There Are Four Lights

For those of you who may not be familiar with anime or manga this rendition of four of the greatest scientists in our history might seem a little odd. For anime/manga fans reading this who aren’t familiar with ‘Charlie, Carl, Albert and Isaac’, this is probably confusing to you as well!

Since we’re celebrating Carl Sagan Day, I thought I’d create a little piece of artwork that has been floating around in my head for a while—-what Carl Sagan, Charles Darwin, Albert Einstein, and Isaac Newton might look like if they were bishounen characters in a manga series.

I’ve added three new images to the header rotation…just some quick little Trek doodles.

I have a weakness for the fashion of the online store, YesStyle.com. My closet contains many of their items, which I wear whenever I decide I should get out of my pjs and put on something nice. And what better place to do that then at the TED 2009 conference!

This is my creme-coloured ballerina skirt from YesStyle, which I wore for the first time at the TED Prize Gala back in February. The conference was held in Long Beach. This layered skirt is from the South Korean brand, Ukki. You can still grab it for about $50 US.

I also have this lovely “Flower-and-Vine” zip wallet by Let’s Fly, a Chinese brand. This particular item is no longer available, but YesStyle carries many of the brand’s other cute women’s bags and wallets.

One feature that I like about YesStyle is their “set” section. You can find some pretty affordable outfits in this sections, where items are combined together. I first came across YesStyle while looking for clothing references for my artwork. Looking through the site’s fashion always makes me want to sketch cute manga girls dressed up in their adorable items. So I did!

This set is from the South Korean brand, Beccgirl. It includes a v-neck long sleeve shirt and the check pattern skirt. Several colours are available in both the skirt and shirt, with the option of mix-and-matching your choice. Not included are the boots and the adorable suspenders. I have a thing for suspenders!

There you have it–YesStyle+manga! …And evidence that this geeky mangaka can, occasionally, get all dolled up!

I try not to think with my gut. If I’m serious about understanding the world, thinking with anything besides my brain, as tempting as that might be, is likely to get me into trouble.

-Carl Sagan

…actually, it was just sitting in the mailbox this morning—-but it should’ve arrived this way! Yep, my very own copy of Death from the Skies signed by the totally awesome Bad Astronomer, Dr. Phil Plait. And yes, he’s lucky enough to be getting a manga goody bag of…goodness. I’m assuming it will arrive via magic ninjas or team of sailor scouts…

Do you want your very own manga goodies by mangaka Sara E. Mayhew? Great! You can get your copy of Secrets of Sorcerers Vol. 1 over at Amazon! Unfortunately, if you want a print copy of Legend of the Ztarr, for now you’ll have to call up Viz and tell them they should publish it…

I thought I’d write a post about my new manga series, Legend of the Ztarr. If there’s anything that I like to talk about more than Trek, Star Wars, and science, it’s my LotZ manga. It also happens to be the thing I get to talk about the least. The end of 2007 was the year that I finally started writting the script for the series, and in 2008 I did character designs, storyboards, and finally the first chapter, which can be read online at www.legendoftheztarr.com.

Legend of the Ztarr is the story of a young girl named Adora Ztarr who lives on a peaceful little planet called Teri with her adopted aunt, uncle, and cousin. Her father, the Great Kalen Ztarr, was killed in the battle to overthrow The Emperor of the Known Universe. The series begins when two off-worlders, still loyal to the House of Ztarr, come to take Adora away from her homeworld, so that she can replace her father in the prophecy which fortells that he will destroy the Emperor.

The sword of Ztarr but once shall slay and end The Holy Emperor’s rein.” – The Third Prophecy of Jillian

I really enjoy creating Legend of the Ztarr; I think because, like most of my creations, it’s a story that I want to read. I’m not concentrated on creating something for a specific target audience and deciding what kind of characters and plotlines that audience will like. These are characters that I love and their adventures tell a story that I want to hear. And it’s my favourite kind of story: swords & sandals in outerspace!

My DeviantART account has a few sketches from the series I’ve uploaded. I recently updated the theme of its website (though the drawing of the blonde man on the far right needs to be replaced as soon as I finish colouring Myren). I’m working on storyboards for the second chapter, so it won’t be complete for a while yet. Also, I’m organizing a proposal for the series to pitch to manga publishers; I don’t think I want to go down the indy path like I did for Secrets of Sorcerers (not that SoS hasn’t done really well, it’s simply too much for lil artist brain me to keep track of inventory and invoices).

So tell everyone about Legend of the Ztarr and check out my youtube channel as well for a little video of me talking about LotZ (and the audio version my friend requested of me).

Solipsism is the argument that nothing exists outside the mind or, at least, that you can’t prove the existence of anything outside your own mind. Of course, this is philosophical solipsism, which I’m discussing in this post, and not the psychiatric condition involving detachment from reality.  I have no problem discussing philosophy; however, I rarely hear these types of arguments when actually discussing philosophy. I’ve only heard this kind of talk from people trying to create a loop-hole where their beliefs can escape scientific scrutiny-or any kind of criticism.

I’d like to share a little anecdote of a conversation I had which sums up quite nicely the typical response I receive as a skeptic talking to a believer. The conversation was with a very nice, friendly new age woman who ended the conversation by telling me that it was fine that I needed evidence for things, but that some people “can just have an inner knowing of how things work”. She thought it was arrogant and close minded to “…Believe in what we can only process with our 5 senses…” That sentiment has become quite commonplace in my experience with new agers and religious proponents. It is quite frustrating, indeed, to be called arrogant by those claiming to have privileged knowledge of the universe; a special viewpoint of nature that is inaccessible to outsiders and immune to any standards of evaluation. This position, like that of solipsism, seems to be the ultimate egotistical world view.

That’s not to say that because an idea is self-centered that it has to be wrong as well. Of course not, it’s simply that I have become very cautious of ideas that put humans or individuals at the center of the universe; the pattern of discovery, to date, continues to dismantle ideas that place us in a privileged position. Long ago, we had to give up the idea that the universe was geocentric and Darwin proved that we can’t hold on to the idea that humans are the center of creation either; we weren’t specially formed, separately from other life on this planet. And so, it seems to me that solipsism and similar ideas are another attempt to carve out a special place for ourselves.

If we remember that ideas we are emotionally invested in should be held to even higher standards of critical thinking, then the claim that anyone (or everyone) has privileged and inaccessible knowledge of the universe definitely needs to be treated with an extra dose of scepticism. It looks like even though people have given up on the idea that they are physically at a center of the universe, the desire still remains, and so it is replaced with the idea that we are at a non-physical center. I can’t help but feel very cautious of this thinking; given the incredibly good track record nature has for being indifferent to human concerns.

And I can’t help but see a streak of intellectual dishonestly in using forms of solipsism in discussions relating to scientific discovery. Dr. Phil Plait, aka the Bad Astronomer, recently posted this to his twitter account: “If the Universe obeys rules (the supposition in question) then it will do so whether we are here or not. There is an objective truth.” When I hear people argue against objective truth, it’s usually a last attempt to save a deeply held belief from evidence against it. In a universe with only subjective truth, everyone’s personal beliefs are protected from the very scary concept of being wrong. And if there’s one thing that science can do is be completely unambiguous about what is untrue.

So it doesn’t really surprise me that a typical response to the fact that science deals with what can be known is that nothing can be known. If something can be known, then it is in the realm of scientific inquiry. But if you can never truly know reality, only experience it then all ideas are conveniently defended from criticism. Again, I have nothing against that idea as a philosophical argument, but nearly every time I’ve heard this point brought up in conversation, its purpose seems to be to avoid the evaluation of a belief by the scientific method. If I needed to turn the universe upside-down, redefine reality and truth, and throw the concept of knowledge itself out the window in order to make sure what I believe isn’t wrong, I just might have to stop and reconsider why I believe it’s true.

Again, I think it’s important to consider carefully why we want to believe some things are true. The idea that the universe needs us-that nothing exists without our own thoughts and experience-is tempting. But regardless of how self-centered solipsist-type ideas seem to be, whether it’s true or not is irrelevant. It’s irrelevant because the universe requires that you operate as if it were untrue.

If there was a prize for the pseudo-science, paranormal, or new age belief which was most harmful, most immoral, or most disgusting it would have to go to alternative medicine. No contest. Any faith based idea has the potential to be dangerous, but faith healing, cleverly marketed with the secular disguise of ‘alternative medicine’ seems to be the most successful, most deceptive, most dangerous, and especially the most profitable. I recently came across a preview for a movie promoting a form of this garbage, Gerson Therapy. The film, titled “The Beautiful Truth” (barf), is a perfect example of the bag of tricks these charlatans use to take advantage those made desperate by illness.

Gerson Therapy is a so-called alternative cancer treatment which uses “…organic foods, juicing, coffee enemas, detoxification and natural supplements to activate the body’s ability to heal itself”. Wow, even Oprah’s wacky Dr. Oz knows that detox diets don’t rid the body’s system of toxins. Diet has no effect on how effectively your body deals with toxins. Now, apparently, it’s supposed to cure cancer.

The movie trailer doesn’t explain what Gerson Therapy is, but it’s full of the typical jibber jabber nonsense of alternative medicine proponents. The most prevalent argument would seem to be that which claims drugs (all drugs?) don’t work and companies are only concerned with making money. I have several problems with this claim. The first would be the huge logical fallacy red flag-you cannot use a company’s motive for profit as evidence that their product doesn’t work. The validity of any treatment must be established through empirical data. Another problem of this argument is how a company is supposed to make huge profit from a product which doesn’t work. It seems we are supposed to believe in some sort of grand conspiracy where researchers, doctors, and medical experts all keep patients in the dark about the complete ineffectiveness of pharmaceuticals so they can scam everyone out of their money.

The idea that the entire pharmaceutical industry is a giant get-rich-quick scheme that the general public is unaware of is, frankly, ridiculous. Huge investments in decades of research are required to get just one drug to the stage where it can be evaluated for its effectiveness and safety. This is not an easy way to make a quick buck. This is where alternative medicine quacks become most infuriatingly deceptive; it is the alternative and natural health product industry which is cheaply and easily making its investors rich. Regulations, certifications, and basic upfront cost to produce these products and services are nearly nonexistent.  I could literally step outside to the nice little forested area across from my northern Ontario home, gather up random leafy-grassy-forest junk, put it through a blender and label it Aunt Sara’s All Natural Organic Energy Supplement and easily sell it. I don’t have to do any research, I don’t have to do expensive trials, and I don’t even have to prove it does anything. The same goes for most of the alternative service industry as well. No one is going to come arrest me if I practice reiki or homeopathy without a license. There is plenty of profit to be made in faith healing without the need to prove your product or service works.

A major red flag when listening to arguments, not just from pseudo-science, but just plain any kind of argument is when the proponent does nothing but attack conflicting arguments. Creationists don’t argue creationism or intelligent design, they argue against evolution. Natural/Organic food proponents don’t point out proven benefits of their products; they highlight fears of genetic modification. Alternative medicine has to attack real medicine because they don’t have any evidence of their own to promote. The major flaw in alternative medicine is that any treatment which can be proven to work as it claims (through controlled trials and proper double-blinded tests) then it becomes accepted as medicine. The requirement for treatments in the alternative health care industry is that they are methods which are unproven. This is not science based medicine; it is religion disguised as health care.

This (first) manga break is of my absolute favourite manga series, NANA. The series creator is Ai Yazawa and it’s still ongoing and serialized in Cookie (a monthly manga magazine in Japan). NANA is a hugely popular shoujo series; Volume 19, released last May, broke 2008 sales record by selling 780 000 copies in one week (the previous record was held by Naruto Vol. 42, which sold 505 000 copies in the week of May 2^nd). The series gets its name from the two main characters; both named Nana, which means ‘seven’ in Japanese. The two girls end up living together in apartment 707, in Tokyo, and become good friends despite their opposite personalities.

One of the Nanas is the vocalist in a band called The Black Stones (or Blast). She nicknames the other Nana “Hachiko” which is the name of a famous loyal pet dog in Japan (and ‘hachi’ also means ‘eight’). Hachiko is your typical girly 20 year old who jumps from relationship to relationship and from one job to another. Among the many contrasts between the two is Hachi’s lack of focus and her seemingly endless boyfriend hopping, compared to Nana’s passion to be a singer and her history with the one man she loves.

Yazawa’s artwork is gorgeous-the details in the changing hair and clothing is wonderful and really suites each individual character. But what I most admire about Yazawa’s work is her writing; the story is a beautiful mix of fantasy (the glamour of famous musicians, dating a celebrity, plentiful designer fashion) and realism (falling out of love, leaving home, struggling to find your life’s focus). No matter what situation the characters are placed in, Yazawa makes it all seem believable. In some manga, sometimes it can seem like a character is making a certain choice solely because it serves the story-but in NANA, every character responds to the situations in a manner which is true to their personality. The interactions that go on between the various characters make you believe that they all really could be living out their lives this way, somewhere in Tokyo.

NANA is more mature than the typical shoujo series you might find licensed here in North America. Personally, I would consider NANA more of a “josei” manga-geared more towards young adults than teens. I can imagine American promoters comparing it to popular teen TV dramas like the O.C. or Dawson’s Creek to try and market to the audience of those kinds of shows, but I don’t think that comparison would do it justice. The story deals with breakups, cheating, drugs, pregnancy, and other familiar drama themes, but none of it feels like it’s been dumped in-nearly everything that occurs in the plot feels necessary to the story-everything feels natural and, again, believable.

NANA was licensed by Viz, here in the US and Canada, and was serialized in their Shojo Beat magazine. It was dropped from the magazine once the story started to outgrow the Shojo Beat age demographic with its increasingly mature content. Viz continues to release the series in graphic novel format, which currently runs to about Volume 14. An anime adaptation was produced and aired in Japan in 2006. The license for the anime has apparently been acquired by Viz, but I haven’t heard any recent news about when it will be released.

I don’t often get the chance to watch or read new anime and manga series, so most of my favourite series are from the late 90s. NANA is one exception. I know I’m not the only one who finds themselves re-reading older chapters and getting sucked in all over again. The balance, flow, and emotion in both artwork and story make NANA one of those great manga series that remind me of why I fell in love with this type of storytelling.

Sara drawn as a Yazawa character?

No, I can’t prove that you won’t spontaneously turn into a toaster. But, in the case of some people, I can certainly wish you will. I’m often disappointed when I mingle within the art world and speak with fellow artists about anything other than art, specifically, science. All that tends to be said is a bunch of wishy-washy gobbly-goop. As a mangaka, I love telling stories, especially the kind of stories that involve magic, spirits, and strange sci-fi phenomena. However, that’s where it ends, for me. I don’t pretend to believe that any of the mysticism, either in my own work or in other books, manga, movies I love, can translate literally into the world we live in. There’s no reason to believe in the existence of spirits, ghosts, demons, deities…or…um, horcruxes. People don’t have psychic powers, they can’t perform divination, and no one can come back in blue-Jedi form (unfortunately). All that fun stuff can only happen within the imaginary made-up worlds in storytelling. But, when confronted with claims saying otherwise, what is a little, non-sciencey, mangaka to do? Eh? Whatcha gonna do, Ms. Grumpy-pants aka closed minded, cold, heartless, evidence-whore?!

The first problem to address is the misunderstanding over what science is. Like  Michael Shermer says, science is a verb. Science isn’t old men in white lab coats; its critical thinking. If there’s one anti-science argument I hear over and over again it’s that science is biased. Well, gosh darn it, this breaks my little grumpy-pants heart! I think the mistake being made here is the difference between a scientist being biased and science being biased. “Of course, you’re gonna say my homeopathic quantum juice doesn’t work, Mr. Fancypants…you’re a ‘scientist’!” (And we all know that negative energy vibrations from Fancypants scientists interfere with how woo-juice works).

Scientists can be prone to bias, like anyone else, but the scientific method itself is objective. There’s no better methodology one can use to fight against our own personal beliefs, observer bias, and confirmation bias. In the world of art and storytelling, things are based on interpretation and your work is perceived differently by different people because of their own experiences, cultural beliefs, and personal tastes. Two people can look at the same piece of art and hold two completely different and valid opinions about it. So, it makes sense that someone used to functioning in the art world might apply this type of thinking to science as well. However, science is not relative. One of the purposes of the scientific method is to produce results which can be repeated by anyone, anywhere, no matter what their biases may be. Again, I’m just a mangaka, but if I understand correctly, even with Einstein’s relativity-where observers can hold different but equally valid claims based on their frame of reference-the theory itself is not relative.

Perhaps, it would be better if I used the words critical thinking or rational thought instead of ‘science’. I doubt as many people would argue against being rational and I can’t think of many scenarios where one would stop and say “You know, I don’t think this is a claim that you should apply science critical thinking to”. If there’s one thing I’ve learned from being exposed to skepticism that I find most valuable is the ability to realize when I’m believing something simply because I want it to be true. Ann Druyan writes, in the introduction to Carl Sagan’s The Varieties of Scientific Experience:

“…science opens the way to levels of consciousness that are otherwise inaccessible to us; that, contrary to our cultural bias, the only gratification that science denies to us is deception.“