Sam Sykes's Blog, page 20

The Wrong Trousers

What you will find in this link here is, overall, a good thing.  I don't like that fantasy isn't taken very seriously.  I don't find a lot of peoples' reasons for not taking it seriously to be all that solid.  I think it's good to call out behavior that appears vaguely douchebaggish…douchey?  Douchesque?

You'll note I haven't signed said petition yet.  This is, of course, partially due to the fact that the last petition I signed ended with me absently joining a cause called Marvin's Law, which suggested that those who disagreed with the obscure political opinions of the late Marvin Gaye should be made into eunuchs.  But there are other reasons.

For one, it's never occurred to me to get upset at the BBC and those who don't take fantasy seriously for the same reason it's never occurred to me to take it seriously when narwhal biologists write to me and say: "You know, there's just not enough narwhals in this book."  I'm not talking to narwhal biologists and the needs of narwhal biologists don't really factor into what I do.  This is, of course, hyperbole, since the people behind mainstream literature recognition and I presumably share similar interests, but when our agendas are set differently, I don't really mind that they don't match up.

But beyond that, I don't know that the idea sits that well with me.  Today, while browsing twitter, I found this quote in Adam Whitehead's feed from this link here:

'It's almost like they've given us older writers licence to use it. Before, it was ghettoised and stigmatised. For years there has been a prejudice towards sci-fi writing, which I think has been to the loss of the literary world, and not vice versa. But with things like graphic novels now, people are taking it seriously.' Still, he has misgivings: 'In truth, the sci-fi label is misleading. I'm just wary like everybody else that it'll bring in the wrong audience with the wrong expectations.'

This was from Kazuo Ishiguro on science fiction acceptance into mainstream.

And it's those last few words that make me hesitate before fully committing myself to the cause of the anti-BBC sentiment.

"The wrong audience."

In the context, it's clear that Mr. Ishiguro is suggesting that people looking for narwhals won't find them in science fiction, so to speak, which is a point worth noting in itself.  But more than that, there are implications regarding the phrase "the wrong audience" that sort of haunt me.

It's only been fairly recently that "nerd" has stopped being a dirty word.  Nerds are not overweight and smelly people with thick, horn-rimmed glasses squatting in basements.  D&D is something you play, not a lifestyle you live.  Liking fantasy means you like fantasy, not that you live in perpetual denial of the world around you.

It wasn't always this way.  Nerds used to be the kind of people that dwelled in clandestine organizations.  If you were a nerd, your interests were restricted mostly to imaginary people and paper.  It was an unfair stereotype then and it's unfair now, and a lot of people in mainstream literature still cling to it.  Sadly, in some instances, so do we.

I'm going to preface what I say next with a few things:

-I can't really cite specific sources

-It might come off as a bit whiny and self-indulgent (it's not intended to, though)

-I don't blame you at all if you decide to stop reading because of these

But we, as genre writers and readers, are not innocent.

R.A. Salvatore.  China Mieville.  One sells a ton, another wins awards.  Fight scenes, weird races.  Sells-a-lot, genius.  Not-touched-by-Locus, critically-acclaimed-everywhere.  We seem pretty content to let this lie and safely file the two authors away under their own little labels, but we're not happy when fantasy, as a whole, is filed away under "drek."  We draw hard lines between hard sci-fi and soft sci-fi, epic fantasy and heroic fantasy, us and them.  If you're on one side, you're not on the other and you don't get to be in that camp.

Now, this is not at all to suggest that Salvatore is the same as Mieville, even by a little.  Mieville earns his awards.  Salvatore earns his paychecks.

But they aren't really judged in the same way, are they?  I'm not you, so I can't say what you thought when you heard Salvatore's name, but I imagine "not real fantasy" in one way or another, be it those actual words or just a brief, fleeting pang of resentful nostalgia like you feel for when you think of when you used to think Pogs were cool, cropped up.  Either way, you wouldn't think to judge them the same way.

But should they even be?

We can argue that they write different things, different styles, different content entirely and that it's impossible to judge them by the same standard.  If we do judge them the same, we live with the suggestion that we're wrong to look at Salvatore book and sneer.  If we don't judge them the same, we send the message that it's fine for us to judge people differently, but not for you, mainstream literature.

We might say that the issue is that Mieville deserves to win a mainstream prize because his work is just that good.  But in that case, are we acknowledging that the awards he gets are not good enough for him?

Of course, it's also perfectly fine to say that Salvatore/Mieville just doesn't do it for us and we prefer Mieville/Salvatore.  Nothing wrong with preference, in the slightest.  What Mieville's saying doesn't really interest us, what Salvatore's doing doesn't really jive with us, what we're really interested in is Sam motherfucking Sykes, right?

But then, if it's all about preference, why does the acceptance of someone who doesn't share our preference matter?

So, I guess that's why I haven't committed to anything yet.  It seems we lack a pretty solid stand.  Are we different or are we the same?  Do we need to be recognized for what we've done for narwhal biology or is it okay that they don't like us?

But maybe I'm missing something important.  I'm not claiming to be making any sweeping declarations of what is and what is not here.  There could be another issue that I've totally missed and there's no reason for this post to exist.

If there is, though, I'd love it if you'd tell me.

The Eff Wyrd

It's been a good couple of days for me, lately.

Just yesterday, I had a chat with my agent, Danny Baror, who said he had been talking with a Serbian book publisher who has apparently been tweeting with me.  "He says you are very funny," said Danny, "very impressed by how many times you can use the f word in a single sentence."

This is how authors roll, my friends.

You might want to read this here very excellent, very awesome review of Black Halo by Robert Berg.  Rob has been one of my favorite reviewers for awhile, and still would be even if The Aeons' Gate books didn't work for him.  He's honest and thoughtful and has absolutely no problem admitting he straight-up likes something, which I note seems to be an issue for a lot of reviewers.  Of course, since he does like The Aeons' Gate books, he's even better.

That was just the start of exciting things, really.  Black Halo continues to be enjoyed by many.  I just found out that Jean-Sebastian Rossbach is doing the cover art for the French edition of Tome of the Undergates (which, according to my buddy/translator, Emmanuel Chastelliere, will involve Kataria and "some awful frogmen").  I'm doing an event at the Poisoned Pen with John Scalzi on May 28th.  And, as a lovely little cherry on a sundae of sunshine served in a bowl marked 'good times,' I've been invited to be a guest at the 2012 Tucson Festival of Books!

As of right now?  I'm in Portland, Oregon, visiting my sister.  I just had dinner with the phenomenal Brent Weeks, who is both humble and affable and non-judgmental (I can't stress this enough).

But, as of Wednesday, I will be in Seattle for Norwescon. I highly suggest you stop by and see me there if you're thinking of coming.  I'll be doing some panels on themes, worldbuilding and other fine things that people in fantasy talk about, as well as helping out with a presentation on Pyr Books.

So, yes.  It has been a good couple of days for me.  You may feel happy for me.

I don't often share good news on the blog, of course.  I'm not sure why, but I tend to forget the occurrence of good news in a matter of days while bad news tends to linger over me like a cloud for a long-ass time.  Beyond that, though, I'm convinced that, in keeping with the idea that the divine has a cruel sense of humor, whenever I have good news, it means bad news for someone else.

And, as if to prove me right, this has been a pretty good week for internet trainwrecks.

Publisher's Weekly runs a column addressing the Jessica Verday deal that we actually discussed awhile back and, upon hearing dissenting opinions to an article proclaiming an abhorrence to censorship, decided to delete a bunch of comments that suggested Run Press might not be authentic.  Is it just me, or is the phrase "in this age of the internet" basically code for "I said something stupid and now everyone knows about it?"

The New York Times successfully alienated women and fantasy fans in their review of the HBO adaptation of A Game of Thrones.

And, probably most embarrassingly, noted cartoonist/misogynist Scott Adams has been caught sockpuppeting his own internet defense.

I'm beginning to wonder if, like Forgotten Realms and Thundercats, watching people meltdown or screw up on the internet is something you can only enjoy for a certain number of years.  Ordinarily, I would be giggling like a madman at these particularly exciting disasters (particularly at Scott Adams, whom I've become somewhat less enchanted with since, you know, the horrifying anti-woman sentiment he's become famous for spewing), but really, I find myself wondering how it came to this.

I'm fairly sure I've suggested before that the word "fuck" is the most important word in the English language today.  If I haven't, then I am now, and I feel I'm pretty well-justified.  It's a word of passion, a word of anger, a word of excitement, a word of humor and, as we're going to discuss, a word of humility.

As in "I fucked up.  Sorry."

My dad taught me a number of things before I moved out of his house, many of them revolving around reasons about why I should move out of his house, but one of the most important things I've ever learned from him is the concept that there is no shame in owning up to a fuck up and apologizing.  It's tough as shit, I know, and more than a little awkward, but what's the alternative?  Creating a dummy account to praise your own genius?

I guess there's the concept of pride getting in the way, of course: admitting your wrong means admitting you're wrong, after all, and people may call that into question when you ever argue anything again.  And if you actually do happen to believe that people shouldn't be arguing with you over disputed facts about homosexual relations in anthologies, or that fantasy readers are nerds that need to grow up, or that women are screaming children and equal pay and dignity is the candy they wail over, you probably shouldn't be apologizing for a fuck up, because at that point, the fuck up is no longer an incident and you are the fuck up and there's not a tremendous amount to discuss nor a particularly great reason to pay attention to you.

But, for most of us, we don't believe those things.  For most of us, though, there will be moments when we do fuck up.  Especially if you're hoping to be a writer in the public eye.  You will almost definitely fuck up at some point.  And you will have that opportunity, fleeting as it may be, to cop to it.

Just remember that there's no shame in doing so.

This all goes out the window, of course, if you're me.

I'm basically perfect.

If you ever disagree with me, it's you that has the problem.

OKAY, BUDDY?

Love,

Sam

Where Have All the Cow-Men Gone

From a long bout of abstinence from fantasy novels, I have returned.  Today, I am reading The Dragon's Path by Daniel Abraham.  His other series, The Long Price Quartet, didn't really work with me, since me am dumb fantasy reader.

It's quite good.  His sense of focus doesn't really jive with mine (which is something I'll talk about later), but there's a lot to praise here.  I haven't seen quite as much as I'd like to for purposes of making a solid judgment, but there is one thing I'd like to talk about while it's still fresh in my mind.

The Dragon's Path takes place in a world of war and political intrigue, of fighting and carnage and, what I really liked, a world full of all kinds of different races living together.  Not always in harmony, mind, but they're there and they're raw.  It was about the time I saw the first unusual race that it struck me as to just how unusual this was.  Races other than human, defined by more than culture.  Honest to God alien, weird, scaly, furry, angry, jeweled weirdos walking alongside humanity.

It was then that another question struck me: exactly why did we give up unusual races in fantasy?  I guess there's a few reasons, really.

Some authors are sparse with magic and with creatures in an effort to make them more impactful when they finally do show up.  If you think back to the old Conan stories, most of the wizards and sorcerers didn't do a tremendous lot beyond making people poop themselves or lifting heavy objects as frail old men.  And yet, it was pretty intense when that happened, because no one else could do it and no one was really sure what it could do.  And, likewise, a hulking lizardman is a lot more scary if there's only one of him, because you have no idea what he is, exactly, if he doesn't have a tribe or culture.

But there's a bigger reason.

The people who accuse fantasy of not being realistic are not exactly wrong and not exactly for the reasons you're thinking of.  "Escapism," as the word is so often used, usually carries with it the connotation of disingenuousness.  It's not realistic, it's not accurate and it's not human.  Perhaps in an effort to shed that stereotype, we also shed the magic, the monsters and the races in favor of politics, intrigue and more things that all of us can relate to…like being thrown out a window for discovering a royal incestuous coup.

Who hasn't that happened to?

I kid, of course.

These practices have worked well for the authors that use them, but I think we might have lost something in our abandonment of fantastic races.

As I said, the people who throw around escapism as equating to disingenuousness are not exactly wrong, but they're not exactly right, either.  When you use fantasy races as cut-and-paste bad guys or nondescript ethereal beings of great wisdom, then yeah, you're not really creating much beyond cannon fodder and/or plot devices.  But when you make a race more than just a name and a war cry, when you apply a culture, an attitude, a struggle and a history, you're making a commentary on humanity, whether you intended to or not.

I'm not saying that anyone who writes a story in which orcs aren't all that bad is qualified to give a seminar on race relations, but that story has put an idea out there.  It's made a point that we can accept, refute or apply to our own lives.  And when that point is made, when it clicks for the reader, then the conflict from which that point came from is more easy to invest into, making a stronger story.

A strong culture behind an alien race = stronger identity = stronger point = deeper conflict = deeper reader involvement = stronger story.

If you do it right.

And while I make it pretty well known that I don't really care about worldbuilding, I make an exception when it comes to alien races.  The reason being that I loathe when worldbuilding stands segregate from character development.  Creating the race and the culture integrates the two.  We are closer to the world because we are closer to the race because we are closer to the character of that race.  It's an excellent way of investing the reader in the world without beating him over the head with an epic poem.

And finally…

You remember Star Wars, don't you?  Remember the Tattooine Cantina?  Remember seeing all these weird, alien creatures hanging out together?  Remember what that felt like?

Wonder.

Awe.

"What the–"

That's what fantasy is all about.

To me, anyway.  It might be something different to you.  But then, what do you think?  Do you prefer your books bundled with lizardmen or do you prefer a straight-up, no-nonsense human-filled romp?

Tell me.

Tell me everything.

Go read The Dragon's Path.

Peace.

More like Peter Orfoolian

Fact: when you get to at least a modicum of celebrity, such as the vast and unrelenting stream of hard-packed, oiled bodies and adoring masses chanting one's name that comes from being an author of a book that involves a farting girl and a kid who wets his pants after shooting fire from his hands, things get a little weird.

You get strange emails.  People tell you odd things.  They sometimes ask you to look at growths on their bodies and sometimes sign them and you don't say no because it's sweet that they're asking and you're happy that people are paying attention to you at all and–

…anyway, if you're the Ranting Dragon review site, your adoration comes in the form of a staple question posed to all interviewees: "How would you beat up Sam Sykes?"

In what may be the most divisive question to face society since "is there a God and does he hate me for what I do at night," this is sure to have a strange and wondrous impact on the face of literature.  If you are a reasonable human being, your answer will undoubtedly be "I won't, it's just impossible, he's so big and handsome."  If you are slightly less reasonable, you might come up with some toss about providing me sport before I rend you asunder with teeth and claws.

If you're Peter Orullian, recently-signed author with Tor and ageless child of 1991, though, you might provide the answer in the form of a weird-as-heck three-page fanfiction about an air guitar battle.

Go on.  Read that.

Consider it a fond example of an exercise in denial.  Use it well when you wish to write a scene in which there is no hope and fleeting ability to survive in the face of overwhelming odds.

Then consider what happens next.

Pretty intense, right?  I was feeling a lot of stuff when that came out.  Not all of it good.

I suggest you have a saunter over to this here poll and take your time selecting my name.  Go on.  Drift over it.  Maybe make like you're going to click Peter's name and then back away shyly.

I want him to feel hope before I consume the rest of him.

Happy Friday!

Love,

Sam

Fly Away, Little Bird, Fly, Fly

Yes.  Those are nine copies of Black Halo going away to various reviewers, gurus and people I like in general.  Busy little worker bees, they go out to pollinate the brains of people and harvest their sweet interest to bring back to the hive, where they shall be slowly digested by a queen and poured into tiny hexagonal shapes to later be harvested by greedy grizzly bears and adventurous, portly men with veils and thick glasses who sweat perpetually.

…I think I may have tortured that metaphor to death, but you get the idea.

I have one for myself, of course, but I don't think there's much of a need to keep a lot around.  If you love something, you must set it free, after all (this philosophy tends to backfire when it comes to kidnapping, protip), and, as a result, I kind of like giving stuff away.

Speaking of…

ARE YOU (CHOOSE ONE):

[ ] A DUTCH GIRL WITH LOW SELF-ESTEEM

[ ] A DUTCH MAN WHO RESENTS HIS PEERS

[ ] DUTCH, DUTCH-RELATED, DUTCH-CAPABLE AND POSSESSED OF A NEED TO READ TOME OF THE UNDERGATES IN DUTCH

[ ] A TRICERATOPS

Give me a holla.  I've got SEVEN Dutch Editions of Tome of the Undergates to give away!  I WILL HOOK YOU THE FUCK UP.

NO THERE'S NO PITHY ENDING QUOTATION FOR YOU TO FEEL GOOD ABOUT

THAT'S HOW I ROLL, YO

How Not to Do It

Hey.  Look at this: I was Shortlisted for the David Gemmel Award.  It's a nice thing.  I don't think there's anyone on that list I would mind winning.

Also, look at this: my Babel Clash with Ari Marmell is over.  So sad.  You can read it all in the backlogs if you missed it.  Or you could just go read Patrick Rothfuss and Jim Butcher sloppily make out over two weeks.  You know.  If you like that sort of thing.

These are all neat things to talk about, but look at this.

…yeah, you've already seen it, haven't you?  That's because this is the internet.  You probably found it whilst browsing for your pornographs or looking at feline pictures or whatever it is you kids like to do.  And this being the internet, it's pretty much everywhere.

Truly, it kind of depresses me.  Mostly because I lament how easily it could have gone. If she had simply asked if he got the emergency backup copy instead of "YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG," it might have gone better.

I think there's this weird sort of perceived animosity between reviewers and authors, like they're the mongooses to our cobras slithering in baby cradles.  I suppose that's understandable; there are some reviewers out there that seem to believe this totally and take it upon themselves to try to be as aggressive as possible, even at the expense of honesty.

I don't think I've ever met one, though.  I've had chats with some reviewers who liked my book (whee) and some who didn't (aww).  It's not that big a deal.  In general, I think most reviewers enjoy talking about what they've read.  Just talking with them like they're people tends to work pretty well for me.  And if not, there's nothing wrong with just…not going berserk on them.

This is a short post.

I am watching Traffic Light on Hulu starring that asshole from The Office that you didn't like and a British guy.  They drive around, talking about stuff that happened in college and talking about relationships.

Relationship humor is the lowest form of comedy.  This I truly believe.

My wife occasionally asks me to contribute to the well-being of our household by doing menial chores that occupy my time that I might rather spend doing other things.  We've all been there, right, fellas?  The other day I was watching television and she came in and said: "Sam Sykes, you are a man who occasionally indulges his own hobbies and/or leisure time at the expense of what society demands I, as a woman, must want.  A good example of this behavior would be that I occasionally wish to discuss the shoes I bought at the store, while you are watching football.  You possess a penis and I a vagina.  We are in a relationship.  This is comedy."

And you know what?  It was.  I laughed.

I laughed all the way out of the chair.  I laughed as I got into the car.  I laughed as I drove down to the old quarry.  I laughed as I tied a rock around my leg and hurled it off.  I drowned laughing.

Sam Sykes is dead.

Relationship comedy killed him.

It will kill you, too.

Live Free or Blog Hard

Hey!  Do you want a copy of Black Halo for butt-fucking FREE?  Look at the BULL SPEC contest in which they ask to create a better backhanded blurb than the one John Scalzi gave me.

I do not wish Sam Sykes dead.

That's a hard one to beat, admittedly.  But if anyone can do it, you can.  I believe in you…and your ability to make me feel bad

Also, holy shit, is there seriously only one review by Harriet fucking Klausner on Black Halo? Come on, guys.  I can't live with this shame.  Give me some more.  If you do, I'll give you…a prize?  I guess?  No, seriously.  I'll find one.

But, hey, let's talk about something new.

That link right thur?   That's worth reading, especially if you're a blogger.  My envy of the YA scene grows each day that there are such open conversations and in-depth discussions between authors and readers.  How come we never do things like that?  Huh?  HUH?!

I don't really follow a lot of blogs anymore, what with the fact that I've mailed some of them body parts.  But I share Author X's lament in that there seem to be too few of them that don't actually do a lot of talking about books or writing.

To me, the best book blogs are the ones that sort of act as tiny book clubs unto themselves.  The Book Smugglers and Floor to Ceiling Books are two of my favorites because they do just that.  Reviews are there, in addition to news, but they also do a lot of talking about issues in the industry (Ana and Thea brought to my attention the issue of whitewashing on covers, which is something very much worth bringing to everyone's attention) and they also talk a lot about writing.  Rob Will Review is another good one because he frequently makes the all-important distinction between a book that isn't good and a book that didn't work for him, and goes into detail describing exactly why.

I've always thought that blogs were better served by performing as hubs for discussion, rather than lists of proclamations, if that makes sense.  Reviews are great, but more because they inspire said discussion, give insight into why something worked or didn't work, note what themes really struck home and what was just tired, offensive or uncomfortable to read.  These are the sort of reviews that are helpful to the author, the ones we like to read.

"So, basically, Sam Sykes, a good blog is one that conforms to your particular views and/or gives you good reviews?"

Admittedly, I have a fondness for blogs that like me more than hate me (though if you want, you can go find the Book Smugglers' review of Tome and why it didn't work for them), but no, I'm not suggesting that the definition of a good blog need be one that is thoughtful and brimming with discussion.

Heck, I'm not even saying that reviews should be written for the author's benefit (though, as I say, I do sort of envy the fact that YA authors can be so open with their blogging buddies).  Presumably, of all the reasons to start a blog, the best one is "because I have something to say."  What you have to say should be just that: your opinion with your goals in mind and you leading the discussion, however much or little you want.  If you want gossip, go for it.  If you want reviews only, roll out.  If you want to trash someone, go hog wild.

However, I do think that discussion is the sort of thing that serves everyone.  Presumably, you started a book blog because you want to talk about books.  So you can talk about whatever it is about books that you want to talk about.  And presumably, the readers are there to agree or disagree with what you said because they're interested in your opinion.  And (most) authors tend to really enjoy talk about their own writing and what you found in their work.  Negative reviews don't even bother an author that much, so long as they're saying something.

In general, the only thing I suggest as the one thing for a blogger to aspire to is this:

Honesty.

Be honest in your opinion.  Be honest in your actions.  Be honest in your insight.  Whatever you say, so long as you're acting with that, will always yield good results.

That's what I suggest.

And that's all that it is.

Sam Sykes Tells You How to Live

First, read this.

I admit, I pay more attention to the goings-on in YA than one might think.  A lot of that is because we tend to share the same tone and themes through our writing: triumphing over hardship and growing through adversity, embracing the fact that philosophy and ethics grow and wither instead of being set in stone, acceptance of the truth that bodily functions are usually hilarious.

Whatever the reason, I've often felt that YA and fantasy tend to have a kindred connection and that, in recent years, we've undergone transformations that are getting us closer together.  Both genres tend to be used as vehicles for human exploration, with YA serving as mostly a discovery of youth and fantasy serving as a discovery for everything else.  You can argue this if you like and maybe scratch your beards, possibly bring up the influence of Tolkien and the power of true myth.  Feel free to.  That's not what we're talking about here.

If you've been with the blog for a bit, you probably know my opinion of mainstream literature's opinion of fantasy literature.  If not, let me summarize: who cares?  We're not writing for them, we're not trying to reach them, we're not talking to them.  If they happen to find something in our work that they can relate to, then great.  If not, then it's not really our concern as writers and readers of fantasy.

There's a lot more to go into there, but I'll end that particular thought by summarizing one of their usual cries against fantasy: it's escapism.  It has no real value.  It does not relate to the human experience.

In more than a few ways, they're actually right, and we've talked about them on this blog before.  The concept of Chosen Ones, prophecies, clean conflicts with neat endings, absolute good and evil, unquestioningly accepting a fate based on whether your mother was an elf or an orc.  Traditions.  Proud traditions.  But left as they are, unquestioned and unaltered, they move us further away from humanity.

Realism is overrated.  We're not aiming for realism.  But we are aiming for honesty: honesty to humanity and honesty to the art.  This is the chief reason that I frequently rail against the status quo (the other reason being that I am consummate attention whore).

And yet, some people prefer that.  They like their orcs evil, their princesses in peril and their heroes to say no to tobacco and whores.  Admittedly, they can make a pretty good case against a trend in fantasy that everyone has to be grimy and gritty for the sake of being edgy (which is as dishonest as the other end of the spectrum, I feel).  I don't blame them.  Some people read for the sake of comfort and that's absolutely and utterly fine.  I'm not suggesting that there is only one way to write and if you dare enjoy your heroes and villains then you're not hanging out in reality, maaaaan.

Rather, I'm suggesting that we need to avoid taking the comfort as canon and the tradition as unalterable.  Disliking, criticizing or outright not reading something uncomfortable is fine.  But denying it totally as a contribution to the work seems to be all too common.  And going even further than that, we seem to use it as an excuse to reject any part of humanity we find uncomfortable.  Hence why we often see a lack of non-straight, non-white non-male protagonists.

As evidenced by what happened in Ms. Verday's story (you didn't think I had a point, did you?  DID YOU?)

Admittedly, this is a subject I've grappled with for awhile.  For a long time, I was leaning toward the theory that it's more honest to not put in a non-straight, non-white non-male protagonist in a story if you are a straight, white male.  After all, how could you be honest about an experience you've never had?  Then I realized that I write about suicidal people, religious xenophobes and schizophrenics without being any of those things.

And that's why I've changed my opinion to "there is value in trying."

I'm not going to say there's no harm in trying.  You might completely fuck something up and be ridiculed and shamed for it.  You might be utterly rejected as a writer for it.  Yeah.  That sucks.  Rejection, though, is going to be ever-present in your life as a person.  I can tell you it doesn't stop after you get published, either.

But if it's what you want to do, you have to try.  Even if it goes against tradition.  Even if you're worried you might screw it up.  Even if it runs the risk of someone proposing the same ultimatum to you that they did to Ms. Verday.

We should all strive to do the same, then, and do our best to stick to our guns.

There might be some decrying that a YA author is experiencing this sort of thing before we big bad adults are tackling the issue.  After all, we've been pretty aware of this as an issue in our genre for a while.  I see it more as an inspiration, though.  As I said, and it might still be just me, but there is a connection between YA and fantasy and I don't think it's a bad thing that we take cues from each other now and again.

I don't think it's a bad thing that we try something new.  I don't think it's a bad thing that we occasionally meet a stumbling block like Ms. Verday did.  I don't think it's a bad thing that we sometimes mess it up entirely.

I do think it's a bad thing if we feel constrained in our writing.  I do think it's a bad thing if the urge to be published overwhelms our urge to explore.  I do think it's a bad thing if the fear that we might be ridiculed, rejected or loathed for what we honestly try keeps us from doing so.

Admittedly, it's easier for me to suggest that getting published is not that big a deal, since I am.  But what I'm not is award-winning, best-selling or possessing any other honors that might or might not be helped by writing something more safe and traditional.  And I still believe what I've just written.

You might dismiss this blog post entirely on that basis, though.  Or you might just roll your eyes and see another Sam Sykes anti-establishment rant.  You might just decide that this particular call isn't for you.

That's fine.

Because, in a way, this is another anti-establishment rant and what I'm suggesting is not for everyone.  I never suggested it should be.  What I am suggesting is that there is always value in fearlessness, that a fear of rejection is as weak an emotion as a fear of something new, that there is always room to learn and you will only ever do so by actually trying.

Think less.

Do more.

Days of Thunder

Hey, guys.

I had a pretty good post I was going to make about Bruce Willis and Die Hard and how hardship defines a character, but then I got into kind of a weird spiral about action heroes and hit something I called "The Schwarzenegger Anomaly" and it all kind of got away from me.  So today's a housekeeping post in which I tell you some stuff.

Tor.com and I are having a brief love affair lately.  When we pass each other in the hallway, I always offer a little wink and it has written my name in its math book in seven different languages, just to see how each one sounds.  Don't believe that a love such as ours can exist?  Behold…

The first four chapters of Black Halo, free to read, as Aidan Moher watches on jealously.

A Black Halo giveaway.

An Ask Sam Sykes plea.

You see what I'm sayin'?  Girl be all into me.  Happens, yo.  Ladies go wild in the presence of Sam Sykes.  Men, too.

But, enough about how you're growing more breathless with rage thinking about what Tor and I have.

The Ranting Dragon is quickly becoming one of the better review sites for fantasy novels out there.  I'm not just saying that because they adored Tome of the Undergates, either.  They're well-armed, well-organized and well-prepared with a plethora of content, reviews and interviews; if this were a post-apocalypse scenario, they would probably be one of the more menacing street gangs roaming the wastelands and enslaving lesser blogs for sport.

Also, they did an interview with me that you should check out because they asked a lot of cool questions about writing.

Amanda at Floor to Ceiling Books continues to prove how awesome she is by establishing the Genre for Japan charity and they're auctioning off several cool things.  I'd definitely check it out and see what you can do to help out.

My latest battle with Ari Marmell continues over at Babel Clash in which I'm starting to lose my identity in a bizarre spiral of insults and crawdads.  One week left until we're forced to say goodbye, Ari drops to all fours and lets me get on his back and we ride into the sunset, never to return…until they invite us back.

Seriously, though, we're talking about writing more than anything else, so it's well worth a look.

Gosh, is that it?  I guess it must be.  Nothing else of note has really happened…

…oh, except this.

Black Halo came out today.  Hope you enjoy it.

John Scalzi sure did.

Black Halo Countdown: One

ONE MORE DAY

SWEET JESUS