Luna (Lindsey) Corbden's Blog, page 11
March 26, 2011
Analysis of Sucker Punch - A Feminist Perspective
Sucker Punch
was released this weekend to extremely negative reviews, with a score of 36% on Metacritic, and an abysmal 20% on Rotten Tomatoes. You can't set expectations much lower than that, yet I enjoyed every minute of this film. I am still thinking about it this morning, and all its implications, hence this blog post.
I will start with a non-spoilery review, and then launch into a detailed analysis of Sucker Punch from a feminist perspective.
I know why critics did not like this film. And so in this review, I will tell you what you need to bring with you, so you can enjoy the film as much as I did.
First, watch this trailer. It is the best of the trailers, and gives you a good setup to help you understand what is going on. It is a deeply-psychological movie, in the tradition of David Lynch (Twin Peaks, Blue Velvet) and Charlie Kaufman (Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind, Being John Malkovich). Additionally, it is a "layer" film, like Inception or The Matrix -- there are multiple versions of reality. Armed with that knowledge, you should be able to suspend disbelief, sit back, and go with it. No part of you should be screaming "That would never happen!", because when you're inside someone's mind, anything can happen.
That said, the fantasy action sequences should not be considered gratuitous. This movie illustrates how the human mind deals with severe trauma in order to survive. If you have a basic understanding of dissociation -- the idea that the mind can detach from reality in order to not experience pain -- the entire premise is not only plausible, but meaningful.
You are joining a girl's fantasy, created to protect her mind from the terrors she will experience in a mental institution in the early 20th century. Unlike Lynch's Mulholland Drive , (Salon.com analysis here), the narrative is well-portrayed in a chronological, clear storyline. It is easy to follow if you understand the premise at the outset.
In other words, be prepared to take certain parts of the film unseriously. Enjoy the ride. Take other parts very seriously.
It helps to have seen a number of darker comic book movies like 300 and Sin City, as well as a few over-the-top kung-fu movies like Kill Bill, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, House of Flying Daggers. Being familiar with Japanese animation will also help. Snyder very much captures the feel of all three genres.
A basic understanding of feminist issues will also contribute greatly to your enjoyment of this film. When the credits rolled, I said: " This film is a summary of the experience of women throughout the 20th century. " My hope is that women will have a better time of things in the 21st. In the meantime, this film has much to teach the ignorant about the plight of women. It is a primer. If you think feminists are a bunch of angry women who whine for no reason, or bra-burning dykes seeking revenge against males, go see Sucker Punch, and then come back and read my analysis.
Lastly, be prepared for a very dark story. It crosses some barriers crossed of what's "ok" to do in a movie plot. Be prepared to let go of your notions, because much like another Zack Snyder flick, The Watchmen, this film is unafraid of revealing harsh reality in a fictional disguise.
If you are a writer or connoisseur of storytelling, and have not seen the film, refresh your memory of the Hero's Journey before viewing. It follows the steps very closely, and it was a joy to watch this unfold. There is perhaps, arguably, even a meta-Hero's Journey, which I mention with a bit more detail in the spoilery section.
Many critics slammed the acting, but I enjoyed the actors. Somehow Emily Browning (Baby Doll) captures the essence and spirit of an Japanese anime schoolgirl, even though nothing about her looks Japanese. She manages to pull it off in spite of her Scandinavian eyes and too-blond hair. She fills the rest of the film with soulfull looks that seem to tap the heart and the "ethereal beauty" centers of the brain.
Those reviewers who did not understand the psychological premise, or those who were unfamiliar with or do not like the genres listed above, may have thought the film incomprehensible or over-the-top. But mostly, critics hated it because they did not have the feminist context through which to interpret this film. It breaks certain rules and exagerates certain norms, the combination of which I believe many people would find disturbing or nonsensical.
If good stories examine the human condition, then this is one of the best.
Now, go see it, and then read my analysis.
This movie tells the tale of a girl placed in a mental institution in the 1950's. Really, it could be set at any time from 1890-1970, which is why the fashions and sets contain so many anachronisms. The essential structure of the plot actually happened to tens of thousands of people, particularly women, through that time (and before). All it took was an accusation of insanity by a significant male (father, husband, brother, doctor), which would typically go unquestioned, and a woman could find herself in Baby Doll's place: Committed to an institution rife with mental, physical, and sexual abuse. Not only that, she is on schedule to receive a lobotomy.
If you accept that this tragic premise is so true, so incredibly real -- if you understand the history of these women, who were entirely powerless and could do nothing but try to cope -- then you can understand the rest of the film. It also helps to note that while the psychiatry field has been "cleaned up" in recent decades, and rarely perpetuates these abuses, this reality of powerless women still exists in many other areas of life, even here in America.
Then we are faced with two layers of Baby Doll's fantasy world. In one, she is being placed not in an institution, but in a 1930's bordello. In fact, some part of me wondered if that was her "true" reality, since this is the layer we are most frequently return to. The rape subtext implied in the institution is replaced with ownership-prostitution, and we see that there aren't many differences. In both they are powerless, in both they are used, in both they are treated like objects.
And in both, with no other tools (or "weapons" as the film euphamistically calls them), they are forced to use their sexuality to attempt escape.
This is a shocking fact that many movie-goers do not wish to face. Women should not have to use their sexuality to get what they want, but the sad reality is, women with no other options must and will use their bodies. And for doing what they must, they are later harshly criticized, and sometimes further victimized, for doing so. It is the last choice available for Baby Doll and her friends, and so they take it.
When Baby Doll dances to distract her captors, we never get to see her moves. She dissociates from a distasteful, unpleasant use of her body, the way many victims of sexual assault do to survive the physical and emotional pain. (And I wonder if "dancing" in the bordello layer is an escape from sex on the institution layer.) Her form of dissociation plunges her into a third layer of fantasy, wherein she is a powerful warrior equipped with a katana and pistol. Here she is capable of destroying dragons and twenty-foot demon samurai. Her sexual power transforms into real power. The other girls are likewise equipped with symbols of male power: machine guns, shotguns, knives, swords, and perhaps most threatening of all (to the male hierarchy), technical expertise with helicopters and airplanes.
Yet the women are still sexualized in their scanty outfits, which one reviewer called an unzipped geek-boy fantasy. Even here, Baby Doll cannot shake the sexual roots of the power she is using in the "real world". She may be defeating steam-zombies and high-tech robots with impossible slow-mo battle moves, but in reality she is just shaking her booty to distract the men so the other girls can gather the tools of escape.
Reviewers can blame the writer and director for the situation these girls are in, but Zack Snyder merely holds a mirror up to our own society. (I believe the The Social Network intended the same thing, when every single woman in that film (with one exception) was brutally objectified.) Many don't like what they see, and even fewer understand, and so they are left squirming, vaguely aware that something is not right. But when one in four women in America are sexually assaulted, many before the age of 18, we need to make films, (and yes, even PG-13 films with glossed-over details), to expose the seriousness of these crimes towards women. (More rape statistics here.)
Perhaps, like Baby Doll, society itself likes to dissociate, fantasizing of a world in which women are happy with their lot, where females are really powerful, and where rape doesn't exist or doesn't hurt anyone. We want our movies to support these fantasies, and when they do not, like in Sucker Punch, we fail to comprehend it and criticize it as done by a "filmmaker who has absolutely nothing original or even coherent to say." (New York Post review) And yet this is one of the most original and thought-provoking movies I've seen all year. I would expect those ignorant of white male privilege to be blind to its merits.
Even at the end of the film, when Sweet Pea boards the bus to freedom, it is only by the grace of a male that she gets away. After all that work, she must still pass a male gatekeeper, who knows nothing about her, yet through the kindness of his heart, lies to the police and lets her get on the bus without paying for a ticket.
Like The Social Network, there is but one powerful woman in this movie. And she is the psychiatrist, Dr. Gorsky. Yet even her power is subjugated through the "good old boys network" run by an evil orderly, who falsifies signatures and takes money from men to get rid of troublesome girls. Once she learns of this racket, she has the ultimate authority and has Blue arrested. Yet she is incapable of saving Baby Doll or any of the other girls from their tragic fates. Her powerlessness is reflected on the bordello level of reality... There she plays a harsh Madam supposedly in control of the girls, but we soon learn that she is just as owned by the club-owner as they are.
Even in their fantasy world, they are aided through the missions by a male "commander", Wise Man, who takes not only a mentor role, but also that of an officer, a superior. Even equipped with weapons and fighting skills, they cannot escape their roles in a male-dominated society.
The only "real" male who shows any sympathy for Baby Doll is the lobotomist, who displays a spark of regret for what he has done and calls attention (too late) to the falsified signature. In a deleted scene, he also plays the High-Roller with whom Baby Doll has a loving sex scene -- but oddly, this was cut in order to give the film its PG-13 rating. The one time Baby Doll has control of her sexuality, using it willingly and for her own pleasure, it is cut to make the movie more palatable for modern society.
By the end, Baby Doll must sacrifice herself to save one of her fellow women. This further punctuates the story of American women throughout the last century -- lacking any other power, many women found themselves sacrificing their own comfort, freedom, or lives, for the sake of their sisters and children. Or even for the sake of their men. I'm talking about sacrifice of body, career, education, life choices; choices of who to marry, when to start a family, where to live, what political views to hold, what talents to pursue, whether to own property, when and who to have sex with, and so on. In fact, Baby Doll's sacrifice is a sexual one: By revealing herself to the men on the bordello-level, she is sentenced to have sex with the High Roller. (She defends herself ineffectively by kicking a man in the groin, a stark contrast to the fantasy world in which she kills a dragon with a sword.) In reality, it means her mind will be destroyed through the act of lobotomy... She will be turned into a passive, submissive woman, so she can play her rightful role in society.
Many of the reviewers criticized Sucker Punch as a feminist revenge film. But I simply cannot agree. In the battle fantasies, not a single male human is killed. Read that again. Yes, they kill steam-powered German zombies. Yes, they kill Orcs. Yes, they kill robots. Yes, they kill dragons. Yes, they kill demons. But it is no accident that the one chance Baby Doll has of killing a living human male (the map-courier in the German trenches), she refrains. Instead of lancing him, she uses her sword to lift the map from his shoulders.
Even when Blue tries to rape Baby Doll, she stabs him, but not fatally. He is still alive enough to attempt the rape again, this time post-lobotomy, when her last remaining defenses have been ripped away. These women, even when they become ultimately powerful, do not use their powers for revenge.
Many critics disparaged this film's PG-13 rating. Michael Medved thought it should be NC-17. Yet what was so challenging in this movie? No sex. No nudity. Very little, if any, bad language. Cartoon violence. Very minimal use of blood (blood on her fingers when her sister dies, blood seeping through fabric from Blue's and Rocket's stab wounds). NC-17, for that?
I will tell you what was so challenging in this movie, and these are not things the MPAA bases ratings on:
1. Women die. Lots of women die.
2. Women have power. Even if imaginary power, they have lots of it.
3. There is a subtext of rape. Lots of rape. It is never shown, in fact not even explicitly implied. If you know what to look for, it is merely hinted at.
4. This movie displays the harsh realities of being a woman in this world.
While the MPAA couldn't find this offensive based on objective standards, many subjective reviewers did. And that fact points not only to the ignorance society holds for these issues, but also to why movies like this are so desperately needed.
[A few side notes about the Hero's Journey and alternate interpretations of the ending: There is some guesswork as to whose reality we are viewing in the movie. Roland suggested that we are actually seeing two hero's journeys, of both Baby Doll and Sweet Pea. I began to argue, to point out that since the camera does not follow Sweet Pea, her journey, if she has one, is not being told. He counter-pointed that Baby Doll is Sweat Pea's mentor/guru (Supernatural Aid); that the main character is actually Sweet Pea, telling her own story through Baby Doll's lens. After all, Baby Doll does say "This is your story." It is interesting to think about.
Alternately, the ending where we get to see Sweet Pea's final escape may in fact be Baby Doll's fantasy. Perhaps Sweet Pea escapes, but from Baby Doll's point of view, she can only hope she makes it to the bus stop. The lobotomized Baby Doll must now live entirely inside her head, and she chooses Sweet Pea's escape for her own "paradise". This idea is supported by the fact that Wise Man is also the bus driver, someone none of them have ever seen before in the real world.]
This film stands at a historical cusp. Whereas many films today reflect a girl-power can-do attitude of third-wave feminism, I think this is more of a wish than a reflection of how things are. This film says, "This is how things were, and maybe how things still are, but the fantasy is the way things can be." With its mix of female powerlessness and female power, it fits the zeitgeist of the confusion many women now feel about what role they should play. Should I be like my mother or grandmother, exerting subtle manipulation as my only manifestation of action? Or should I be a male-in-girl-clothes, sporting guns and killing toy soldiers like the generations of second- and third-wave feminists before me?
Perhaps the tragedy of this film shows us that both roles are dangerous and lead to an equally futile conclusion. Perhaps we should throw away both the male and female "weapons" of the past, and forge new impliments of power. Fourth-wave feminism, now in its fetal stage, seems to suggest that.
I will start with a non-spoilery review, and then launch into a detailed analysis of Sucker Punch from a feminist perspective.
I know why critics did not like this film. And so in this review, I will tell you what you need to bring with you, so you can enjoy the film as much as I did.
First, watch this trailer. It is the best of the trailers, and gives you a good setup to help you understand what is going on. It is a deeply-psychological movie, in the tradition of David Lynch (Twin Peaks, Blue Velvet) and Charlie Kaufman (Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind, Being John Malkovich). Additionally, it is a "layer" film, like Inception or The Matrix -- there are multiple versions of reality. Armed with that knowledge, you should be able to suspend disbelief, sit back, and go with it. No part of you should be screaming "That would never happen!", because when you're inside someone's mind, anything can happen.
That said, the fantasy action sequences should not be considered gratuitous. This movie illustrates how the human mind deals with severe trauma in order to survive. If you have a basic understanding of dissociation -- the idea that the mind can detach from reality in order to not experience pain -- the entire premise is not only plausible, but meaningful.
You are joining a girl's fantasy, created to protect her mind from the terrors she will experience in a mental institution in the early 20th century. Unlike Lynch's Mulholland Drive , (Salon.com analysis here), the narrative is well-portrayed in a chronological, clear storyline. It is easy to follow if you understand the premise at the outset.
In other words, be prepared to take certain parts of the film unseriously. Enjoy the ride. Take other parts very seriously.
It helps to have seen a number of darker comic book movies like 300 and Sin City, as well as a few over-the-top kung-fu movies like Kill Bill, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, House of Flying Daggers. Being familiar with Japanese animation will also help. Snyder very much captures the feel of all three genres.
A basic understanding of feminist issues will also contribute greatly to your enjoyment of this film. When the credits rolled, I said: " This film is a summary of the experience of women throughout the 20th century. " My hope is that women will have a better time of things in the 21st. In the meantime, this film has much to teach the ignorant about the plight of women. It is a primer. If you think feminists are a bunch of angry women who whine for no reason, or bra-burning dykes seeking revenge against males, go see Sucker Punch, and then come back and read my analysis.
Lastly, be prepared for a very dark story. It crosses some barriers crossed of what's "ok" to do in a movie plot. Be prepared to let go of your notions, because much like another Zack Snyder flick, The Watchmen, this film is unafraid of revealing harsh reality in a fictional disguise.
If you are a writer or connoisseur of storytelling, and have not seen the film, refresh your memory of the Hero's Journey before viewing. It follows the steps very closely, and it was a joy to watch this unfold. There is perhaps, arguably, even a meta-Hero's Journey, which I mention with a bit more detail in the spoilery section.
Many critics slammed the acting, but I enjoyed the actors. Somehow Emily Browning (Baby Doll) captures the essence and spirit of an Japanese anime schoolgirl, even though nothing about her looks Japanese. She manages to pull it off in spite of her Scandinavian eyes and too-blond hair. She fills the rest of the film with soulfull looks that seem to tap the heart and the "ethereal beauty" centers of the brain.
Those reviewers who did not understand the psychological premise, or those who were unfamiliar with or do not like the genres listed above, may have thought the film incomprehensible or over-the-top. But mostly, critics hated it because they did not have the feminist context through which to interpret this film. It breaks certain rules and exagerates certain norms, the combination of which I believe many people would find disturbing or nonsensical.
If good stories examine the human condition, then this is one of the best.
Now, go see it, and then read my analysis.
This movie tells the tale of a girl placed in a mental institution in the 1950's. Really, it could be set at any time from 1890-1970, which is why the fashions and sets contain so many anachronisms. The essential structure of the plot actually happened to tens of thousands of people, particularly women, through that time (and before). All it took was an accusation of insanity by a significant male (father, husband, brother, doctor), which would typically go unquestioned, and a woman could find herself in Baby Doll's place: Committed to an institution rife with mental, physical, and sexual abuse. Not only that, she is on schedule to receive a lobotomy.
If you accept that this tragic premise is so true, so incredibly real -- if you understand the history of these women, who were entirely powerless and could do nothing but try to cope -- then you can understand the rest of the film. It also helps to note that while the psychiatry field has been "cleaned up" in recent decades, and rarely perpetuates these abuses, this reality of powerless women still exists in many other areas of life, even here in America.
Then we are faced with two layers of Baby Doll's fantasy world. In one, she is being placed not in an institution, but in a 1930's bordello. In fact, some part of me wondered if that was her "true" reality, since this is the layer we are most frequently return to. The rape subtext implied in the institution is replaced with ownership-prostitution, and we see that there aren't many differences. In both they are powerless, in both they are used, in both they are treated like objects.
And in both, with no other tools (or "weapons" as the film euphamistically calls them), they are forced to use their sexuality to attempt escape.
This is a shocking fact that many movie-goers do not wish to face. Women should not have to use their sexuality to get what they want, but the sad reality is, women with no other options must and will use their bodies. And for doing what they must, they are later harshly criticized, and sometimes further victimized, for doing so. It is the last choice available for Baby Doll and her friends, and so they take it.
When Baby Doll dances to distract her captors, we never get to see her moves. She dissociates from a distasteful, unpleasant use of her body, the way many victims of sexual assault do to survive the physical and emotional pain. (And I wonder if "dancing" in the bordello layer is an escape from sex on the institution layer.) Her form of dissociation plunges her into a third layer of fantasy, wherein she is a powerful warrior equipped with a katana and pistol. Here she is capable of destroying dragons and twenty-foot demon samurai. Her sexual power transforms into real power. The other girls are likewise equipped with symbols of male power: machine guns, shotguns, knives, swords, and perhaps most threatening of all (to the male hierarchy), technical expertise with helicopters and airplanes.
Yet the women are still sexualized in their scanty outfits, which one reviewer called an unzipped geek-boy fantasy. Even here, Baby Doll cannot shake the sexual roots of the power she is using in the "real world". She may be defeating steam-zombies and high-tech robots with impossible slow-mo battle moves, but in reality she is just shaking her booty to distract the men so the other girls can gather the tools of escape.
Reviewers can blame the writer and director for the situation these girls are in, but Zack Snyder merely holds a mirror up to our own society. (I believe the The Social Network intended the same thing, when every single woman in that film (with one exception) was brutally objectified.) Many don't like what they see, and even fewer understand, and so they are left squirming, vaguely aware that something is not right. But when one in four women in America are sexually assaulted, many before the age of 18, we need to make films, (and yes, even PG-13 films with glossed-over details), to expose the seriousness of these crimes towards women. (More rape statistics here.)
Perhaps, like Baby Doll, society itself likes to dissociate, fantasizing of a world in which women are happy with their lot, where females are really powerful, and where rape doesn't exist or doesn't hurt anyone. We want our movies to support these fantasies, and when they do not, like in Sucker Punch, we fail to comprehend it and criticize it as done by a "filmmaker who has absolutely nothing original or even coherent to say." (New York Post review) And yet this is one of the most original and thought-provoking movies I've seen all year. I would expect those ignorant of white male privilege to be blind to its merits.
Even at the end of the film, when Sweet Pea boards the bus to freedom, it is only by the grace of a male that she gets away. After all that work, she must still pass a male gatekeeper, who knows nothing about her, yet through the kindness of his heart, lies to the police and lets her get on the bus without paying for a ticket.
Like The Social Network, there is but one powerful woman in this movie. And she is the psychiatrist, Dr. Gorsky. Yet even her power is subjugated through the "good old boys network" run by an evil orderly, who falsifies signatures and takes money from men to get rid of troublesome girls. Once she learns of this racket, she has the ultimate authority and has Blue arrested. Yet she is incapable of saving Baby Doll or any of the other girls from their tragic fates. Her powerlessness is reflected on the bordello level of reality... There she plays a harsh Madam supposedly in control of the girls, but we soon learn that she is just as owned by the club-owner as they are.
Even in their fantasy world, they are aided through the missions by a male "commander", Wise Man, who takes not only a mentor role, but also that of an officer, a superior. Even equipped with weapons and fighting skills, they cannot escape their roles in a male-dominated society.
The only "real" male who shows any sympathy for Baby Doll is the lobotomist, who displays a spark of regret for what he has done and calls attention (too late) to the falsified signature. In a deleted scene, he also plays the High-Roller with whom Baby Doll has a loving sex scene -- but oddly, this was cut in order to give the film its PG-13 rating. The one time Baby Doll has control of her sexuality, using it willingly and for her own pleasure, it is cut to make the movie more palatable for modern society.
By the end, Baby Doll must sacrifice herself to save one of her fellow women. This further punctuates the story of American women throughout the last century -- lacking any other power, many women found themselves sacrificing their own comfort, freedom, or lives, for the sake of their sisters and children. Or even for the sake of their men. I'm talking about sacrifice of body, career, education, life choices; choices of who to marry, when to start a family, where to live, what political views to hold, what talents to pursue, whether to own property, when and who to have sex with, and so on. In fact, Baby Doll's sacrifice is a sexual one: By revealing herself to the men on the bordello-level, she is sentenced to have sex with the High Roller. (She defends herself ineffectively by kicking a man in the groin, a stark contrast to the fantasy world in which she kills a dragon with a sword.) In reality, it means her mind will be destroyed through the act of lobotomy... She will be turned into a passive, submissive woman, so she can play her rightful role in society.
Many of the reviewers criticized Sucker Punch as a feminist revenge film. But I simply cannot agree. In the battle fantasies, not a single male human is killed. Read that again. Yes, they kill steam-powered German zombies. Yes, they kill Orcs. Yes, they kill robots. Yes, they kill dragons. Yes, they kill demons. But it is no accident that the one chance Baby Doll has of killing a living human male (the map-courier in the German trenches), she refrains. Instead of lancing him, she uses her sword to lift the map from his shoulders.
Even when Blue tries to rape Baby Doll, she stabs him, but not fatally. He is still alive enough to attempt the rape again, this time post-lobotomy, when her last remaining defenses have been ripped away. These women, even when they become ultimately powerful, do not use their powers for revenge.
Many critics disparaged this film's PG-13 rating. Michael Medved thought it should be NC-17. Yet what was so challenging in this movie? No sex. No nudity. Very little, if any, bad language. Cartoon violence. Very minimal use of blood (blood on her fingers when her sister dies, blood seeping through fabric from Blue's and Rocket's stab wounds). NC-17, for that?
I will tell you what was so challenging in this movie, and these are not things the MPAA bases ratings on:
1. Women die. Lots of women die.
2. Women have power. Even if imaginary power, they have lots of it.
3. There is a subtext of rape. Lots of rape. It is never shown, in fact not even explicitly implied. If you know what to look for, it is merely hinted at.
4. This movie displays the harsh realities of being a woman in this world.
While the MPAA couldn't find this offensive based on objective standards, many subjective reviewers did. And that fact points not only to the ignorance society holds for these issues, but also to why movies like this are so desperately needed.
[A few side notes about the Hero's Journey and alternate interpretations of the ending: There is some guesswork as to whose reality we are viewing in the movie. Roland suggested that we are actually seeing two hero's journeys, of both Baby Doll and Sweet Pea. I began to argue, to point out that since the camera does not follow Sweet Pea, her journey, if she has one, is not being told. He counter-pointed that Baby Doll is Sweat Pea's mentor/guru (Supernatural Aid); that the main character is actually Sweet Pea, telling her own story through Baby Doll's lens. After all, Baby Doll does say "This is your story." It is interesting to think about.
Alternately, the ending where we get to see Sweet Pea's final escape may in fact be Baby Doll's fantasy. Perhaps Sweet Pea escapes, but from Baby Doll's point of view, she can only hope she makes it to the bus stop. The lobotomized Baby Doll must now live entirely inside her head, and she chooses Sweet Pea's escape for her own "paradise". This idea is supported by the fact that Wise Man is also the bus driver, someone none of them have ever seen before in the real world.]
This film stands at a historical cusp. Whereas many films today reflect a girl-power can-do attitude of third-wave feminism, I think this is more of a wish than a reflection of how things are. This film says, "This is how things were, and maybe how things still are, but the fantasy is the way things can be." With its mix of female powerlessness and female power, it fits the zeitgeist of the confusion many women now feel about what role they should play. Should I be like my mother or grandmother, exerting subtle manipulation as my only manifestation of action? Or should I be a male-in-girl-clothes, sporting guns and killing toy soldiers like the generations of second- and third-wave feminists before me?
Perhaps the tragedy of this film shows us that both roles are dangerous and lead to an equally futile conclusion. Perhaps we should throw away both the male and female "weapons" of the past, and forge new impliments of power. Fourth-wave feminism, now in its fetal stage, seems to suggest that.
February 21, 2011
"Make a Living with Fiction" Panel at Radcon
I've been to panels with similar titles before, and they all focused on writing query letters, getting an agent, how to meet publishers at cons, and so on. This year was quite different. Three published and even best-selling authors (Patricia Briggs, Mike Moscoe aka Mike Shephard, and S. Andrew Swann) spent the hour discussing the uncertain publishing market, whether you should self-publish ebooks, and how to self-promote whether indie or traditionally published.
According to Mike Moscoe, if anyone tells you they know where the industry is going to be in 2 years, don't believe them. No one knows. I noticed this general theme at the Villains panel, where noted and famed authors like CJ Cherryh discussed their recent move to self-publish print on demand and ebooks.
For now, it's best to just guess. Place your bets folks, because it's going to be an interesting ride.
For the most part, this panel was, for me, a validation that I have a good head on my shoulders and have been making decent decisions so far. Being successful in this business, in the end, comes down to luck, but luck will do you no good (or even harm you) if you're not covering a few bases.
The biggest message was: Write well. Now that the market is the slush pile, the stakes are even higher when it's time to market. While it's always been true that even the best writers will benefit by writing more, now new writers may not have the benefit of an editor to guide them through this early phase. Your goal is to get through this phase without damaging your reputation too badly. You might be able to get someone to read your 1st or 2nd book with lots of promotional efforts, but if that book sucks, then it will be impossible to get them to read your 5th or 15th book, which will inevitably be much better.
Most of all, if your work actually does suck (and isn't at least pretty good), you really shouldn't publish it. I put that in bold because I don't think anyone wants the indie market to be a giant slush pile. Wait until you've written out all of your sub-par words, file them away, and only publish the good stuff.
Since I've already stored all my crappy writing in a cool, dark place, I concluded that I should market appropriately to the quality of my work. I happen to think my work right now is "pretty good", and is getting better, and eventually will be excellent. If I market When Prey Hunts and Make Willing the Prey as if they were excellent, then no one will buy my actually excellent work 5 years from now.
People get a general feeling for just how excellent your work is by the quality of the marketing materials, how often your ads or fliers pop up, how often they see you interviewed in blogs, and so on... Anyone who took my laser-printed bookmark with the hand-threaded ribbon at Radcon probably knows that the free ebook "Four Fae" and Kindle novella "Make Willing the Prey" are probably "pretty good", so they can't be disappointed. Later, when I'm Super Awesome, then I can ramp up the full color printing and fancy artwork and blog tours and so on.
At least, I think that's what they were saying. :)
Speaking of bookmarks at Radcon, yeah. I probably distributed about 100-125 free bookmarks at Radcon. And according to Mike Moscoe, that's the best thing I could have done.
He's spent years trying every possibly marketing gimmick. He confided that he over-marketed given the quality of his early work. Which is one reason he publishes his newest work under a pseudonym. He learned the three most effective techniques for promotion of fiction:
Go to cons.Give away bookmarks.Print a good bio and an email address on the books you sell.That's it. Which made me feel very pleased that I was already doing the first two. :)
Another piece of advice, which I am already trying to do, is to market yourself over your books. Sell a brand, not a title. This is why I spent so much prep before Radcon coming up with a "brand" for the universe of my fae stories and books. It took two days of concentrated effort, plus the help of friends and family, to settle on "Dreams by Streetlight". Now when ever I promote any story in that world, I am promoting every other story in that world. And myself as an author. So that 10 years from now, when I'm actually writing excellent books, my name is what people will remember, not the title of my first two or three books which will (relatively) suck.
Thanks to Patricia Briggs, Mike Moscoe, and S. Andrew Swann who spoke on this panel, for their openness in sharing their wisdom to those of us just beginning.
According to Mike Moscoe, if anyone tells you they know where the industry is going to be in 2 years, don't believe them. No one knows. I noticed this general theme at the Villains panel, where noted and famed authors like CJ Cherryh discussed their recent move to self-publish print on demand and ebooks.
For now, it's best to just guess. Place your bets folks, because it's going to be an interesting ride.
For the most part, this panel was, for me, a validation that I have a good head on my shoulders and have been making decent decisions so far. Being successful in this business, in the end, comes down to luck, but luck will do you no good (or even harm you) if you're not covering a few bases.
The biggest message was: Write well. Now that the market is the slush pile, the stakes are even higher when it's time to market. While it's always been true that even the best writers will benefit by writing more, now new writers may not have the benefit of an editor to guide them through this early phase. Your goal is to get through this phase without damaging your reputation too badly. You might be able to get someone to read your 1st or 2nd book with lots of promotional efforts, but if that book sucks, then it will be impossible to get them to read your 5th or 15th book, which will inevitably be much better.
Most of all, if your work actually does suck (and isn't at least pretty good), you really shouldn't publish it. I put that in bold because I don't think anyone wants the indie market to be a giant slush pile. Wait until you've written out all of your sub-par words, file them away, and only publish the good stuff.
Since I've already stored all my crappy writing in a cool, dark place, I concluded that I should market appropriately to the quality of my work. I happen to think my work right now is "pretty good", and is getting better, and eventually will be excellent. If I market When Prey Hunts and Make Willing the Prey as if they were excellent, then no one will buy my actually excellent work 5 years from now.
People get a general feeling for just how excellent your work is by the quality of the marketing materials, how often your ads or fliers pop up, how often they see you interviewed in blogs, and so on... Anyone who took my laser-printed bookmark with the hand-threaded ribbon at Radcon probably knows that the free ebook "Four Fae" and Kindle novella "Make Willing the Prey" are probably "pretty good", so they can't be disappointed. Later, when I'm Super Awesome, then I can ramp up the full color printing and fancy artwork and blog tours and so on.
At least, I think that's what they were saying. :)
Speaking of bookmarks at Radcon, yeah. I probably distributed about 100-125 free bookmarks at Radcon. And according to Mike Moscoe, that's the best thing I could have done.
He's spent years trying every possibly marketing gimmick. He confided that he over-marketed given the quality of his early work. Which is one reason he publishes his newest work under a pseudonym. He learned the three most effective techniques for promotion of fiction:
Go to cons.Give away bookmarks.Print a good bio and an email address on the books you sell.That's it. Which made me feel very pleased that I was already doing the first two. :)
Another piece of advice, which I am already trying to do, is to market yourself over your books. Sell a brand, not a title. This is why I spent so much prep before Radcon coming up with a "brand" for the universe of my fae stories and books. It took two days of concentrated effort, plus the help of friends and family, to settle on "Dreams by Streetlight". Now when ever I promote any story in that world, I am promoting every other story in that world. And myself as an author. So that 10 years from now, when I'm actually writing excellent books, my name is what people will remember, not the title of my first two or three books which will (relatively) suck.
Thanks to Patricia Briggs, Mike Moscoe, and S. Andrew Swann who spoke on this panel, for their openness in sharing their wisdom to those of us just beginning.
What I Leaned from Radcon 5c
What a great Radcon this year! I think cons are often what you make of them, and this year I was assisted at the task of "having a good time" by my wonderful fiance. I also think my experience of cons is enhanced when I'm attending with my writer's goggles on. Not literally.
Not only that, but the Friday batch of Toxic Waste® at the Official Radcon Room Party® tasted mighty fine. I heard they found a new source for depleted U-238, so I'm sure that had something to do with it.*
In addition to the parties, admiring the costumes, meeting new people, saying hi to old friends, and absorbing the general vibe, I attended a few panels. I tend to forget how interesting they can be.
Monster Hunting kept devolving into Zombie Apocalypse Escape Planning, but I learned a few great tips for hunting monsters. For starters, I they discussed some of the things I've already considered for my faerie hunters in When Prey Hunts. Like how does your hunter make a living? Those weapons cost a lot of money, after all. And what do you do with the bodies? How do you dodge modern-day law enforcement, when they're not likely to believe you've imprisoned, injured, robbed, or killed this guy because he's a vampire, werewolf, zombie, or faerie.
They also discussed the use of dogs or other animals to help counter-balance the monster's supernatural senses. If you're hunting through the woods, horses make great pack animals and can sense an approaching monster, especially if trained. You should plan to bring a lot of people -- one to pursue and track, one to ambush, and a reserve group to deploy as needed. They also pointed out that when fighting groups, deplete your enemies resources by shooting to wound, not kill.
There was a lot of interesting discussion on the Build a Better Villain panel. But not much I haven't already heard or thought about myself, so I didn't take notes.
The Neuroscience panel was education and interesting. The physics student in me loved hearing about how an fMRI works. A magnetic field lines up the spin of the atoms in your brain, and then turns off. When the atoms snap back to their previous random positions, they release energy. Doing this, they can tell how much oxygen is in your blood in various places. Based on the assumption that active areas of the brain are using oxygen, they can take a moving image of those active areas while asking you questions or having you perform various activities.
I'm a big fan of fMRI studies in the news, and always find the results fascinating. So I loved seeing the union between two of my favorite fields, physics and psychology.
Contrary to popular belief, the processing areas of the brain for specific tasks are not limited to one location. For example, a simple version of the task may be in one spot, when when the same type of task becomes more complex, that area will call upon various backup areas to process sub-tasks.
Less efficient readers process in their frontal brain, while efficient readers process words in the back.
By far the best panel I attended was "Make a Living by Writing". I learned enough there that it deserves its own post.
As always, Radcon proved to be the best con in its class (general sci-fi fantasy with slight focus on tabletop games and fiction). If you live in the Pacific Northwest, consider driving a couple of hours to the middle of nowhere next February to attend Radcon 6!
* Just kidding about the Uranium! It's bad for you, kids!
Not only that, but the Friday batch of Toxic Waste® at the Official Radcon Room Party® tasted mighty fine. I heard they found a new source for depleted U-238, so I'm sure that had something to do with it.*
In addition to the parties, admiring the costumes, meeting new people, saying hi to old friends, and absorbing the general vibe, I attended a few panels. I tend to forget how interesting they can be.
Monster Hunting kept devolving into Zombie Apocalypse Escape Planning, but I learned a few great tips for hunting monsters. For starters, I they discussed some of the things I've already considered for my faerie hunters in When Prey Hunts. Like how does your hunter make a living? Those weapons cost a lot of money, after all. And what do you do with the bodies? How do you dodge modern-day law enforcement, when they're not likely to believe you've imprisoned, injured, robbed, or killed this guy because he's a vampire, werewolf, zombie, or faerie.
They also discussed the use of dogs or other animals to help counter-balance the monster's supernatural senses. If you're hunting through the woods, horses make great pack animals and can sense an approaching monster, especially if trained. You should plan to bring a lot of people -- one to pursue and track, one to ambush, and a reserve group to deploy as needed. They also pointed out that when fighting groups, deplete your enemies resources by shooting to wound, not kill.
There was a lot of interesting discussion on the Build a Better Villain panel. But not much I haven't already heard or thought about myself, so I didn't take notes.
The Neuroscience panel was education and interesting. The physics student in me loved hearing about how an fMRI works. A magnetic field lines up the spin of the atoms in your brain, and then turns off. When the atoms snap back to their previous random positions, they release energy. Doing this, they can tell how much oxygen is in your blood in various places. Based on the assumption that active areas of the brain are using oxygen, they can take a moving image of those active areas while asking you questions or having you perform various activities.
I'm a big fan of fMRI studies in the news, and always find the results fascinating. So I loved seeing the union between two of my favorite fields, physics and psychology.
Contrary to popular belief, the processing areas of the brain for specific tasks are not limited to one location. For example, a simple version of the task may be in one spot, when when the same type of task becomes more complex, that area will call upon various backup areas to process sub-tasks.
Less efficient readers process in their frontal brain, while efficient readers process words in the back.
By far the best panel I attended was "Make a Living by Writing". I learned enough there that it deserves its own post.
As always, Radcon proved to be the best con in its class (general sci-fi fantasy with slight focus on tabletop games and fiction). If you live in the Pacific Northwest, consider driving a couple of hours to the middle of nowhere next February to attend Radcon 6!
* Just kidding about the Uranium! It's bad for you, kids!
February 7, 2011
Links of the Week
Every week I post a lot of fun and interesting links in Twitter. Last week was no exception. Here is an aggregate of some of my favorites.
Writing & Fiction
I'm pretty excited about a new book called "How to Write a Sentence and How to Read One". Here's an except. In the spirit of this, the author has listed a few of his favorite sentences here: Stanley Fish's Favorite Sentences (and Mine, too)
I posted a few of my own favorite sentences, from a series I'm currently reading, Gormenghast by Mervyn Peake.
And while we're on that, Strunk and White vs. Stanley Fish at the Boston Globe.
I learned a new way of spelling "teh internet", "t'internet" from this blog post, Why Being an Indie Author is More Difficult Than It Sounds.
There's a documentary on H.P. Lovecraft, called Lovecraft: Fear of the Unknown. I love biographies of the old-school sci-fi and horror writers. So inspiring and nostalgic.
I listened to an awesome short story called Schrodinger's Cat Lady on the Escape Pod podcast. What a fun story!
Here's a blog post about publishing and piracy called, Writing on the High Seas.
Science
Carl Sagan's old Cosmos series is up on Google Video for free viewing. I watched all of these last year, and they are very worth it. He cannot disguise his passion for science. The retro charm of this show only lends enjoyment, and most of the science is still accurate. Here is Episode 1.
Speaking of Carl Sagan, here is the much-shorter excerpt, A Pale Blue Dot. If you don't have time for 13 episodes of Cosmos, this one is less than four minutes.
The Kármán vortex street caught my interest. What beautiful fractals in the clouds.
I also discovered the beautiful Faroe Islands up north of Ireland and west of Norway. The tradition of growing grass on their roofs came from the Vikings, who would build houses by tipping their ships upside down and growing turf on top.
And I found a huge source of free documentaries at Top Documentary Films.
There's a short TED Talk called How to Start a Movement, about the science of leadership.
Entertainment
Best superb owl commercial of the week? Watch this Volkswagen Commercial featuring Darth Vader.
Leavenworth, WA has started a new marketing campaign, featuring Woody the Nutcracker in a new rap video.
News
An Iowa Eagle Scout testifies to the Iowa House of Representatives in favor of gay marriage. You see, he was reared by two mothers. His story is touching.
Speaking of touching, here's a video about the protests in Egypt.
In a story from Russia fit for a cyberpunk novel, a suicide bomber blew up prematurely when she received a spam text.
Writing & Fiction
I'm pretty excited about a new book called "How to Write a Sentence and How to Read One". Here's an except. In the spirit of this, the author has listed a few of his favorite sentences here: Stanley Fish's Favorite Sentences (and Mine, too)
I posted a few of my own favorite sentences, from a series I'm currently reading, Gormenghast by Mervyn Peake.
And while we're on that, Strunk and White vs. Stanley Fish at the Boston Globe.
I learned a new way of spelling "teh internet", "t'internet" from this blog post, Why Being an Indie Author is More Difficult Than It Sounds.
There's a documentary on H.P. Lovecraft, called Lovecraft: Fear of the Unknown. I love biographies of the old-school sci-fi and horror writers. So inspiring and nostalgic.
I listened to an awesome short story called Schrodinger's Cat Lady on the Escape Pod podcast. What a fun story!
Here's a blog post about publishing and piracy called, Writing on the High Seas.
Science
Carl Sagan's old Cosmos series is up on Google Video for free viewing. I watched all of these last year, and they are very worth it. He cannot disguise his passion for science. The retro charm of this show only lends enjoyment, and most of the science is still accurate. Here is Episode 1.
Speaking of Carl Sagan, here is the much-shorter excerpt, A Pale Blue Dot. If you don't have time for 13 episodes of Cosmos, this one is less than four minutes.
The Kármán vortex street caught my interest. What beautiful fractals in the clouds.
I also discovered the beautiful Faroe Islands up north of Ireland and west of Norway. The tradition of growing grass on their roofs came from the Vikings, who would build houses by tipping their ships upside down and growing turf on top.
And I found a huge source of free documentaries at Top Documentary Films.
There's a short TED Talk called How to Start a Movement, about the science of leadership.
Entertainment
Best superb owl commercial of the week? Watch this Volkswagen Commercial featuring Darth Vader.
Leavenworth, WA has started a new marketing campaign, featuring Woody the Nutcracker in a new rap video.
News
An Iowa Eagle Scout testifies to the Iowa House of Representatives in favor of gay marriage. You see, he was reared by two mothers. His story is touching.
Speaking of touching, here's a video about the protests in Egypt.
In a story from Russia fit for a cyberpunk novel, a suicide bomber blew up prematurely when she received a spam text.
December 23, 2010
The Urban Myth of Santa Claus on IUF
In which I bespoil all your childhood fantasies: Santa Claus deconstructed on Indie Urban Fantasy:
Long ago, I wrote a comedic essay on the parallels between Santa Claus and Satan. I was surprised to find quite a few things in common, though I was really only joking. I finished the piece "...and the North Pole is as cold as hell!"Click here for the rest!
Back then, I didn't even know that "Nick" or "Old Nick" is also another word for The Devil in some parts of the world. It is also the root of the name for several types of fairies in different regions (neck, nykk, nissie, nixsie, nyx, etc. This itself may have come from the Roman "nymph".) When we accept that many of our Christmas traditions have pagan roots, it's easy to see where all the confusion might have come from...
December 21, 2010
When Prey Hunts is Done!
Today I finished the first draft of When Prey Hunts, a novel set in the same world as Make Willing the Prey and a number of my short stories. I started conceptualizing it in late August, and began writing in early September. It came in at at 69,438 words, and I am very pleased with how it turned out. I think the ending could use a little work, and lots of spit and polish will be applied to the beginning and middle as well.
My critique group is great. They've already read through Chapter 4, and their comments have been really helpful. Since this is my first attempt at a novel, my biggest concerns have to do with plotting. I had way more characters, and a lot more going on, than any of my short stories, or my NaNoWriMo novel (The Sun Never Rises). And since plotting is way more difficult and time consuming to fix than grammar and prose, I hope I pulled it off.
It also contains a few challenging concepts. Sure, it's an urban fantasy about faeries. Sure, it's a pot boiler. But the protagonists are never clearly in the right, everyone is deeply flawed, there are a few non-traditional relationships, and I included a Christian cult. I hope I was able to handle all of these subjects delicately, yet still be realistic, and most importantly, be true to my characters and my world.
It was really difficult to write a faerie as a main character, to make her both sympathetic and creepy. What a tightrope to walk. My faeries are alien. They are not predictable, yet my readers still needed to understand and believe their actions. Designing a character like Jett was both fun and challenging. I love her to death.
What's next? I've been thinking about editing Make Willing the Prey, just a little bit, to make the beginning more interesting. I've gotten a lot of feedback that it starts a bit slow, and thanks to technology, I can fix that.
Then I go to work on the final draft of When Prey Hunts. I will be held back a bit by the reading pace of my critique group. There are thirteen chapters, I can submit a chapter at a time, every two weeks. So the soonest I will have all the feedback will be in mid-spring. I can do a few things in the meantime. Then the final round of beta readers. Then cover design, layout and formatting, possibly a proofing service, and by summer, it should be published. It seems like such a long time! I will do what I can to speed it up.
My critique group is great. They've already read through Chapter 4, and their comments have been really helpful. Since this is my first attempt at a novel, my biggest concerns have to do with plotting. I had way more characters, and a lot more going on, than any of my short stories, or my NaNoWriMo novel (The Sun Never Rises). And since plotting is way more difficult and time consuming to fix than grammar and prose, I hope I pulled it off.
It also contains a few challenging concepts. Sure, it's an urban fantasy about faeries. Sure, it's a pot boiler. But the protagonists are never clearly in the right, everyone is deeply flawed, there are a few non-traditional relationships, and I included a Christian cult. I hope I was able to handle all of these subjects delicately, yet still be realistic, and most importantly, be true to my characters and my world.
It was really difficult to write a faerie as a main character, to make her both sympathetic and creepy. What a tightrope to walk. My faeries are alien. They are not predictable, yet my readers still needed to understand and believe their actions. Designing a character like Jett was both fun and challenging. I love her to death.
What's next? I've been thinking about editing Make Willing the Prey, just a little bit, to make the beginning more interesting. I've gotten a lot of feedback that it starts a bit slow, and thanks to technology, I can fix that.
Then I go to work on the final draft of When Prey Hunts. I will be held back a bit by the reading pace of my critique group. There are thirteen chapters, I can submit a chapter at a time, every two weeks. So the soonest I will have all the feedback will be in mid-spring. I can do a few things in the meantime. Then the final round of beta readers. Then cover design, layout and formatting, possibly a proofing service, and by summer, it should be published. It seems like such a long time! I will do what I can to speed it up.
December 15, 2010
Urban Fantasy Short Stories Roundup
Indie Urban Fantasy has a monthly newsletter. You can sign up here, and read the archives here.
I've been writing short stories there every month since August. All but one all are set in my fae world, the same as Make Willing the Prey and my work in progress, When Prey Hunts. In fact, two of the characters, Jett and Perstin, are both in When Prey Hunts.
Some of these are whimsical and some fall into the creepy/scary category. That's just how faeries are.
Right After Feeding Time
I've been writing short stories there every month since August. All but one all are set in my fae world, the same as Make Willing the Prey and my work in progress, When Prey Hunts. In fact, two of the characters, Jett and Perstin, are both in When Prey Hunts.
Some of these are whimsical and some fall into the creepy/scary category. That's just how faeries are.
Right After Feeding Time
Vivian is a crazy cat lady and a witch. Will her powers protect her when she meddles with forces she does not understand?The Thief at 619
Perstin is a pygsie with a penchant for painting. But the supplies he uses aren't exactly his...The Metro Gnome
Buses are the perfect place for gnomes who love books. Too bad nobody ever reads anymore.Cold Hunger
It lives in the woods, and it is always hungry.I hope you enjoy!
December 14, 2010
Indie Urban Fantasy Roundup
It's been a while since I posted on here. I have been writing, and I have been blogging. Since my August post, I have written 116,000 words of novel (two novels). And I've been blogging twice-monthly over at Indie Urban Fantasy. The goal was to link an excerpt from each one, in a separate post, around the time of the original posting, but... well... Writing two novels in three months is one of the best excuses I have ever had.
So here's the roundup.
A three-part series on faeries:
The Science of Faeries Part 1
The Science of Faeries Part 2
The Science of Faeries Part 3
Urban Fantasy is the New Folktale:
Folktales in the past did not always begin "Once upon a time, in a land far away". When medieval German mothers told their children tales, they often began, "Just down the road by the old church, there lives a witch", or "When I was as old as you, I met a dwarf in the woods."...Argentina Gnome - Creepy Reality? Or Just a Hoax?
In 2008, the small town of Guemes, Argentina gained notoriety when The Sun (UK) reported that a gnome had been captured on film. According to The Sun, locals had been plagued by this little gnome for some time. The boys who captured this video were minding their own business when they heard a sound, as if someone where throwing rocks. When Jose Alvarez, who had been playing around with his phone camera, saw a movement in the grass, he pointed it towards the sound. And that's when he captured the gnome...A humorous post about supernatural NaNoWriMo participants, Interview with a NaNoWriPire:
As you all know, Belle Art ran a popular late-night paranormal podcast. She disappeared last June under mysterious circumstances, along with every copy of every podcast she ever recorded. These transcripts survive. They were of a show taken exactly one year ago, today...For a very special Thanksgiving post, featuring infinite turkeys, finite unicorns, Zeus, and how they are related, see A Toast to The Copious Cornucopia of Ancient and Modern Folktales
And most recently, last week in fact, I wrote about Mind Control, Mystical Mesmerism, and Other Magical Compulsions, in which I explore all the methods a modern-day fantasy character might use to force you against your will.
Up next, a roundup of all the short stories I have written for the Indie Urban Fantasy Newsletter. But you'll have to wait until tomorrow. :)
September 2, 2010
Guest Post at IUF - The Science of Faeries Pt. 1
I have another guest post over at the Indie Urban Fantasy blog. This is the first of a mutli-part post on faeries!
Here are the first few paragraphs:
Here are the first few paragraphs:
The "science of faeries". An oxymoron?
Not really.
Don't get me wrong. I am quite the skeptic, a big fan of James Randi and Christopher Hitchens. All of this is fantasy, right? The only scientists who believe in fairies are pseudo-scientists.
But there was a time in the past when credible scholars did give credence to the possibility of...
August 21, 2010
Hacking My Brain
I'm going on vacation next week. I'm hoping there will be no wireless access of any kind, and I hope I don't figure out how to tether my netbook to my phone.
Here's why. Yesterday, I read an article in the New York Times about five neuroscientists on a camping trip in the desert. They are experts on the human brain who study things like memory, motivation, and attention. While their trip didn't qualify as a real experiment, they wanted see how going off the grid affected their mood and me...
Here's why. Yesterday, I read an article in the New York Times about five neuroscientists on a camping trip in the desert. They are experts on the human brain who study things like memory, motivation, and attention. While their trip didn't qualify as a real experiment, they wanted see how going off the grid affected their mood and me...
