Mini-Review: Willful Child: Wrath of Betty by Steven Erikson

Willful Child: Wrath of Betty by Steven Erikson is a sequel Willful Child. Therefore, I recommendthat you stop now and read the review I wrote for it as I think it’s valuableto have that perspective before getting to what I write below.

If anything, in the two years since I wrote that review, my thoughts on Willful Child have only grown stronger. I think it is a superb satire of far more than just Star Trek, but read the review for that. I’ve come to realize that while the humor of that book is certainly coarse and inappropriate, that plenty of people ‘get it’ and therefore see what Erikson is doing in the book. All this adds up to me being very happy to read the sequel.

Unfortunately, I was largely unimpressed. Of course, I enjoyed a lot of what Erikson was doing with the book and how he plays with both time travel and parallel-dimension issues. I particularly found the gender-swap / parallel world parts to be well done and timely given so much of what’s going on. And of course, it’s hard for someone like myself to not be immensely amused by the comic-con sequence. Really, Wrath of Betty is worth reading for those two parts regardless of my overall disappointment.

Where does my disappointment come from? It’s all in the timing. Wrath of Betty continues the satirical directions from Willful Child, with a strong focus on the consumerism and rampant capitalism of the Western world. And this is unfortunately where it misses. Often the most effective satire works because it feels particularly timely to what’s going on in the culture it targets. Generally consumerism and capitalism are perfect elements for satire to target, but at least for me, it misses the elephant in the room for a satirical book published in 2016. I am speaking of the big issues we all see too much of right now – from Brexit to the US election and the idiot who will remain nameless, and war and refugees, etc. etc. A satire focused so much on consumerism simply doesn’t stick with me right now – it feels off topic, especially since reality is so primed for good satire (though admittedly, Brexit and the US election are often plenty satirical without any help at all).  

I do think that the focus on consumerism and capitalism in Wrath of Betty is likely to be more timeless and therefore would have more staying power than the satire I wanted to read. But, it remains that I simply couldn’t enjoy things as much as I wanted to. Yes, I realize that due to just how it works writing a novel, that Wrath of Betty was largely written well before reality jumped the shark, but that intellectual knowledge doesn’t really help my reaction to the book.

So, while I think Wrath of Betty is a worthy follow-up to Willful Child, it didn’t work well for me. However, it may well work for you.

Willful Child: Amazon, My Review

Willful Child: Wrath of Betty: Amazon

Review: Willful Child by Steven Erikson

As I begin this review, it’s clear that I need to establish some context – specifically about humor, and more specifically, about my sense of humor. In short, my sense of humor can be terribly inappropriate and offensive. It’s something that I’m constantly aware of, so many may not realize this, but it’s true. Yes I’m a product of the society I come from, but I’m also a product of my own love ‘Meta’. Which basically means that my humor often follows this process: 1) wow, that’s offensive and/or wrong, 2) I am aware that it’s offensive, 3) I’ll amp that up an order of magnitude or three, 4) now it’s funny.

I admit the above not because I’m looking for a discussion about the (de)merits of my sense of humor, but because I need to establish what I can find funny and my love of Meta. This leads me to Willful Child by Steven Erikson (Indiebound, Book Depository, Amazon), which reeks of inappropriate humor and Meta exploration of society. As a result, I’m essentially predisposed to liking this book, while I can see why a good number of people will not only not like the book, but loathe the approach taken (and with good reason).

Willful Child is branded as a Star Trek parody, which is absolutely correct, while missing the point entirely. Willful Child is absolutely a blatant parody of Star Trek, with a focus on the infamous Captain Kirk. The humor (or offense depending on your point of view) develops through Erikson’s decision of how to define his parody – essentially through the sexist (even misogynistic?), anti-authority, racial/species insensitivity (OK, this is being kind), aspects of Kirk. He does this through Captain Adrian Alan Sawback of the Engage-class starship Willful Child. While the parallels to Captain Kirk are there, the vision I (and likely those younger than me) kept coming up with is that of Captain Mal from Firefly, only in the persona of Captain Hammer from Dr. Horrible’s Sing Along Blog, but I may be unduly influenced by the cover art in this instance.

Let’s just say that Erikson lays it on thick. So thick that it really does become tiresome at times and it’s hard, even for someone with my sense of humor, to not feel disgusted by the choices made. Of course, that’s the point of Erikson’s humor in this book – forgetting for a moment whether or not that is a wise choice to make – we really should look at what Erikson is doing. And Erikson is essentially condemning pretty much the entire American-dominated, patriarchal, Western culture of the past 50+ years. Have I mentioned yet that it would seem that Erikson is one bitterly cynical person with a rather low opinion of humanity?**

Erikson uses his intentionally inappropriate humor in this book to focus on the absurd, horrific consequences of Western Culture. Being a SFF writer, he uses the underlying privilege of classic science fiction and its embodiment in Star Trek, as the vehicle for his condemnation. And the result really is a brilliant piece of work. The humor is over-the-top offensive, which I find funny*, and it is seamlessly woven into a completely paradoxical narrative – one that clearly loves classic science fiction and one that believes that the messages of classic science fiction embody the absolute worst of modern civilization. All the while, he makes the reader actually cheer for Captain Sawback (as they choke back vomit), in spite of him being a complete asshole, sexist pig. That’s a damn fine-line to manage.

And I can’t forget to mention the names – no author does names better. Essays could be written about the symbolic meaning names in this book, even those that aren’t blatantly offensive (I’m looking in your general direction, Security Officer Nipplebaum*).

One could (and probably should) argue that there are other, less offensive, ways to make the points that Erikson makes in this book. Erikson certainly isn’t inventing something new in his condemnation of the privilege of classic science fiction and poison that it injects into civilization. Though I have to admire the balls* that it takes to do it in this way, because the point is a rusty nail punched into the gut by a nihilistic deadpan philosopher** (now I’m laying it on thick), and it’s a point that’s not likely to win many friends.

Wrapping it up, I think that Willful Child won’t truly be a divisive book, since I think that the overwhelming majority of those who read (or begin to read) it won’t like it – whether they bounce off it being a humorous parody, or if they just find the humor disgusting – I simply think that not many will like this book. But I could be wrong, maybe my sense of humor isn’t as rare as it feels, and others will see this book as the brilliantly offensive manifesto (laying it on thick again) that I see it as. I guess I’m just a sucker of for cynicism wrapped in inappropriate humor, and I’m probably the only one hoping for a sequel***.

But I’m aware, so it’s all good.****

*See the first paragraph of this review

**Though, perhaps the in writing this Erikson is just trying spur thought and change?

***Seriously, I would love to see sequels to this, and I'm not-so-secretly hoping this book does find an audience. Does this review help or hurt those chances?

****I added a few minor edits post-publishing.

Review: The Sheriff of Yrnameer by Michael Rubens

So, what happens when a TV funny-man (well, the person behind the TV funny-man) decides that they need to write a hilariously funny science fiction parody for a novel in the spirit of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy? In the case of Michael Rubens, a former field producer for The Daily Show and others, and his debut novel The Sheriff of Yrnameer (US, UK, Canada, Indiebound), and to put it kindly, nothing particularly interesting happens at all.

The Sheriff of Yrnameer is the story of Cole, a second-rate galactic criminal who has a really bad day. The enforcer who he owes money is threatening to lay a bunch of parasitic eggs in his head and he hijacks a rival’s ship to escape. This begins his journey across the galaxy to a planet that supposedly doesn’t exist. Along the way Cole grows a heart (kind of), is featured on intergalactic public radio, is relentlessly pursued by Kenneth the egg-laying enforcer, is reunited with the love of his life, and faces yet another enemy from his past.

There’s a problem when trying to emulate someone like Douglas Adams – it’s almost impossible to get even close. One of the things that works best about Adams’ books is how thoroughly British the humor is. Conversely, one of the reasons that Rubens’ effort so thoroughly fails is due to just how American the humor is. Everything has a flippant, consumerism feel about it – sure it’s supposed to, after all much of The Sheriff of Yrnameer is satire – but it just isn’t funny (or at least it isn’t funny to me). Yes, when the title of your book has the word ‘Yrnameer’ in it, then it is appropriate to make a joke about hard-to-pronounce things, but just leave it at one – don’t flog the dead horse of silly, hard-to-pronounce words.

When one picks up a book like The Sheriff of Yrnameer, it isn’t really expected that the science part of the science fiction will be well developed. However, at least make things plausible. The protagonist can’t travel the length of a galaxy that is presumably inhabited by billions, trillions, or more sentient beings to the one hidden inhabitable planet that has all of about 100 beings on it and know no less than 3 of the ‘people’ living there. It’s just ridiculous (which is an apt descriptor for much of The Sheriff of Yrnameer). And don’t blatantly copy Douglas Adams by ‘inventing’ bendspace as a means for traveling galactic distances. Also, while the hapless rogue is a well-loved character in American pop-culture, if you are going to center a 288-page book on him, at least make him somewhat likeable and interesting. Cole is an insensitve idiot, the kind of person I would like to see fail in life if I could be bothered with caring.

Satire is something I quite enjoy, so there are some redeeming qualities to The Sheriff of Yrnameer, just not enough to make the book worth recommending. Rubens’ galaxy is one of universal corporate sponsorship (even planet names) and his presentation of these worlds did bring an ironic smile to my face at times. Heck even the oft-joked about hard-to-pronounce Yrnameer is a play on ‘your-name-here’ for the only planet in the galaxy without a corporate sponsor. The satire bites deepest with an intelligence implant that turned a corporate retreat into an over-the-top cannablistic hell, perfectly remincent of a popular video game in Rubens’ world. The cameo of intergalactic pubic radio (I’m an avid NPR listener) and naming an indescribable bad-ass, yet surprisingly sensitive, alien enforcer Kenneth also provided me with amusement.

Frankly put, if I hadn’t been in a small Arizona town on a work assignment that gave me the choice of watching other people work or reading while watching people work with a choice only 3 books (all of which I read), The Sheriff of Yrnameer is not a novel I would have finished reading. Of course, this is a humor novel, which means that if the novel doesn’t appeal to your sense of humor, it’s unlikely you’ll enjoy it. The Sheriff of Yrnameer clearly didn’t appeal to mine – maybe it will appeal to yours, but I won’t bet on it. 4/10