Kelly McCullough's Blog, page 78
November 12, 2010
Friday Cat Blogging
Listing to starboard! Mayday! Mayday!
Like I give a rip.
Serious cat shows her serious side.
I plots evilly now, kayz?
Are you taking a picture of my bad side?
You're taking my bad side, I know it.
You know how fat that makes me look.
Like I give a rip.
Serious cat shows her serious side.
I plots evilly now, kayz?
Are you taking a picture of my bad side?
You're taking my bad side, I know it.
You know how fat that makes me look.
November 11, 2010
My Thoughts on the Genre of Steam
This started as a more serious response to Kelly's post, but grew. I'm composing on a bit of a fever and lack of sleep, so my apologies if I run on at points.
I think steampunk has a lot of potential, as a setting, as a backdrop, as a sub-genre. It just plain looks fun. Admittedly, I haven't been overly impressed by some of the work being held up as "the standard" for SP at this point, but that is partly taste, partly evolution of the form, and partly, I suspect in a couple cases, writing being rushed to market. (I also admit I am not as widely read in the form as I might be, and so may have just been having horrible luck in picking titles to date.)
I'm not as disturbed by the glossing over of the evils of the Victorian era as some because, well, most of us do that for the other periods we use as settings. I'm a historian--there are vast swaths of evil and bad and rottenness in every era, most of which is not addressed or acknowledged in second-world fiction. Leaving it out is a tried and true tradition, and I don't think we should be conveniently dumping on one genre when there are so many others that do the same thing. Of course, that doesn't mean the darker side of society can't be can't be addressed in SP (or fantasy, or SF, or...), and shouldn't, and I suspect it will (and already is, from what I have gleaned via teh webz). We just haven't seen the full counter-swing of the pendulum, yet.
What annoys me, personally, are the ray guns, zombies, plot-holes, and extremes some people are taking the "science" to. Mad science /= implausible/impossible/hand-waving science, at least in the most egregious forms. If you want to hand wave, use magic, or at least try to give me a bit of a plausibility base. But this is only *my* opinion and, like I said, I trained as a historian--stuff like that bugs me. Clearly, others don't have this issue, and, for them, that's okay. Like the song says: You can't please everyone, so you got to please yourself. That holds doubly true for writers.
I think this latest iteration of SP is still building itself and sorting itself out. With the up-surge in the SP fashion/life style, along with over-the-top vehicles like Girl Genius (which I thinks works as an over-the-top offering, whereas many other literary efforts take this as an inspiration but don't adopt the tongue-in-cheek tone that makes GG work), there is more of an homage to the esthetic and less to the nuts and bolts of what make good world building. For those who want a brass and leather romp, this isn't an issue; for those looking for a bit more meat on the bone of their literature, much of the current fare is leaving the reader hungry.
That, and the sales and the shelf space, are likely what is rubbing some people raw. I can understand that. But I also agree with Kelly when he says that's no reason to start lobbing grenades (or, clock-work, self-igniting, inner fused explosive spheres, depending on the lobber) just because you aren't happy about the latest trend.
Do I think SP could be better? Sure. I also think fantasy, as a whole, could have been better in the late 70s and early 80s too, but that didn't mean the entire genre was crap and dragging us all into the abyss. And I don't even pretend to get all the vampire and zombie stuff. But so what? Steampunk is what it is, and if you don't like it, either write something better or let the people read their books. Bitching about it isn't going to make it go away.
I think steampunk has a lot of potential, as a setting, as a backdrop, as a sub-genre. It just plain looks fun. Admittedly, I haven't been overly impressed by some of the work being held up as "the standard" for SP at this point, but that is partly taste, partly evolution of the form, and partly, I suspect in a couple cases, writing being rushed to market. (I also admit I am not as widely read in the form as I might be, and so may have just been having horrible luck in picking titles to date.)
I'm not as disturbed by the glossing over of the evils of the Victorian era as some because, well, most of us do that for the other periods we use as settings. I'm a historian--there are vast swaths of evil and bad and rottenness in every era, most of which is not addressed or acknowledged in second-world fiction. Leaving it out is a tried and true tradition, and I don't think we should be conveniently dumping on one genre when there are so many others that do the same thing. Of course, that doesn't mean the darker side of society can't be can't be addressed in SP (or fantasy, or SF, or...), and shouldn't, and I suspect it will (and already is, from what I have gleaned via teh webz). We just haven't seen the full counter-swing of the pendulum, yet.
What annoys me, personally, are the ray guns, zombies, plot-holes, and extremes some people are taking the "science" to. Mad science /= implausible/impossible/hand-waving science, at least in the most egregious forms. If you want to hand wave, use magic, or at least try to give me a bit of a plausibility base. But this is only *my* opinion and, like I said, I trained as a historian--stuff like that bugs me. Clearly, others don't have this issue, and, for them, that's okay. Like the song says: You can't please everyone, so you got to please yourself. That holds doubly true for writers.
I think this latest iteration of SP is still building itself and sorting itself out. With the up-surge in the SP fashion/life style, along with over-the-top vehicles like Girl Genius (which I thinks works as an over-the-top offering, whereas many other literary efforts take this as an inspiration but don't adopt the tongue-in-cheek tone that makes GG work), there is more of an homage to the esthetic and less to the nuts and bolts of what make good world building. For those who want a brass and leather romp, this isn't an issue; for those looking for a bit more meat on the bone of their literature, much of the current fare is leaving the reader hungry.
That, and the sales and the shelf space, are likely what is rubbing some people raw. I can understand that. But I also agree with Kelly when he says that's no reason to start lobbing grenades (or, clock-work, self-igniting, inner fused explosive spheres, depending on the lobber) just because you aren't happy about the latest trend.
Do I think SP could be better? Sure. I also think fantasy, as a whole, could have been better in the late 70s and early 80s too, but that didn't mean the entire genre was crap and dragging us all into the abyss. And I don't even pretend to get all the vampire and zombie stuff. But so what? Steampunk is what it is, and if you don't like it, either write something better or let the people read their books. Bitching about it isn't going to make it go away.
November 10, 2010
More on Realms of Fantasy
Some cautionary thoughts regarding the re-re-birth of Realms of Fantasy have started to pop up on the web.
A general "let's wait and see what happens" observation was made by John Klima over at Tor.com, which, when you think about it, makes sense. Someone we don't know much about has bought a well-known name--let's see what they do with it.
More interesting, and potentially ominous, is Tobias Buckell's advice to tread carefully when it comes to the revivified Realms. Not deep digging to be sure, but what he brings up is reason enough for caution, I think.
At this point, there's really no way to know how things will fall out. I think Tobias's advice to be careful about dealing with the new publisher until we have a bit of a track record isn't a bad one. Buying a revered name only gets you that--the name. All the rest is earned. I am hoping that Damnation Books can do the old masthead justice and bring a storied publication back from the brink, but I will be watching to see how things develop, especially after the Dec. 2010 issue (the last one put together by the former publisher, Warren Lapine) is out the door.
So, I guess I am saying that I am going to hold off on the champagne for a bit, until I see what Realms becomes.
A general "let's wait and see what happens" observation was made by John Klima over at Tor.com, which, when you think about it, makes sense. Someone we don't know much about has bought a well-known name--let's see what they do with it.
More interesting, and potentially ominous, is Tobias Buckell's advice to tread carefully when it comes to the revivified Realms. Not deep digging to be sure, but what he brings up is reason enough for caution, I think.
At this point, there's really no way to know how things will fall out. I think Tobias's advice to be careful about dealing with the new publisher until we have a bit of a track record isn't a bad one. Buying a revered name only gets you that--the name. All the rest is earned. I am hoping that Damnation Books can do the old masthead justice and bring a storied publication back from the brink, but I will be watching to see how things develop, especially after the Dec. 2010 issue (the last one put together by the former publisher, Warren Lapine) is out the door.
So, I guess I am saying that I am going to hold off on the champagne for a bit, until I see what Realms becomes.
People like stuff that you don't. Get over it.
This is a rant that grows out of the whole anti/pro steampunk kerfuffle that the f&sf genresphere has been aflutter with of late in which many on the two sides are flinging great gobs of words at each other like punctuation-laden poo. It's not pretty and in many cases it seems to be a mix of sour grapes and tribalism, and it looks just like every other variation of this argument we've had for the last fifty years with the only real difference being what sub-genre/genre/literary sensibility we're arguing about.
One of the things that we as a genre community seem to be most vulnerable to is the idea that our personal favorite type of writing is the only type of writing that other people should love and pay attention to and that anyone who disagrees that our pet subgenre is the one true form of worthwhile writing is a poo-poo head. This tends to be expressed in one of two ways:
1) I want more of my stuff, and why isn't everyone writing and publishing that? "Waaaaah!" *POUT* It is often accompanied by the stomping of rhetorical feet and tearing of hair. It mostly looks like highly articulate toddlers throwing a tantrum because the world isn't treating them and their pet interests as the center of the universe.
2) How can anyone believe that XXXXX is worthy of their attention and dollars? XXXXX is immoral and anti-intellectual or just plain bad and the people who read/write it are dupes/exploiters or simply uncultured. If they really understood the underlying dynamic of XXXXX they'd realize that and come over and read YYYYY which is the one true way. It mostly looks like even more articulate toddlers throwing a tantrum because the world isn't treating them and their pet interests as the center of the universe.
People, get a freaking grip! Not everyone likes what you like, and that's okay. In fact it's wonderful and healthy and necessary for the survival of a culture. Diversity of thought and idea and taste is one of the single most important parts of our ongoing survival as a species. It's what drives us to try that funny looking fruit over there, or accept that those who don't look and think like us are people too, or take a long walk over the hill and find out there's cool stuff over there too.
The tendency of people to act as though stuff they don't like is awful and bad for the culture if not downright immoral is one of the human tribal reactions that I find least attractive. It's genre fundamentalism and it's ugly and petty and basically unhealthy both for the culture and for the head of bile it builds up within the person in question.
Does this mean I'm immune to the impulse? Of course not. There are sub-genres I think are stupid or hateful or bad for people. When my stuff doesn't sell as well as somebody else's stuff I get a little jealous and pouty. Hey, I'm human. However I really do try to throttle it down because it's bad for me and indulging the impulse is bad for the culture. And I sure as hell don't throw a public tantrum about it.
If you were a geek in school, and if you're reading this, the odds are pretty good, you remember what it was like to have the cool kids looking down on you for loving Star Trek or Dr. Who or reading those funny Lord of the Rings books. This impulse to say my genre/subgenre good = your genre/subgenre bad is the exact same shit. Do you really want to be doing that?
One of the things that we as a genre community seem to be most vulnerable to is the idea that our personal favorite type of writing is the only type of writing that other people should love and pay attention to and that anyone who disagrees that our pet subgenre is the one true form of worthwhile writing is a poo-poo head. This tends to be expressed in one of two ways:
1) I want more of my stuff, and why isn't everyone writing and publishing that? "Waaaaah!" *POUT* It is often accompanied by the stomping of rhetorical feet and tearing of hair. It mostly looks like highly articulate toddlers throwing a tantrum because the world isn't treating them and their pet interests as the center of the universe.
2) How can anyone believe that XXXXX is worthy of their attention and dollars? XXXXX is immoral and anti-intellectual or just plain bad and the people who read/write it are dupes/exploiters or simply uncultured. If they really understood the underlying dynamic of XXXXX they'd realize that and come over and read YYYYY which is the one true way. It mostly looks like even more articulate toddlers throwing a tantrum because the world isn't treating them and their pet interests as the center of the universe.
People, get a freaking grip! Not everyone likes what you like, and that's okay. In fact it's wonderful and healthy and necessary for the survival of a culture. Diversity of thought and idea and taste is one of the single most important parts of our ongoing survival as a species. It's what drives us to try that funny looking fruit over there, or accept that those who don't look and think like us are people too, or take a long walk over the hill and find out there's cool stuff over there too.
The tendency of people to act as though stuff they don't like is awful and bad for the culture if not downright immoral is one of the human tribal reactions that I find least attractive. It's genre fundamentalism and it's ugly and petty and basically unhealthy both for the culture and for the head of bile it builds up within the person in question.
Does this mean I'm immune to the impulse? Of course not. There are sub-genres I think are stupid or hateful or bad for people. When my stuff doesn't sell as well as somebody else's stuff I get a little jealous and pouty. Hey, I'm human. However I really do try to throttle it down because it's bad for me and indulging the impulse is bad for the culture. And I sure as hell don't throw a public tantrum about it.
If you were a geek in school, and if you're reading this, the odds are pretty good, you remember what it was like to have the cool kids looking down on you for loving Star Trek or Dr. Who or reading those funny Lord of the Rings books. This impulse to say my genre/subgenre good = your genre/subgenre bad is the exact same shit. Do you really want to be doing that?
NASA Photo of the Day
Did you know that our Milky Way Galaxy has huge bubbles emitting gamma rays from the direction of the galactic center? Neither did anybody. As the data from the Earth-orbiting Fermi satellite began acuminating over the past two years, however, a large and unusual feature toward our Galaxy's center became increasingly evident. The two bubbles are visible together as the red and white spotted oval surrounding the center of the above all sky image, released yesterday. The plane of our Galaxy runs horizontally across the image center. Assuming the bubbles emanate from our Galaxy's center, the scale of the bubbles is huge, rivaling the entire Galaxy in size, and spanning about 50,000 light years from top to bottom. Earlier indications of the bubbles has been found on existing all sky maps in the radio, microwave, and X-ray. The cause of the bubbles is presently unknown, but will likely be researched for years to come.
November 9, 2010
Realms Lives... Again!
SF Scope announces that Realms of Fantasy Magazine has been sold to Damnation Books. According to the article:
Yippee!
"The just-concluded deal will see the December 2010 issue produced in print (as opposed to the previous announcement, which expected it to be an electronic-only final issue). The new owners will begin their tenure with the February 2011 issue, meaning there will be no gap in the bi-monthly magazine's publication schedule. All subscriptions already paid for will be honored."
Yippee!
November 8, 2010
Smart Things
Various bits from around the web. It's amazing what needing to read a county budget is doing for my productivity on small tasks that I've been ignoring for up to several weeks.
Jim Hines on sexual harassment at conventions, particularly by publishing professionals. First he did a bit of background and a problem description. Next he did something about it and created a resource on reporting that harassment. Thank you, Jim.
Lilith Saintcrow on giving yourself permission to write garbage. Nothing like it for getting over perfectionist paralysis.
Victoria Strauss at Writer Beware on reality checks and publishing scams. If it seems too good to be true, it probably is.
Kristin Nelson's top 10 reasons for turning down SF&F query letters. If you're looking for an agent, read this.
Scrivener's Error on the Martha Grimes/Agent lawsuit. Meaty analysis of an important precedent setting lawsuit in the land of author/agent relations. Important reading for the working professional.
Alma Alexander at SFNovelists on Impostor Syndrome. I've never experienced this, but it's an absolutely endemic malady of the writer breed.
Jim Hines on sexual harassment at conventions, particularly by publishing professionals. First he did a bit of background and a problem description. Next he did something about it and created a resource on reporting that harassment. Thank you, Jim.
Lilith Saintcrow on giving yourself permission to write garbage. Nothing like it for getting over perfectionist paralysis.
Victoria Strauss at Writer Beware on reality checks and publishing scams. If it seems too good to be true, it probably is.
Kristin Nelson's top 10 reasons for turning down SF&F query letters. If you're looking for an agent, read this.
Scrivener's Error on the Martha Grimes/Agent lawsuit. Meaty analysis of an important precedent setting lawsuit in the land of author/agent relations. Important reading for the working professional.
Alma Alexander at SFNovelists on Impostor Syndrome. I've never experienced this, but it's an absolutely endemic malady of the writer breed.
November 7, 2010
Writing
There is something demented about the way I write. I have three stories in the last stages of revision and a partly finished story, which I need to get back to; and I have the sequel to Ring of Swords, which I really, really need to finish revising.
So I have just started two new stories.
I think I definitely belong to the class of writers who like the first draft and don't like revising.
So I have just started two new stories.
I think I definitely belong to the class of writers who like the first draft and don't like revising.
NASA and Hubble Strike Again!
A fantastic jumble of young blue star clusters, gigantic glowing gas clouds, and imposing dark dust lanes surrounds the central region of the active galaxy Centaurus A. This mosaic of Hubble Space Telescope images taken in blue, green, and red light has been processed to present a natural color picture of this cosmic maelstrom. Infrared images from the Hubble have also shown that hidden at the center of this activity are what seem to be disks of matter spiraling into a black hole with a billion times the mass of the Sun! Centaurus A itself is apparently the result of a collision of two galaxies and the left over debris is steadily being consumed by the black hole. Astronomers believe that such black hole central engines generate the radio, X-ray, and gamma-ray energy radiated by Centaurus A and other active galaxies. But for an active galaxy Centaurus A is close, a mere 10 million light-years away, and is a relatively convenient laboratory for exploring these powerful sources of energy.
Comentary courtesy of NASA.
My comment is, the universe is not a safe place. Most of it is cold and dark and empty, and most of the rest of it is furnaces producing lethal radiation, often in the course of exploding, colliding or cannibalizing neighbors. Not that I'm complaining. It's one heck of a show.
November 5, 2010
Friday Cat Blogging Guy Fawkes Edition
Remember, remember
The 5th of November
Of course I rememberz
Guy Fawkes, why do you ask?
Wait, back up. When did it stop being July?
The 5th of November
Of course I rememberz
Guy Fawkes, why do you ask?
Wait, back up. When did it stop being July?
Kelly McCullough's Blog
- Kelly McCullough's profile
- 369 followers
Kelly McCullough isn't a Goodreads Author
(yet),
but they
do have a blog,
so here are some recent posts imported from
their feed.
