Blood & Rhetoric

Megan McArdle from The Atlantic wrote an article last week on explaining science fiction to women that managed to (rightfully so) piss a lot of women off.

One of the more offensive points she had was this little gem:

“Those of you who pitch science fiction to wives and girlfriends who do not enjoy it are probably saying something along the following lines: “Space ships! Alien monsters! Men in tights!” Instead, for women who find that sort of thing distasteful, talk about it as a fairy tale–only a fairy tale with science instead of magic. The basic emotional space it taps is the same.”

Yes, that’s right. Sell it as a magical fairy tale populated by melodrama and unicorns and TRUE LOVE CONQUERING ALL! We chicks just eat that shit up like crazy! That and nothing else! For realz.

Um no. Have we seriously not yet passed all this needless gender warring? Or, much like fitting science fiction and fantasy into neat genres and subgenres, do we still seriously maintain as a species that men and women are so fundamentally different that our tastes simply don’t and can’t overlap?

It’s like watching a bad comedien spin his outdated “women are like this, and men are like that” jokes to an audience where one half of it is rolling their eyes, and the other is too stupid to know any better.

It’s as offensive as marvelling over the idea that black people like reading and writing science fiction.

And ultimately it’s just a moot point; one that I’m tired of. I’m a woman. I do like romantic plots (and unicorns too, actually) but I also love hard science fiction, and I shouldn’t have to qualify that statement or explain myself.

This chick does a better job than I of explaining why this is so stupid, but I wanted to add my voice to the disconted masses of women wondering where this bullshit stems from.

“pubble”

Full, plump; usually spoken of corn or fruit.

John Brockett, Glossary of North Country Words, 1825

Again, I found this via Nathan Bransford’s blog: Vanguard Press, Imprint of the Future.

Where Jonathan Karp’s Imprint 12 focuses on a small catalogue of books along with intense advertising and promotion to generate sales; Vanguard Press, run by Roger Cooper takes an even more unusual approach in that it asks the author to share in the initial investment.

Translation: NO advance, but a much larger investment put into marketing along with higher royalties and monthly paycheques being paid out based on book sales.

The American Film Institute recently released a list of the top ten greatest films in fantasy and science fiction. The science fiction list is fairly decent. The fantasy list….um, Groundhog Day? Are you people fucking joking? No. They’re not. John Scalzi’s not touching the fantasy list either (yet) but he posts an interesting blog over at AMCtv asking the readers what their top list is for science fiction.

His five are: The Matrix (1999); Ghost in the Shell (1995); The Incredibles (2004); 12 Monkeys (1995); Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004).

I agree with The Matrix and Eternal Sunshine of The Spotless Mind, further on my list of best science fiction films:

Solaris (1972): The original Russian film directed by Andrei Tarkovsky based on the novel Solaris by Polish science fiction author Stanisław Lem. Themes of love, loss, the nature of existence and our memory abound in this gloomy, existential masterpiece.
Solaris (1992): Yeah that’s right. Again. Can you tell I’m a huge Solaris fan all around? The 1992 version is directed by Steven Soderbergh, and stars George Clooney. This version focuses too much on the relationship of the leads, but it is a stunning and under-rated film regardless. Read the book, watch the movies, prepare to ponder the mysteries of life and God.
Children of Men (2006): directed by Alfonso Cuarón and loosely adapted from P. D. James’s 1992 novel The Children of Men. Starring Clive Owen.
Dark City (1998): a science fiction film noir directed by Alex Proyas. I still remember walking out of the theatre after seeing this for the first time with friends. I was 14 and literally disoriented and dizzy, stumbling around the mall, and talking about the implications of humanity and memory and God (I seem big on these themes, don’t I?) this film had introduced to me. Brilliant.
Blade Runner (1982): the cyberpunk classic directed by Ridley Scott and starring Harrison Ford. Eyeballs. Thumbs. Eyeballs and thumbs….

I could go on, but I won’t.

Not today anyway.

Ballista magazine calling for submissions: Ballista publishes ‘fresh and inventive tales considering the supernatural, psychological, paranormal, modern horror, mythos, macabre, SF, dark fantasy or just the downright bizarre.’

More information on their website.

Locus Award Winners Announced.

In science fiction, we have Michael Chabon’s The Yiddish Policeman’s Union, and for fantasy Terry Pratchett’s Making Money: A Novel of Discworld.

An interesting discussion on Designer Babies.

Survival of the fittest and natural selection have taken a back seat to the almighty SCIENCE! Is it any wonder we’re doomed as a race?

Terry Goodkind changes genres:

“Terry Goodkind’s next book will not be published by Tor. With the release of The Confessor last year, the Sword of Truth saga is officially complete and now Mr. Goodkind is looking to switch genres from fantasy to mainstream fiction. To do so he has joined the ranks of Tom Clancy, Clive Cussler and Jack Higgins by signing a three book deal with G. P. Putnam’s Sons.”

Guillermo del Toro On Starting Hobbit Preparation. I am nerdily excited about this.

Galleycat blogs about Can You Sell One Story By Telling Another? An alternative to the standard booktrailer — which I LOATHE — in the form of backstory. Now that has promise. That actually sounds interesting — provided it’s well done of course, though that holds true for anything, even the standard, dreaded book trailer that sets my teeth on edge in all it’s cheesy badly-produced glory.

A Conversation With Jacqueline Carey: one of my favourite modern authors. If you haven’t read her Kushiel’s Legacy trilogy, you’re missing out. I mean who doesn’t love sado-masochistic sex and political intrigue? Hm?

More endless and (ultimately) fruitless conversations of science fiction and fantasy generes and subgenres.

According to Alexa, these are the 20 most popular SF sites.

I was directed to Editorial Ass: Less is More via Nathan Bransford’s blog, and I can’t believe I missed this the first time around.

Jonathan Karp’s imprint 12 revolves around a very basic concept: 1 book per month; 12 books a year:

That means a given catalog has only four books in it, tops. This means more focus on quality, where only one book is getting an editor’s complete attention at a time. It also means the slashing of arbitrary initiatives (many publishing companies incentivize their departments and employees by the number of acquisitions and books published, which makes sense in a quantitative way but in a qualitative way inadvertently encourages editors to acquire books they don’t care about in order to scrape their margins together).

Jonathan Karp brings with him 16 years of experience from Random House, so my assumption is that he knows what he’s talking about.

More focus on quality. Not quantity. What a revolutionary concept, eh? And 7 of their first 10 published books have become NYT bestsellers.

Less crap published, and deserving novels and authors getting the attention (and money) they deserve.

I think this is something to get very excited about.

With so many seemingly in a tizzy about the future of publishing and the drastic ways the industry has (and must) change, here’s something that actually makes sense.

I hope this a business model others start adapting.

“erubescency”

Blushing for shame… for fear of loss of reputation.

Nathaniel Baily, Etymological English Dictionary, 1749.

This is a favourite point of discussion for many science fiction and fantasy enthusiasts.

What is fantasy? What is science fiction?

Is this novel steampunk? Or a combination of dark-bengasian-deiselpunk?

Who the fuck really cares?

That’s the stand Jonathan McCalmont takes in his interesting post on how to define a genre…and why not to bother

“The desire to define things is a product of one of the more interesting quirks of human neural architecture; the desire for abstraction. This desire expresses itself as a tendency to see the world not in terms of individuals but rather clumps of objects that share characteristics, and which can therefore be expected to behave in similar ways.”

On one hand, the defining of the multitude of subgenres for fantasy and science fiction makes sense: I love to read dark fantasy. I love to read dark fantasy with a more “literary” bent. Therefore, I actively seek out work that’s been defined by critics and readers as such.

But the problem starts, when the lines become blurred, and when the work fits into more than one or two neat categories. That’s when the disagreements start. And they can get heated. But the negative here is that it really can have a limiting effect on a book to define it so narrowly.

So-called “literary fiction” doesn’t really carry any subgenres within it despite the fact that books falling within that particular bent obviously work on different trends much in the same way that genre or commercial fiction does. I mean, how much literary fiction has been published in the last few years pertaining in some way to the immigrant experience in North America? Dozens. At least. And that’s just what I’ve personally managed to read. Browse through a bookstore and you’ll see what I mean. Immigrant fiction is hot. So are stories that focus on a son or daughter relating their parent’s story and unraveling some mystery about them in order to come to a deeper understanding by the end of the novel about their own lives.

These could be construed as subgenres. But literary fiction does not carry any official genre card, unlike fantasy and science fiction which certainly do — and often to a ridiculous extent. Look at the wiki article on fantasy subgenres and science fiction subgenres. It’s absurd almost to the point of farce, and I feel one of the many reasons that the two genres have such a hard time gaining mainstream success or literary accolades. It goes beyond merely helping the potential reader find what they’re looking for and makes books published in the genre seem almost instantly formulaic.

Those of us who are passionate about fantasy and science fiction and who realize what a load of crap the snobbery is are fighting an uphill battle for literary acknowledgement. Especially considering that novels like The Road and The Handmaiden’s Tale, despite their science fiction leanings, would never be labeled thus except by those of us who already read the genre and can point and say — hey pretentious jackass! that is science fiction you’re giving the Nobel to!

And don’t even get me started on “magical realism,” which is essentially fantasy of another name.

But at the end of the day, who does really care and why should we be bothered? Isn’t it really a moot point? An argument no one will ever win? I like to think so.

Think of the possibilities, for both readers and writers of any type, if such strict classification was at least taken less seriously if not outright shunned.

Richard Laymon’s Rules of Writing, over at the website of the Horror Writers Association might damn well be the best writing advice I ever read or been given.

I’ve read a few books over the years about writing fiction; none of them have ever done anything for me other than give that initial burst of inspiration that feels so damn good at the time but is very short-lived. Kinda like crack cocaine, I guess; but less expensive.

A couple of those books have managed to stick with me, but not in any substantial way. I also know a few writers who spend more time reading books about writing than actually doing the writing; the real work that has nothing to do with dreams and aspirations and lofty ideals, but with work. Because writing is hard. Preaching to the converted, I suppose, but I’ve been feeling lately as though I’m in a creative dump and it really does bear repeating that the craft of writing takes extreme dedication and practice and effort. And I’m not the only one feeling as though everything I pen is riddled with cliche’s and obvious bad grammar and infantile prose.

So I guess my point is: stop reading dozens of books about creative writing! But do read Richard Laymon’s Rules of Writing, because it’s the most concise and realistic advice I’ve ever gotten, and you may just agree.

Or maybe my point is that writing is hard work and no book will provide you with all the answers you need. I don’t know, I think my real problem is that it’s the middle of the afternoon and I need to be fed.

I’m a little confused as to how some of these were nominated. Family Guy? Dexter? No Country For Old Men? That’s stretching the fantasy/science fiction thing a bit.

And where’s Battlestar Gallactica? It’s the best written science fiction show on television right now. One of the few non-cheesy ones. What happened?

Anyways, The Saturn Awards Complete List of Winners:

Fantasy Film: “Enchanted ”

Science Fiction Film: “Cloverfield ”

Horror Film: “Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street ”

Action/Adventure/Thriller Film: “300 ”

Actress: Amy Adams (”Enchanted”)

Actor: Will Smith (”I Am Legend”)

Supporting Actress: Marcia Gay Harden (”The Mist”)

Supporting Actor: Javier Bardem (”No Country for Old Men”)

Performance by a Younger Actor: Freddie Highmore (”August Rush”)

Direction: Zack Snyder (”300″)

Writing: Brad Bird (”Ratatouille”)

Music: Alan Menken (”Enchanted”)

Costume: Colleen Atwood (”Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street”)

Make-Up: Ve Neill, Martin Samuel (”Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End”)

Special Effects: Scott Farrar, Scott Benza, Russell Earl, John Frazier (”Transformers”)

Animated Film: “Ratatouille”

International Film: “Eastern Promises”

Network Television Series: “Lost”

Syndicated / Cable Television Series: “Dexter”

Presentation on Television: “Family Guy: Blue Harvest”

Actress on Television: Jennifer Love Hewitt (”Ghost Whisperer”)

Actor on Television: Matthew Fox (”Lost”)

Supporting Actress on Television: (TIE): Summer Glau (”Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles”) and Elizabeth Mitchell (”Lost”)

Supporting Actor on Television: Michael Emerson (”Lost”)

DVD Release: “The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari“ (remix)

DVD Special Edition Release: “Blade Runner” (5 Disc Ultimate Edition)

DVD Classic Film Release: “The Monster Squad”

DVD Collection: “Mario Bava” (Box Sets 1 & 2)

Television Series Release on DVD: “Heroes” (Season 1)

Retro Television Series Release on DVD: “Twin Peaks” (Definitive Gold Box Ed.)

The Life Career Award: Robert Halmi, Jr.

The George Pal Memorial Award: Guillermo del Toro

The Filmmakers Showcase Award: Matt Reeves

The Special Achievement Award: Tim & Donna Lucas

The Service Award: Fred Barton