Mark L. Van Name's Blog, page 235

On the road again: Renovation (WorldCon), Reno, day 5

The morning arrived entirely too early for my taste, as it usually does. After a business meeting, we grabbed some lunch and then attended a panel on The Fisher King. All of the panelists had a lot to contribute on the topic, but none really seemed into it, so it never jelled.



Next up was a very interesting panel on cover design. I gained some insights, which is always nice, and I enjoyed listening to the art-director panelists discuss their work processes.



I passed a little time playing blackjack, made a little more money, and headed out with two others to see Conan the Barbarian. I'll review it more fully later this week.



Work filled the next few hours, then dinner. The food here has been consistently good--not great, but always at least adequate and usually a bit better than that. I have no complaints on that front.



I chatted with Griffin for a while afterward, then headed back to work, pack, and so on.



Tomorrow, the long journey home.

On the road again: Renovation (WorldCon), Reno, day 4

One thing you have to love about casino towns is the ability to get breakfast at any time of the day or night.



I slept as late as my obligations would permit, then caught up on work before showering and heading out. First stop was the Baen upcoming books panel, where Publisher Toni gave me the mic to talk about the paperback of Children No More, The Wild Side, and the upcoming No Going Back. The audience was great, as always, so the talk was fun, as was the rest of the slide show.



By the time the panel ended, we were past due for breakfast and lunch, so we found the casino diner that was still serving breakfast. That meal is always best in the early afternoon, so I quite enjoyed it.



Three of us headed out shortly thereafter to a local theater to catch Fright Night. I'll post my review of it in a later entry.



More work filled the time until we cabbed over to the other con hotel for the Hugo awards. I've gone to this ceremony at every WorldCon I've attended, which is all but about five of them since 1978, and I've always found it a touching celebration of the SF community. Of course, like so many other writers, I've also always imagined myself receiving one, but now, four books and somewhere around a dozen and a half stories into my SF writing career, I don't expect that will ever happen.



You can find the winners at many places online, including on the con's site, so I won't list them here. My congratulations to them all; well done, folks.



We were lucky to share a cab back to the hotel before most of the fans had made the trek, so access to the parties was easy and quick. After a few stops, though, I reached my social limit and returned to my room. Lest the melancholy of not being anywhere near the writer I had hoped I would be overtake me entirely and lead me to more self-pitying whining, I'll stop this entry and focus elsewhere.

On the road again: Renovation (WorldCon), Reno, day 3

After a very late night, I woke from two hours of sleep to do a work phone meeting and a bunch of work email. I then crashed for a few more hours and felt much better getting out of bed the second time.



Work, lunch, and then to Tim Powers' Guest of Honor speech. Its structure in many ways was like that of his novels, appearing to wander a bit here and there but ultimately proving to be a coherent and thought-provoking whole. His main thesis was that he wanted to look at the world from the fantastic angle, as opposed to the "stick to what is possible" approach of mainstream fiction, and that in this more fantastic perspective there is great value. I completely agree.



The next several hours went to the dealers' room, where I browsed the best selection of books of any WorldCon in recent memory, talked to multiple booksellers, and signed all the books of mine that I spotted. Wandering through books is always relaxing for me, so I quite enjoyed the time there.



Dinner was a Baen gathering that Publisher Toni hosted at a local steakhouse. Our table included several other Baen writers: Lois McMaster Bujold, Eric Flint, Sharon Lee and Steve Miller, Chuck Gannon, and Walter Hunt. I quite enjoyed talking with all of them and getting to know them a bit more.



After some time in a local pub with Griffin and Jerry (I'm a cheap bar date: one Diet Coke will do me), I played eight minutes of blackjack, won a little money, and retired to work and then to sleep.



Along the way, I completely forgot to finish and post this blog entry, which is why it's late. Sorry.

On the road again: Renovation (WorldCon), Reno, day 2

Verbal snapshots from a mostly work-filled day here at WorldCon.



The blackout curtains at the hotel are superb. The only visible light is the glow of the dehumidifier. All hotels should have to meet this standard.



On the way into the dealer's room, this vending machine:





As opposed to those useless single-purpose spoons? I'm never going to be content with a regular spoon again.



In the dealer's room, Sally Kibbee said to me something all writers like to hear: "Don't just stand there with your hands in your pockets. Sign books!"



Watching the Chesley awards ceremony, I was struck by how much passion so many in SF have for every aspect of the field. It's quite heartening.



While cruising the art show in the evening, the best line of the day, from a mother to her balloon-sword-wielding daughter: "No en garde in the art show, dear."



Words to live by.



At the Texas in 2013 party, brisket on white bread with Salt Lick's sauce. Yum.



After finishing my work, I spent a few very late-night hours in the poker room. Three other people at the table knew what they were doing, but fortunately for us, six did not. Won a little, had some fun, and enjoyed the people watching.



I time-shift entirely too easily. Despite what the timestamp on this entry says, it's 4:30 in the morning here. I have a work call in three and a half hours, but I can blame only myself for trading a few hours of sleep for the same time at poker.

On the road again: Renovation (WorldCon), Reno, day 1

Fun facts and lessons from a day of travel, work, and convention going:



Getting up at 4:00 a.m. sucks.



Leaving the house at 4:30 a.m. sucks.



Doing the above on 80 minutes of sleep sucks worse.



I still can't sleep on planes, but I can doze and make horrible noises when startled. I don't believe others near me appreciated the sounds. I don't blame them.



People will call me about email they sent three hours ago or chide me if I happen to talk to them before I have responded to the email--even if I was on a plane during most of those hours. A bit frustrating.



John Picacio did a panel today which the program book said was going to show his process in refining a real cover in progress. I went because he's a friend and, more importantly, an awesome artist. I was pleasantly surprised to learn that the cover he was planning to discuss was the one for No Going Back. If you wanted to see his sketch work and his current polished revision--still to undergo more changes--you should have been there. It's very cool work indeed.



The hotel is smooth at upselling food. The cheap place couldn't take four of us for dinner, but the more expensive steakhouse could. The food there, fortunately, was good, as was the company, though I fear I talked too much.



Spokane is bidding for the 2015 Worldcon, which made me sad because of what I'd heard about that city. When I visited their bid party, though, they made a pretty good case for the place. Dunno.



I can't keep up with work without extraordinary effort. No news there, but I was foolishly hoping today would be different.



25.5 hours awake is enough. I'm crashing.

Geer Street Garden

The other night, a group of us tried out this new Durham restaurant. We'd eaten Chef Andy Magowan's fine food at his previous restaurant, Piedmont, which he no longer owns, and so we trusted the meal would be good.



It was.



The food is simple and leans heavily on locally sourced ingredients, a combination that goes well with the building, a former gas station. Most of the seating is outside, but fortunately for us, the evening we were there was perfect for dining outdoors.



You won't find much fancy here, but everything we tasted was delicious. One particularly tasty mess I have to recommend is "The Pile," an amazing looking mixture of French fries, fried chicken, jalapenos, and melted cheese. Think game-day food done wonderfully and all mixed in one dish.



In keeping with the emphasis on simple food, the costs are more than reasonable. The tab for five of us--and we ate a lot of the menu, as well as multiple desserts--was less than the bill for two at many of the area's nicer restaurants.



Definitely check out this one.

A hole in my heart

One old, fat author and father; one young, handsome son and college student.



Scott and I this afternoon, just before we all drove off to NCSU.



Two years ago, I wrote a similar post about Sarah. Now, that time is here for Scott.



Damn, this is hard, if anything harder the second time than the first.



Eighteen and a quarter years ago, Scott was born. Earlier today, we moved him into North Carolina State University, where he is beginning college.



From the moment I knew we were having a son, I was terrified about how to be a good father to him. I grew up largely without fathers, and most of the men I knew as a child were far from good role models. How could I love him well? Make him both tough enough to survive as a boy and a man and yet comfortable with his feelings? Make him know I loved him? Make him confident and strong? Just be the father he deserved?



I had no clue.



In the years since that time, I've fumbled in the dark, doing the best I could as a dad but always being sure I was making a bad job of it. I've worked too many hours, gone on too many trips, spent too much time alone in my home office, taken too much time for myself, and missed too much of his life. I've always, always, always felt like I was failing. I still do. I've tried to balance being a good provider and being there and all the rest, and I know I've screwed up.



The only thing I have never failed on is loving him. I don't know how much that matters, but I've gotten that one thing down. I have always, always, always loved Scott and Sarah with a fierceness I cannot imagine they understand. No one will ever be more important to me than they are.



I still hug him good night every night and kiss him on the cheek as I say good night. I'll do that until I die if he'll let me.



I am so very proud of him and such a believer in him that I hope I have conveyed those feelings to him. I just don't know if I've done it enough, because I've spent so much time pushing him, worried for his future in this increasingly difficult world, that I fear he's heard only the pushing and not the tremendous, chest-bursting pride and love.



Every single night of Scott's and Sarah's lives, I have either stood outside the doors of their rooms and to the darkness whispered, "Good night, Scott. Daddy loves you. Good night, Sarah. Daddy loves you." as if it were a blessing that could keep them safe, or said the same words to myself as I was falling asleep in some other building in some other place. It's a dumb tradition, but it's mine, and it's theirs, though they've never participated in it, and I don't ever intend to stop it.



And now, Scott has left this house and moved into a dorm and started the next phase of his life. All of that is good and proper and natural and what I have desired for him; heck, I'm paying for it. I want him to have his own life, and in any way I can, I will help him get it. I also know he'll be home at holidays, and we'll find our old ways quickly enough, we'll talk and laugh and hug and play Halo and make dick jokes, and for a short time we'll all be living together again.



Today, though, there is a hole in my heart and an ache in my chest, a heart that will always beat for Scott. I want him to know always that for as long as I'm alive, he can take refuge with me from a rough world and know that his father, that I, will do anything in my power to keep that roughness at bay, and that I love him more than I can ever express.



Daddy loves you, Scott.

Dr. Efficient clarifies a point from his last column

The mention of rape in the last Dr. Efficient column drew enough attention and raised enough ire that when he asked if I thought he should comment on it, I said, yes. He did, and his comment is available in the Comments section of that entry. Because many readers have told me they often miss the comments, I am also making the text available here, as its own entry.



Now, I turn you over to Dr. Efficient.



The subject of rape could probably fill several columns on its own. I can't really do it justice here, but nothing I've written should be interpreted as excusing rape or Sudanese atrocities in the Nuba mountains.



David Buss writes in The Evolution of Desire, "it is a matter of controversy within evolutionary psychology today whether rape represents an evolved sexual strategy of men or is better understood as a horrifying side effect of men's general sexual strategy of seeking low-cost casual sex." However, "the age distribution of rape victims corresponds almost perfectly to the age distribution of women's reproductive value, in marked contrast to the age distribution of victims of other violent crimes. This evidence strongly suggests that rape is not independent of men's evolved sexual psychology."



Rape is also most often perpetrated by socially outcast young men who've lost the game of marital musical chairs because there aren't enough available women to go around. (A fact that bodes poorly for Asia and its 160 million missing girls. But that's another column.)

An open invitation to those who feel Dr. Efficient is wrong

As you might imagine, more than a few people, most of them women, have told me in no uncertain terms how very wrong most of Dr. Efficient's answers are. Some of these folks have been rather vehement in stating those feelings.



I've been pondering this situation, and I've decided to offer to all those who feel Dr. Efficient is wrong an opportunity: write your own guest column here. You would have to go back to the first Dr. Efficient column and respond to those questions, and then when you had caught up to the current columns, I would run the doctor's and yours either intermixed or one after the other.



Before I made this offer, I asked Dr. Efficient if he would mind if I did this. His response:

It certainly wouldn't bother me to have somebody else go back and give incorrect answers to all the questions that I've already answered correctly.

The rules are simple and the same ones under which Doc E. operates:

* You have to answer all the same questions he already has (which presumably it already is, or you wouldn't be interested in rebutting him).



* Your viewpoint has to be rather different from his.



* I will edit you for conformance to my personal style guide but otherwise will leave your work alone.



* You may use a pseudonym, but I must know your real name, and you must be willing for me to show it to the world in the tags, as I do with Dr. Efficient/Kyle.



* There's no money here; I don't pay Dr. E, and I wouldn't be paying you.



* I will run only one alternative viewpoint column (well, unless two people just blow me away with their writing).

That's it. Anyone think Dr. Efficient is wrong and want to play?

Ask Dr. Efficient, the Love Guru: Dr. Efficient Answers All, #8

Warning: The following is an adult entry. If you are underage or simply do not want to read about sex-related topics, stop now.



All opinions are those of Dr. Efficient.



In Dr. Efficient's eighth guest column, he clarifies some of his positions while also helping his questioners.



As usual, the questions he answers originated with U.S. women who chose to remain anonymous.



Why do men like to watch women masturbate? It has nothing to do with procreation, which is your general theme for sex. Explain that to me, Dr. Efficient.

Okay, two things: First, I'm not a biological determinist. And second, men don't care about procreation, they just want to fuck.



If I tend to give answers rooted in evolutionary biology, it's because I tend to get cross-cultural questions like "Why do men do like to watch women masturbate?" rather than "What is it with Germans and Scheisse porn?" or "Why is female genital mutilation common in Northeast Africa but not in Northern Europe?"



Evolution has left humans with a broad palette of mating behaviors to choose from. Which of those strategies they evince depend largely on culture and individual personality. When a young man in middle America hires a limousine, rents a tuxedo, and gives a girl flowers in the hope of getting laid, that's one mating strategy. When a young man in Sudan joins a dozen of his Arab militia buddies in gang-raping a Nuban tribeswoman, that's another.



And those are just evolutionary strategies that make some kind of evident sense. (Demonstrating resources to a prospective mate in one case, forcibly increasing genetic diversity in the other.) Beyond that, there are numerous sexual behaviors that appear, at least on the surface, to be maladaptive. Homosexuality, celibacy, and polyamory all seem like behaviors less likely to result in successful propagation of one's genes than the traditional serial monogamy, polygyny, or monogamy+cheating. Yet homosexuality, celibacy, and polyamory persist, and continue to be practiced by single-digit percentages of the population. Do they convey some evolutionary benefit that is at first non-obvious? Or are they merely side-effects of some other adaptive behavior?



And then there's the truly freaky shit. Vorarephiliacs who get off on watching people being eaten. The aforementioned Germans and their love of shitmunchery. Amputation fetishists. Human furniture. Kitten crushing. If it exists, there is porn of it. It's all but unimaginable that these behaviors are adaptive. Yet there are whole sub-communities devoted to all of them. Psychologists call such fetishes paraphilias--but can't agree on their origin, or even whether they're disorders that should be treated or healthy behaviors.



So where were we? Oh, yes. People do all kinds of whack shit to get off that has nothing to do with procreation. That said, the answer to your question seems pretty obvious. As I mentioned, men aren't turned on by procreation; they're turned on by fucking, and biology takes care of the rest. Foreplay, to a man, is the sight of a sexually available woman. A naked woman who's done the two-finger taco tango until she's dripping wet is about as available as it gets.



On the other hand, if Studly Do-Right would rather watch you buff the beaver than actually walk over and stick his dick in, he probably has a paraphilia. Depending on how satisfied you are with this arrangement, he may require treatment.



How can you tell if a man is potentially interested in you as a long term mate vs. just thinks you're a fun fuck? To what extent do men really differentiate?



When surveyed, men express different preferences for casual encounters than for a long-term mate. As David Buss explains in The Evolution of Desire, for men seeking short-term sex partners, promiscuity is a plus. A woman seeking commitment is undesirable. A woman's marital status is less important in short-term than long-term relationships. In fact, a lot of standards are lowered for short-term mates: Men are willing to accept a wider age range, lower intelligence, lower education, less athleticism, and more emotional instability in short-term sex partners. That last point should work in your favor.



Men gain greater evolutionary benefit from casual sex than women do, which has left men much more willing to fuck around. Women know this, and so women who are interested in longer-term relationships typically require demonstrations of a man's commitment. They require ongoing effort in courtship: lots of dates, lots of phone calls, time spent listening to the woman's problems, time spent discussing the improbable future of their relationship. When a man buys a woman an engagement ring, that's not a custom that evolved by happenstance. It's a signal that a man is sufficiently committed to the relationship that he's willing to spend several months salary on a useless bauble for the woman.



On the other hand, men know all of this. Both sexes practice deception in securing the attentions of the other. Men looking for a quick fuck will pretend to be interested in long-term relationships. They'll pretend to be polite. They'll pretend to be considerate. Men who want to get laid will ape human feelings and will pretend to care about small animals and children. If cornered, a man will even tell a woman, "I love you." None of these things should be believed. Women think men are nicer than they are, when really women just have something men want.



The battle of the sexes is a war that's hundreds of thousands of years old. Male and female mating strategies operate at cross purposes. When one sex has evolved a new behavior to maximize success, the other sex has evolved countermeasures, in a never-ending arms race. Where men seek signs of youth and fertility, women deceive them with make-up, high heels, and wonderbras. Where women seek success and fidelity, men deceive them with feigned bravado and pretended sincerity. And the war goes on.



Have fun on your next date.

As long as you keep sending in questions, Dr. Efficient will return soon! Email your queries to me or send them via