Dish-Houston

BY DISH CONTRIBUTOR MARK YZAGUIRRE

Last weekend was the big opening weekend for the film version of The Hunger Games, as anyone who follows popular culture at an even cursory level has noticed.  The original book trilogy was written by Suzanne Collins and has already become a classic addition to the genre of dystopian fiction.

I haven't read any of The Hunger Games books and I currently don't plan on seeing the film (though that might change if I have a little more free time during the next few weeks), but I have noticed a particular trend with regard to commentary about The Hunger Games.  As night follows day, if one reads commentary about The Hunger Games online, whether in articles or Facebook postings, one can practically guarantee that someone will chime in saying that The Hunger Games is just a retelling of a Japanese novel, film and manga series called Battle Royale.  Invariably the person stating this will say that The Hunger Games isn't as good as Battle Royale and everyone who is interested in The Hunger Games is just a lame American who should instead watch or read Battle Royale. 

To such people I say, get over yourselves.  First of all, the writer of The Hunger Games claims to have not been influenced by Battle Royale.  Even if that isn't the case (though I have no reason to disbelieve her, it's not like Battle Royale was well-known in the United States), whether or not The Hunger Games is a worthwhile work of film or literature is a question that stands on its own.  It isn't exactly uncommon for works of art in one culture to borrow from and reinterpret artworks from another culture and that doesn't make such works failures in their own right. 

For example, The Magnificent Seven was a reworking of Akira Kurosawa's Seven Samurai, but that doesn't mean that The Magnificent Seven wasn't a great film in itself.  (And before someone says that I am claiming that The Hunger Games is as good as The Magnificent Seven, no, I'm not claiming that, this is what writers sometimes refer to as a comparison.)  It is a fallacy to claim that the existence of Battle Royale somehow makes a difference as to whether The Hunger Games is worth reading or watching.  These things are independent of one another.  Frankly, when one reads such commentary, one is reminded of the sort of annoying person who will talk about how they were into a band before anyone else knew them and now that band isn't good anymore because they've become a bunch of sellouts. 

So there are people out there who were really into Battle Royale and they are critical of the success of The Hunger Games, and they absolutely must point out at every opportunity that Battle Royale came first.  That's great.  Congratulations.  Thanks for that fascinating bit of information.  Now get lost before I give you a wedgie.

Editor's Note:  This article was originally posted at The Huffington Post on March 26, 2012. 

BY DISH CONTRIBUTOR MARK YZAGUIRRE:

Houstonians were generally disappointed when it was determined that the Johnson Space Center would not receive one of the retired space shuttles, now that the space shuttle program has been discontinued.  Instead, the remaining shuttle orbiters and the Enterprise test vehicle will be housed in California, New York, Florida and Washington DC.  Houston political leaders complained about this decision and an investigation occurred into the decision-making process.  This investigation determined that the decision was not a political one.  However, it did state that Charlie Bolden, the chief administrator of NASA, did not believe that a city's ties, or lack thereof, to the shuttle program or NASA should be considerations in whether to house the retired shuttles in that city.

            Let's be blunt - such criteria tipped the scales against Houston.  As stated in a Houston Chronicle article written by Eric Berger:

That decision set NASA on the path toward awarding its now-grounded fleet of orbiters to institutions in Washington, D.C., New York, Florida and California...  "I think the story here is that Houston was deliberately and intentionally denied the shuttle by Administrator Bolden," said Denis Braham, chairman of the Greater Houston Partnership's NASA Task Force. "There's no other way to read that report."  It was not clear exactly why Bolden chose to change the rules of evaluating the 21 proposals submitted by institutions to NASA, but in the end he prioritized putting the orbiters in high-tourism locations.

            Admittedly, Houston is not a major tourism center.  This is a city where people come to make their fortunes, not to spend their summer vacations.  But to prioritize tourism over history is ridiculous.  The space shuttle program was an important step in the history of American space exploration and that history is inextricably tied to the city of Houston.  Historical context matters and ignoring that context shows a disregard for the cultural ties a given artifact has to its location.  Under this logic, perhaps we should move the Liberty Bell from Philadelphia to Disney World, since more tourists could see it there.  Thanks for nothing, Charlie.