ignorance?
His skill as a writer is debatable. It’s his ideas that are compelling. Primarily for the utter lack of hope to be found, I would not recommend Lovecraft to children.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Anti-theism
So I’ve been on a pulp fiction kick recently.I’m suffering a bit of fatigue from trying to read Shelby Foote’s 3000 page history of the civil war and nothing cures the I’ve-been-reading-too-much-serious-stuff blues like Burroughs, Howard and Lovecraft.
While looking for some creepy Lovecraftian diversions at the local library I found his name attached to a book called “Atheism: A Reader” edited by S. T. Joshi. I have a lot of religious readers and selections from world scripture, but I’ve never read an atheism manifesto. “Atheism: A Reader” is a collection of essays by many famous atheists, agnostics and skeptics and, according to Joshi, describes why atheism should be the philosophy of choice among humans.
Not being atheist, I was curious about what he had to say. In the first two pages of the book’s introduction Joshi describes me, among other things, as “blind…unthinking…incapable of comprehending the issues at stake…unable to conduct logical reasoning on this (or any other matter)…” because I’m religious.
I must admit that the petty assault of Joshi’s opening killed much of my desire to find out what he had to say. But I did grit my teeth and skim through the introduction. He, of course, starts out with the typical shot across the bow that I’ve heard from other contentious atheists.
“Of course, religions have always used the inability of science definitively to disprove the existence of God as an excuse for continued belief, forgetting both that it is just as impossible to prove God’s existence.”
This statement shows the utter disparity of frame of reference that all religion vs. atheism debates I’ve heard have shared. The typical atheist espouses a “rational” world view. Rationality, in this case, has a specific definition. It means a world view based on repeatable, observable evidence. An assumption is made that there is nothing supernatural going on. “Putting the existence of God aside…” so to speak, the rational man logically tries to make sense of the world.
Of course it’s impossible that God’s existence can be proved or disproved using this approach. Where Joshi gets it wrong is that God can make him self known as he wishes. In short, religion is NOT rational.
It’s almost funny to hear one who doesn’t believe in God stand up and tell me how God should be and use this as proof He doesn’t exist. Joshi makes this mistake as well, he even goes so far as to say, “one could easily argue that God cares more for fishes than for human beings, since he gave them three times as much space to flourish than he gave us.”
Joshi throws out the fundamental horror of atheism in a rather off hand fashion.
“How did we get here? What is our purpose in being here? Where will we be after we die? Of course, primitive peoples – and many not so primitive – are unaware that these questions are perhaps faulty in the very manner of their formulation. It is inconceivable to such people that we very likely ‘got’ here by natural rather than supernatural means; that there is no ‘purpose’ to our existence beyond the goals we envision for ourselves; that life ends utterly upon our deaths.”
From a secular standpoint, I will readily agree that there is no purpose to anything; that there is nothing inherently “good” or “evil”; the right course of action for anyone to take is purely subjective. Later on in his introduction, Joshi lists the horrors perpetrated by religionists, which I will not argue. But at least I can say that what they did was wrong. In Joshi’s purely secular view you can’t even say that. The horrors of the world simply are.
Joshi concludes his essay, in part, with this:
“So what is the atheist, agnostic, or secularist to do?
“In the First place, we should insist on the need to engage in a meaningful debate on the entire issue of the truth or falsity (or probability or improbability) of religious tenets, without being subject to accusations of impiety, immorality, impoliteness, or any other smokescreens used by the pious to deflect attention from the central issues at hand.”
Understanding God can only be done on His terms. One can’t throw out God-defined morality and expect to have some sort of communion with Him. An important crux of the whole question of God’s existence is to discuss morality. A liar, murderer, fornicator, adulterer nor coveter can have communion with God.
However a lying, murdering, fornicating, coveting man of reason can experimentally confirm everything from Newton’s laws to Darwin’s observations.
If one wants to know God, one should do what He says. That’s about as rational as this whole religion thing gets.
As one atheist acquaintance once told me, atheism doesn’t equate to anti-theism. I don’t think the atheism vs. religion discourse can really go anywhere until both sides realize they are looking at things from completely different angles and allow a bit more mutual respect into the dialogue.
By the way, if you want to read a creepy H. P. Lovecraft story check out The Music of Eric Zann.
While looking for some creepy Lovecraftian diversions at the local library I found his name attached to a book called “Atheism: A Reader” edited by S. T. Joshi. I have a lot of religious readers and selections from world scripture, but I’ve never read an atheism manifesto. “Atheism: A Reader” is a collection of essays by many famous atheists, agnostics and skeptics and, according to Joshi, describes why atheism should be the philosophy of choice among humans.
Not being atheist, I was curious about what he had to say. In the first two pages of the book’s introduction Joshi describes me, among other things, as “blind…unthinking…incapable of comprehending the issues at stake…unable to conduct logical reasoning on this (or any other matter)…” because I’m religious.
I must admit that the petty assault of Joshi’s opening killed much of my desire to find out what he had to say. But I did grit my teeth and skim through the introduction. He, of course, starts out with the typical shot across the bow that I’ve heard from other contentious atheists.
“Of course, religions have always used the inability of science definitively to disprove the existence of God as an excuse for continued belief, forgetting both that it is just as impossible to prove God’s existence.”
This statement shows the utter disparity of frame of reference that all religion vs. atheism debates I’ve heard have shared. The typical atheist espouses a “rational” world view. Rationality, in this case, has a specific definition. It means a world view based on repeatable, observable evidence. An assumption is made that there is nothing supernatural going on. “Putting the existence of God aside…” so to speak, the rational man logically tries to make sense of the world.
Of course it’s impossible that God’s existence can be proved or disproved using this approach. Where Joshi gets it wrong is that God can make him self known as he wishes. In short, religion is NOT rational.
It’s almost funny to hear one who doesn’t believe in God stand up and tell me how God should be and use this as proof He doesn’t exist. Joshi makes this mistake as well, he even goes so far as to say, “one could easily argue that God cares more for fishes than for human beings, since he gave them three times as much space to flourish than he gave us.”
Joshi throws out the fundamental horror of atheism in a rather off hand fashion.
“How did we get here? What is our purpose in being here? Where will we be after we die? Of course, primitive peoples – and many not so primitive – are unaware that these questions are perhaps faulty in the very manner of their formulation. It is inconceivable to such people that we very likely ‘got’ here by natural rather than supernatural means; that there is no ‘purpose’ to our existence beyond the goals we envision for ourselves; that life ends utterly upon our deaths.”
From a secular standpoint, I will readily agree that there is no purpose to anything; that there is nothing inherently “good” or “evil”; the right course of action for anyone to take is purely subjective. Later on in his introduction, Joshi lists the horrors perpetrated by religionists, which I will not argue. But at least I can say that what they did was wrong. In Joshi’s purely secular view you can’t even say that. The horrors of the world simply are.
Joshi concludes his essay, in part, with this:
“So what is the atheist, agnostic, or secularist to do?
“In the First place, we should insist on the need to engage in a meaningful debate on the entire issue of the truth or falsity (or probability or improbability) of religious tenets, without being subject to accusations of impiety, immorality, impoliteness, or any other smokescreens used by the pious to deflect attention from the central issues at hand.”
Understanding God can only be done on His terms. One can’t throw out God-defined morality and expect to have some sort of communion with Him. An important crux of the whole question of God’s existence is to discuss morality. A liar, murderer, fornicator, adulterer nor coveter can have communion with God.
However a lying, murdering, fornicating, coveting man of reason can experimentally confirm everything from Newton’s laws to Darwin’s observations.
If one wants to know God, one should do what He says. That’s about as rational as this whole religion thing gets.
As one atheist acquaintance once told me, atheism doesn’t equate to anti-theism. I don’t think the atheism vs. religion discourse can really go anywhere until both sides realize they are looking at things from completely different angles and allow a bit more mutual respect into the dialogue.
By the way, if you want to read a creepy H. P. Lovecraft story check out The Music of Eric Zann.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Movies Stink but...
Here's my opinion about movies: they are one of the weakest forms of art imaginable. They require tons of effort for a limited, constrained product. There's a tedious temporal limitation on how the information is presented and visual mediums, in general, are so highly subjective as to be meaningless.
I should probably expand these ideas so they make more sense, but instead I am going to list the movies I'm dying to see this up coming year. Oh, the irony!
1. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
2. Hellboy 2
3. Batman: Dark Knight
4. Cloverfield
Some movies I'm curious about:
1. Iron Man
2. Hulk 2
3. Persepolis
If it's not a good art form, I say go for the low-brow stuff because at least it's sensational!
I should probably expand these ideas so they make more sense, but instead I am going to list the movies I'm dying to see this up coming year. Oh, the irony!
1. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
2. Hellboy 2
3. Batman: Dark Knight
4. Cloverfield
Some movies I'm curious about:
1. Iron Man
2. Hulk 2
3. Persepolis
If it's not a good art form, I say go for the low-brow stuff because at least it's sensational!
Friday, January 4, 2008
Blame it on...the rain?
This the the first entry in my public blog. I intend to vent my opinions here. Feel free to comment. If you find offensive anything I say, perhaps you would feel better if you blamed it on the Devil.
The quote in the title of my blog comes from a song by Steve Earle. The song is called "The Devil's Right Hand" of all things. My "picture" is inspired from this passage from a short story by Jorge Luis Borges:
When I see the deserts of the American Southwest it does make my heart beat faster in a way the sea never has. I accept the fact I am a romantic. I'm also compelled to accept the old Latin saying, "Sic Transit Gloria Mundi".
The quote in the title of my blog comes from a song by Steve Earle. The song is called "The Devil's Right Hand" of all things. My "picture" is inspired from this passage from a short story by Jorge Luis Borges:
Beyond the setting sun lay the cedar-felling ax, the buffalo's huge Babylonian face, Brigham Young's top hat and populous marriage bed, the red man's ceremonies and his wrath, the clear desert air, the wild prairie, the elemental earth whose nearness made the heart beat faster, like the nearness of the sea.It's a wonderful romanticized view of the old west (and, in some ways, the modern west as well) that manages to capture the range of possibilities afforded. The wilderness was a place of Native Americans, Utopianists, entrepreneurs, religious non-conformists, outlaws, vagabonds, families, individuals, preachers, searchers and dreamers with a bent to wander. Does such a place exist any more?
When I see the deserts of the American Southwest it does make my heart beat faster in a way the sea never has. I accept the fact I am a romantic. I'm also compelled to accept the old Latin saying, "Sic Transit Gloria Mundi".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)