Review: A History of the World in 100 Objects, by Neil MacGregor

This was originally a radio series which made the unsurprising transition to book form. The book itself is pretty hefty, a burglar-killer of a tome, in fact.

The objects are all taken from the British Museum, which has an extensive enough collection to allow for almost all of human history and a broad spread of geographical locations to be covered. There are one or more colour photographs of every object, which vary in size from a few inches wide to an Easter Island statue. The photography is well done, with one or two minor exceptions (an interesting shadow puppet from Java is hard to make out because the background and its head are both black).

Each object has around half a dozen pages dedicated to it, describing the item itself as well as outlining the context in which it was created. Some of them are perhaps expected, whereas others are less well known and all the more interesting for it. I especially liked reading about the astrolabe, which is a cunning device from several centuries ago that functioned almost like a watch and satnav.

The items are arranged in approximately chronological order, within little sections (the Enlightenment being from the latter 18^th century to the start of the 20^th, for example). The gaps between the first few objects are wider than later on, as might be expected.

In terms of selection, I think it’s excellent. Picking 100 objects, given that the whole of human history from across the globe has to be covered, must be a bloody difficult task but I think MacGregor does well. There are plenty of items from China, Australasia, Africa and South America, as well as the more familiar items from Europe.

Personally, I found the Chinese items to be amongst the most interesting. There’s Chinese jade, a very early banknote (unfortunately, they suffered inflation trouble and a loss of faith in the currency, something that would never happen today, I’m sure…) and, of course, china itself.

The objects are a mixture, with some political in nature (the Qianlong Emperor defacing/inscribing an ancient jade ornament with his message, Suffragettes doing likewise with a penny), some commemorating great rulers like Alexander or Croesus and others of religious or martial significance.

Due to the nature of the book (hefty and with 100 discrete sections) it’s ideal for reading in small doses over a long period, and is very enjoyable.

Reminds me, in that regard, of The Art of War: Great Commanders of the Ancient and Medieval Worlds, edited by Andrew Roberts and with contributions from numerous historians. I’ll probably review that in the nearish future, actually.

Thaddeus

Doctor Who: A Good Man Goes To War

So, the final episode of the first half of the season is upon us. Big spoilers lie herein, as might be expected.

The previous episode gave us a fantastic cliff hanger, with Flamy (Flesh Amy) being disintegrated and Real Amy waking up to discover she’s heavily pregnant and has the creepiest midwife in the universe.

The story begins by setting the scene: Amy’s being held on Demon’s Run, a fortress on an asteroid, which is defended by an army of humans and some dodgy characters by the name of the Headless Monks. Meanwhile, the Doctor and Rory (back in his Roman gear) are busy rounding up old allies to help them rescue Amy.

The Welsh Sontaran (Strax, I think his name was) sentenced to being a nurse was hilarious and provided some light relief. Cockney assistant to the Silurian (I didn’t catch her name) was rather lovely, and I liked Christina Chong as Lorna. The pirates previously terrorised by the Siren also made a brief appearance.

Anyway, the Doctor thwarted the Headless Monks (whose description is gruesomely literal) and the human army and rescued Amy and the baby (named Melody). However, creepy eye-patch woman proved too cunning. The baby that was rescued was Flesh, leaving Amy and Rory bereft of their child. In addition, its genes were Human-Plus, with the effect of the TARDIS making it a human-Time Lord hybrid.

The Headless Monks launched a sudden attack and, although they were defeated, the lovely Lorna bit the dust and Strax was probably dying too, alas.

River Song appeared only at the end, revealing that “The only water in the forest is the river” referred to a gift Lorna had given Amy. Lorna was from the forest, and the TARDIS translated her language’s version of Melody Pond into River Song. So, River Song was Amy and Rory’s daughter all the time, and perhaps halfway to being a Time Lord.

It was a nice twist but not hugely unexpected given earlier pointers.

The episode had a large cast of secondary characters which were very good, especially the comedy Sontaran and lovely Lorna/cockney girl. The build up was good as well, but there was a certain lack of tension after the Doctor began the rescue. It didn’t quite work, but Amy’s safe, the Doctor seemed to know where to find Melody (quite possibly Earth, 1969) and River Song was there. For a moment I thought she was going to try and kill the Doctor, given the baby was stolen to be made into a weapon, but the only twist at the end was the not entirely unexpected identity of River Song.

Although not quite a five star episode, the first half of the series has generally been very enjoyable. Three months to go now until the latter six episodes.

Thaddeus

Favourite Voice Actors/Characters

I’ve often said I love great voice-acting, so here’s a list of half a dozen or so that I think are particularly good, in no particular order. There are some spoilers for Metal Gear Solid, Dragon Age: Origins and Uncharted/Uncharted 2.

Cam Clarke and David Hayter as Liquid and Solid Snake in Metal Gear Solid

Metal Gear Solid is one of those games that became a benchmark for the genre and something its rivals aspired to match. Part of the reason was the engaging and original characters, most notably the protagonist, Solid Snake, and his evil twin brother, Liquid Snake.

I’ve paired the two up because the two characters are partly defined in contrast to one another, and the plot is about their battle. Liquid is the more confident (and arrogant) of the two, whereas Solid is a hardnosed but essentially good man. Hayter turns in the first of several engaging performances as Solid Snake, which is tinged with vulnerability in both a military (he gets captured and tortured) and emotional sense (regarding Meryl).

In many ways I actually preferred Liquid. Whilst undoubtedly evil and a bit full of himself, he’s also the more confident and proactive of the two. It’s a shame Cam Clarke never (save for a brief cameo in MGS2) reprised the role.

Simon Templeman as Loghain in Dragon Age: Origins

There are a ton of great performances in Dragon Age: Origins, but none can match the nigh on perfect Loghain, voiced by Simon Templeman. Loghain is a great general and patriot who consider the King to be a bloody fool. Ambition outweighs his loyalty and he takes a strategic decision to leave the King to die.

Loghain’s a complex character, and it can be hard to tell whether he puts his own desire for the throne or his wish to serve and protect Ferelden first. He’s egged on by the black-hearted Arl Howe, a little like Grima Wormtongue to his King Theoden. Templeman puts in a stellar performance, lending Loghain a voice of authority, certainty and arrogance. He can become a companion, or be killed, and makes a cameo appearance in Dragon Age: Awakenings if the former is chosen.

Corinne Kempa as Leliana in Dragon Age: Origins

Excepting Wynne (who was a tedious nagging old woman), I liked every companion in Origins, but Leliana was undoubtedly my favourite. She has a rather lovely French accent and a sweet, flirty character. Kempa’s voice is as pleasant and relaxing as a long hot bath, and Leliana offers plenty of opportunity for fruity conversation.

She was originally a rogue in Orlais, but was betrayed by her lover and went to Ferelden to seek sanctuary in the Chantry, which is where the player finds her. As such, she’s dutiful and devout but with a slightly naughty streak.

Happily, I suspect she’ll return in DA3 (which is interesting, as it’s possible to kill her in Origins).

Claudia Black as Chloe Frazer in Uncharted 2: Among Thieves

Chloe’s an interesting character, and quite hard to pigeonhole. She’s a confident and saucy minx, but doesn’t fall into the videogame trap of being a stereotypical randy Mandy in a chainmail bikini (although that would’ve been an interesting skin option).

Drake, despite being the protagonist, is often bossed about by her, and she’s a sly she-devil. Black does a great job of providing her character with intelligence and complexity, making her a fully rounded and three-dimensional lady.

Nolan North as Drake in the Uncharted series

Drake is a hugely likeable character, reminiscent of Indiana Jones and an improvement on Lara Croft. He’s a tomb raider (ahem) with a penchant for witty one-liners, lovely ladies, shady associates and occasionally buggering things up.

North’s performances as Drake manage to balance the character’s competence and charm with a few weak spots. He’s not a two-dimensional superhuman, and does make bad judgement calls at times. I can take or leave the tomb raider genre, but the top notch voice-acting (aided by the excellent gameplay) is what draws me to Uncharted.

Thaddeus

Recipe for a great RPG

RPGs are my favourite genre of computer game. Old classics like Phantasy Star IV, Vagrant Story and Shadow Hearts made a lasting impression on me. I’ve been slightly less impressed with some recent offerings. I loved Oblivion, though its levelling system displeased me. FFX and FFXII had a number of flaws (the latter had a potentially great political plot that was never developed and half the characters were tedious) and lacked the charm of FFIV and FFVII.

However, whilst Final Fantasy seems to be plunging over the abyss of linearity (albeit with delicious graphics) there are some good modern RPGs. Dragon Age: Origins was flawed but enjoyable, and Valkyria Chronicles offered an intriguing mix of story and tactical combat.

The benchmark for the latest generation of consoles is Oblivion (until 11/11/11). But what makes a great RPG, and why has Final Fantasy gone from the great days of Cecil and Kain, Cloud and Sephiroth, to being second rate?

Freedom

Long ago, when every character spoke only in text and games were on cartridges (or, and I feel ancient as I type this, cassettes) a lack of freedom to choose in RPGs was ok. It was ok because moving a little character of a few pixels on the screen was amazing and new.

Now, it’s unacceptable. There are a few ways to achieve proper RPG freedom. The Oblivion/Skyrim route is simple: create a massive world, cram it with quests, side-quests, random encounters and different ways of playing the game and levelling, and let the player do whatever the hell they like. In Oblivion, the main quest is entirely optional (I actually preferred the excellent Dark Brotherhood quests). So, you can be as evil as you like, stealing things and killing innocents, or very good indeed.

Then there’s the Dragon Age route. You aren’t playing solo, but in a team. However, you choose the members of your party, equip them as you like, change their tactics if you want and get a lot of moral options. So, if you want to be evil, that’s fine. Commit infanticide, enslave dwarven souls to make them mindless, obedient warriors and slaughter a tribe of elves led by Tuvok from, Star Trek: Voyager. It is undoubtedly more linear than the Oblivion way, but you do benefit from the intra-party interactions.

Both routes allow for the player-character to be created rather than pre-defined. Races (well, not in DA2), colour, gender, class are all tailored by the player. The face can be tweaked to try and make a character look beautiful or handsome, damned ugly, or rather evil.

The above two systems work because Oblivion offered literally hundreds of hours of playing time and Dragon Age: Origins enabled players to make different player characters with different parties and to make different moral choices when presented with moral questions.

In short, there’s a hell of a lot of replay value. FFXII offered a little as characters can be customised to fight in different ways and provided with different orders, as in DA:O. But, there were no moral dilemmas to be faced, and the characters were not exactly classics.

World-building and storyline

So, you’ve got freedom. But you need a world in which to be free.

An RPG is best served by a variety of epic locations, and a substantial number of NPCs (non-player characters) which whom to interact. Oblivion had this, but was also let down a little bit by the fact that the vast majority of the characters were voiced by a surprisingly small cast. The dungeons/landscapes were also quite similar generally, a slight problem that is to be mended for Skyrim.

The world also needs a strong history to provide it with an identity beyond Vague Fantasy World. I think Dragon Age has a tremendously strong identity and a great history, and hope that DA3 gets enough time in development to showcase this.

Oblivion felt a little bit too generic, there was not quite enough meat on the bones to make it stand out as distinctive and different. However, it did have a huge world to play in.

FFXII’s political plot could have been excellent, but it seemed underdeveloped, which is a great shame. The general backstory of two massive empires preparing for war was not the most original. I was also puzzled as to what exactly the point of Vaan and Penelo was.

Hmm. Turns out the recipe for a great RPG is shorter than I imagined. There are a lot of peripheral things (easy to navigate menus, great voice acting etc) but generally they’re icing on the cake rather than the chocolatey goodness itself.

I’m hoping for some more news and screenshots of Skyrim to emerge from the E3 Expo, which runs from 7-9 June. If anything particularly interesting comes out, I’ll be sure to post it.

Thaddeus