‘Neuromancer’ Coming At Us from ‘Deadpool’ Director Tim Miller

Ryan Reynolds in ‘Deadpool’/Image © Twentieth Century Fox

Editor's Note:

Great news for fans of Neuromancer landed in the world of adaptations today! This and more – including Dragon Con controversy – in today’s Daily Blunt.

The next few years are going to be exciting for sci-fi fans. “Deadpool” director Tim Miller has been given the go-ahead to adapt William Gibson’s Neuromancer for Fox, and Ava DuVernay is going to sail from “A Wrinkle in Time” to a TV adaptation of Octavia Butler’s Dawn, which readers recall is the kickoff to a trilogy called Lilith’s Brood. No network has been announced for the latter, but based on the overwhelmingly positive reception for DuVernay’s trailers for the L’Engle film, a bidding war seems all but inevitable.

You’d think that opening up a literary contest to popular vote would be the most democratic way to go about it, but authors like John Scalzi and Alison Littlewood know better. Following problems with the Hugo and Nebula awards, in which organized factions tried to skew the nominations as well as the awards to ensure that white males took every prize, both of these authors have expressed concerns about the contest being organized by this year’s Dragon Con. Scalzi warned organizers, “Some other finalists are trying to use the book and me as a prop … to advance a manufactured ‘us vs. them’ vote-pumping narrative based on ideology or whatever,” while Littlewood was dismayed to discover that she wouldn’t be able to withdraw her name from the nominee pool — though the convention has since amended its policy, and allowed authors to decline the honor. (Encouraged by this gesture, Scalzi has opted to remain on the ballot for now.)

Rebecca Solnit never counted on becoming “The Voice of the Resistance,” but as a new generation of feminists discovers some of her older works, the author is finding herself in the strange and precarious position of being appreciated in her lifetime. The New York Times talks to Solnit about the phenomenon, on which she comments: “I feel that it’s really important to not depend on all this in any sense and not let this define my worth or work … I wrote Hope in the Dark fourteen years ago. Am I somehow better or smarter now than I was then?” Perhaps not, but we are all better off for having her words to reflect on now.

Last week, game designer and author Mike Selinker wrote an article framing the 2016 presidential election results as an outcome of game theory. This week he’s back, with an explanation for President Trump’s increasingly bizarre, self-destructive behavior throughout the ongoing Russia investigation, viewed through the lens of classic gambler’s fallacies, as demonstrated by Tom Stoppard in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. Selinker points out that certain strategies may only be accessible to those with seemingly infinite wealth and power, including this one in particular: “It’s called the St. Petersburg Paradox, and it was invented in Russia. Just like his presidency.”