Kyell Gold's Blog, page 14

A Decade of Writing

 

Volle came out in January of 2005, and this is a little late, but I was thinking today about what’s happened in the ten years since then. The above is a nice summary of my productivity during that time, though not an exhaustive list–there are things I’ve published under my other name, and short stories published that aren’t represented here (I’m in at least one other FANG), not to mention over a dozen conbooks (seven years of TFF; three years of RF; EF and Furry Migration 2014; ConFuzzled 2013; Gaylaxicon and Oklacon 2012; Camp Feral 2009, probably more I’m forgetting about–I really should compile them all into a collection sometime) and the online novel “Camouflage.” But this shelf isn’t all that shabby, and looking over it, there’s nothing I’m not proud of still.

Now to get back to work on the next ten years…

BLFC Bound!

It is looking more likely (like in the 90% range) that Kit and I will be attending BLFC next weekend in some capacity. We will likely be lurking about the dealer’s room (keep an eye on my Twitter and on @RoomPartyGame as well) or otherwise around the con. I will try to set up a time for a signing and will tweet about it, so again, keep an eye out there. Generally I have my pens with me so if you run into me and I’m not in the middle of something (like a meal), feel free to ask me if I have time to sign a book or two.

See y’all in Reno! I’ve heard a lot about BLFC and am excited to go for the first time!

Judicial “Activism”

activism. “the doctrine or practice of vigorous action or involvement as a meansof achieving political or other goals, sometimes by demonstrations,protests, etc.” —dictionary.com

“Judicial activism” has become a common phrase used to describe the handing down of progressive decisions from courts. It’s specifically coming back into play, even from the progressive side, with the gay marriage arguments being heard by the Supreme Court at this moment. But it’s another example of distortion through language, of pushing a loaded phrase into common parlance so that even those who don’t agree with it in principle end up using it, and the connotations of the phrase follow it around.

The definition above shows just how loaded, and how wrong in context, the phrase is. Three big points here:

* “Vigorous action or involvement.” People who are actually activists are people who take action, who organize campaigns or participate in protests. There are activist groups and organizations who are specifically organized to take action toward specific goals. But judges can only rule on the cases that are brought before them, and the court is not organized to take action toward goals (more on this later). So the term “activist” is inaccurate as applied to a judge handing down a ruling in the course of his or her job. It’s deliberately inaccurate, though, because the use implies that the judge has done something improper and outside the bounds of his job. It’s only being applied to gay marriage rulings, though; the “Citizens United” ruling was as revolutionary as any of the gay marriage rulings (though in a different realm), but rarely is that referred to a “judicial activism.”

* “political or other goals.” Impartiality is one of the most important aspects of our court system. Calling these rulings “activism” carries with it the connotation of political action, which erodes our faith in their impartiality. Again, note that this label is only applied to certain rulings with which these people disagree. They often don’t examine the actual legal reasonings leading to the ruling. All they know is that they don’t agree with it, so they do whatever they can to make it seem less legitimate.

* The word “activist” also leads us to images of violent protestors, people who are willing to break the law for what they believe in. Again, this association is meant to belittle the judges, to imply that they’re putting their cause ahead of their job.

So do me a favor. When you talk about gay marriage rulings, don’t call it “judicial activism,” even if you’re for it. Call it “social progress.” Those words are accurate and meaningful.

How To Make Other People Like What You Like (Spoiler: You Can’t)

It’s great to be a fan, to have something you love so much you want to tell other people about it, something you can’t wait for the next book or next episode or next installment or next album of. But being the social creatures that we are, it’s natural that we want to share that love with the people around us and in our community, and sometimes it can be frustrating when they don’t seem to want to listen.

I’m not talking about your friend who kind of chuckles when you play your Nicki Minaj album, the one who inexplicably loves those cheesy classic horror films. I mean more when you’re invested in a community and the things you like in that community aren’t what the majority of people gravitate toward.

If you’re following the news from SF fandom these days you probably have an idea of where I’m going, but I don’t want to get embroiled in all of that. (If you don’t, search for “sad puppies hugo awards” on the Internet and you will have enough to read for days.) So I’m going to keep it abstract, but you can imagine something like “I like science fiction in the furry community but everyone just wants to read romance/relationship stories!” or “I like romance/relationship stories in the science fiction and fantasy fandom but everyone just wants stories with amazing settings!” Or even “There are these amazing masks in the furry fandom but everyone just wants fursuits!” Stuff like that.

So here’s the main thing, and the thing that seems to escape a lot of people (not my fans, of course, because you are all kind and understanding): everyone has the right to like whatever they want, and those likes will not necessarily align with yours. There you go. It is one of the trials of being a fan that not everyone will share your fandom. It can be frustrating when you’re in a community of people who seem like they should enjoy (science fiction/romance/masks) but remain obdurately ignorant or unappreciative. It can be tempting in those situations to ascribe other motives to those likes.

“People only like romance stories because of the porn.”

“People only like those fursuits because the owners are all over social media.”

“People only like this thing because someone popular told them to like it.”

And maybe there’s a little bit of truth to those things. But those are still their decisions to make.

I took a marketing class in college in which the professor explained to us that objectively, Pepsi tastes better than Coke. He got lots of strong arguments from Coke-preferrers in the class (including me), but pointed out that scientifically, in taste tests where people didn’t know the brand of cola, they tended to prefer Pepsi. When they knew the brands ahead of time, they preferred Coke*. This is the entire reason Coke changed its formula in the eighties: because people objectively did not like the taste of their cola as much.

* (Now, there are a lot of mitigating factors here, among them that Pepsi’s sweeter flavor works well on a first taste but often gets cloying over a full can; also I participated in a blind taste test run by a friend last year and my favorite of the colas was Coke Zero, so these things don’t always work.)

And yet, Coke was and remains the most popular cola brand. This is probably somewhat frustrating to Pepsi executives, though Pepsi is doing very well so they’re probably not all that broken up over it. But Coke’s marketing makes their brand so desirable that people enjoy drinking Coke more than Pepsi, and when they know the brand, to them, it tastes better.

That does not mean that those people are stupid for liking Coke. It does not mean that you can convert them to Pepsi by waving test results in their faces and saying it tastes better–as evidenced by the people in my class objecting to being told their favorite soda doesn’t taste as good. Because–are you ready for this point again?–it is their choice what to like.

In fandoms, the choices aren’t always as clear-cut as soda brands (if slight variations on the sweetness level in a cola soft drink is clear-cut). But the main point remains: sometimes you’ll be lucky enough that the thing you like is beloved by a lot of your community*. Sometimes you’ll just have a little group of your friends to discuss it with. There’s always that push to convert other people, and you absolutely, absolutely should talk in positive terms about the things you like. Be an evangelist for furry SF or romantic SF or masks or Pepsi or whatever you like.

*I have been extremely fortunate in finding a passionate fanbase, one which was motivated to vote in popular awards, and in being welcomed at most furry conventions I attend. I love all you guys.

Just don’t get negative about the thing you don’t like that everyone else does. Find new and creative ways to show off what’s great about your thing while allowing that other people like their things (and hey, try the things they like once in a while, too). Don’t press people to love what you love; lead them to the Pepsi but don’t get mad if they don’t drink.

“Over Time” update

“Over Time” is being read by my writing group now and I’m starting to think about what to do for the release at Further Confusion 2016. Dev and Lee have been pretty important to me over the last, well, decade, and at the very least I’d like to have a release party. What else do you think we could do there? Costume contest? Music? Kit and I will try to have the jerseys available so you can all order and wear them there, and maybe we’ll think up some other little things to celebrate the end of the series (but NOT, as I have said, the last work with those characters).

Do you guys have any ideas?

In The Anna: Thoughts

So Indiana.

Here, in no particular order, are a few thoughts of mine on the law (SB 101, the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” that will supposedly enable businesses to discriminate against LGBT individuals), the people attacking it, the people defending it, the people explaining it, and furries.

First of all, if you haven’t read one of the excellent legal analyses of the law, you should do that. Many of them are not even very long! Here is a good one.

The short version: Indiana’s law is different for two big reasons. One, most other RFRA-like laws are worded to protect individuals against government policies. SB 101 specifically enumerates corporations and for-profit businesses as people and specifies that they may seek remedy against other individuals. Two, most other states with these laws also have a state-wide anti-discrimination law protecting sexual orientation and/or gender identity; while the city of Indianapolis does, the state of Indiana does not (this is the remedy called for by the Indianapolis Star on Tuesday: to pass this law to basically take the teeth out of SB 101).

The initial reaction to the law from its opponents (i.e. 90% of the Internet) was somewhat overblown (surprise, Internet!), not in the reach of the law, but in the probable future application of it. Given the way the law is applied and the general expense of bringing suit, it’s unlikely that a wave of discrimination would have swept the state. However, I don’t believe that the reaction was all that extreme because the interpretation being put on the law by its backers, specifically some of the people who created it, was exactly that broad, and people who want to engage in that kind of discrimination would have taken away the impression that they were now allowed to. So I think that, content of the law aside, the tone of its passage that was created by the legislators definitely created the hostile atmosphere that people responded to.

And the response. Wow. I gotta say, every time something shitty like this happens, I am heartened by the breadth of response to it. In this case, a lot of religious people, businesses, and groups spoke up to make sure that we heard that most Christians are loving, tolerant people who are sick and tired of this fundamentalist minority representing their entire group. The same could be said of the people of Indiana. I’ve spent a few weeks in Indiana–Indianapolis mostly–and everyone I met there was unfailingly nice in that great midwestern way. If you missed the Indianapolis Star’s Tuesday front page, it was beautiful: a black square with three huge words, top to bottom: FIX. THIS. NOW. Go look at it.

A lot of people are talking about boycotting Indiana. GenCon famously is looking at other sites; the NCAA is going to “look closely” at events there; people are canceling business trips and so on (including the city of Seattle, the state of Washington, Salesforce, and many more, a heartening–see previous paragraph–list). There have been other people who have said that when they visit Indiana they are only going to patronize businesses with “We reserve the right to serve everyone” signs. Some people are concerned that boycotts of Indiana will harm those businesses that aren’t discriminatory (well, yes).

So the question is whether you think an economic boycott is the right way to fight something like this. If you do, then yeah, it’s going to hurt everyone in the state, not just the people you’re targeting. If you think you are going to change the minds of the politicians with an economic impact, then the only real option is not to visit the state. If they count up tourist dollars to see the impact of the legislation (itself a doubtful proposition, see below), the dollars don’t come in bins marked “tolerant” and “discriminatory.” You can affect individual businesses in this way, probably, and if you *live* in Indiana, that’s likely your best option.

Personally, I am doubtful that an economic boycott (at least on an individual level) will work. The public threat of one by large businesses, as well as the Internet-wide shaming of the politicians involved, seems to be working much better. One of the reasons I think this is that I can’t imagine how hard it would be to examine economic performance and be able to isolate changes to a factor as specific as this law (as opposed to, say, a change in tax structure that has a quantifiable result). Another reason is that the Internet has a pretty short attention span. This issue has persisted for nearly a week at this point, but that’s because the governor has held TWO news conferences, the mayor of Indianapolis has held a press conference, they’ve both been on TV as the major news programs catch up to the Internet, and so on. The length of time it takes for an economic boycott to work is just too long for people to remain interested. The momentum is here now, and everyone is of the opinion that something needs to be done now.

Another good side effect of all the discussion and boycott threats is that laws in North Carolina, Georgia, and Montana that were under discussion in the legislatures there have quietly been tabled, at least for the moment. A strong show of public opinion really does help, because now, instead of thinking that these laws are a great way to get points with the right-wing fringe voters, politicians are seeing that they actually score really negatively with everyone else.

So the best thing you can do is actually keep up with the issue, and keep talking about it. Don’t let the Indiana state legislature do nothing until everyone moves on to the next crisis. If you’re going to Indianapolis, you’re probably okay because they have an anti-discrimination law, so don’t feel too bad about spending some money there. On the other hand, if you feel strongly that you don’t want any of your dollars to go to Indiana but you don’t want, say, IndyFurCon to die, then send them money directly. And if your state is considering a law like this, write to your representatives. Let them know how you feel. That still makes a difference.

Divisions Audiobook On Sale!

http://www.audible.com/pd/Fiction/Div...

This is pretty cool for a couple reasons, beyond just “hey, I have another audiobook for sale this month.” Those of you who follow my updates (thank you!) will know the long saga of trying to get this book online. ACX changed their standards for recordings in between Isolation Play and our first attempt to get Divisions up, and this resulted in a frustrating back-and-forth with their QA team that ultimately resulted in poor Savrin having to read the entire book over again (and later, due to a hard drive crash, he had to read part of it for a third time–“I like your writing,” he told me earlier this year, “but I don’t want to read it aloud four times.” I don’t blame him.). Our second try (really more like third or fourth because we tried twice with the first recording), months later, also resulted in the recording being rejected. Finally we consulted our audio expert, B-Hop, who had fortunately helped someone else get a recording out to ACX just recently and so was familiar with their standards.

And so not only do we have a new audiobook up for your listening pleasure, but Savrin can get started on Uncovered now with a lot more confidence.

As always, your reviews and ratings are much appreciated! Thanks for your patience, and I hope you’ll enjoy Divisions.

Coming To Seattle!

Hey you guys. I’ll be at Emerald City Comic Con in the Washington State Convention Center in downtown Seattle in a week and a half. If you’re going, the Sofawolf table will have limited quantities of my books and a bunch of Sofawolf comics, and there are a bunch of other cool things at the con, including a lot of furry artists (and I believe Erika Moen will be there with a copy of the “Oh Joy Sex Toy” book that has the comic I did with Keovi in it).

Would be happy to see any furries who’d like to come by and say hi to us!

Waterways Audiobook For Sale

tl;dr: http://www.audible.com/pd/Teens/Water...

It was sometime in 2011, around February if I recall, that a friend of mine offered to record Waterways. He wanted to try out podcast/story narration and was going to have a chunk of time during which he would be able to record things. I had no plans for audiobooks at the time nor any means to distribute them, so I said sure, figuring that once we had the recording we could figure out what to do with it, and if nothing happened then I wasn’t losing anything.

Nothing did happen (you know this already); time and energy always show up in smaller quantities than we suspect. Didn’t matter; we’re still friends (no hard feelings if you’re reading this, honestly).

Sometime in 2012 or thereabouts, Amazon and Audible launched ACX, a platform that paired authors with narrators. I asked my friend if he’d mind if I took the book to ACX and he said no, he was sorry he hadn’t done anything on it and I should go ahead. So I found a narrator who’d done erotica and had a good voice, contacted him, asked if he was interested, and he said he was. I sent him the book and we were off and running.

Only deadlines kept slipping. I’d wait for weeks past the deadline and then e-mail him, and days later I would get a note back. His regular job was very busy. His computer had crashed and he’d lost the manuscript (this happened twice). Finally, early in 2013, I sent him a note and said that if he wasn’t going to do it, no worries, I understand life gets busy, but he should tell me so I could find another narrator. He wrote back and said this would be best.

In the meantime, Savrin’s recordings of Out of Position and Isolation Play were moving along, doing well. I recorded Bridges and posted that, and I’d found a narrator to do Green Fairy who was talented and professional. So partly because I had other projects to do and partly because I was just tired of throwing Waterways at people, I let it sit until about June.

Then Kit urged me to try again, and I found a narrator who’d done work for one of my friends. I contacted him and asked if he had any interest in Waterways, and he replied enthusiastically. We got the contracts done and were under way again.

And again, long periods of silence. From what Rob’s told me, he moved several times, lost his studio space, and suffered numerous other personal disruptions. When he did contact me, though, he promised me earnestly that he would finish it (I believe he stopped just short of saying, “If it kills me”).

Finally, in January of this year, I got the word that the book was done. I downloaded the audio files and listened to them, and I have to say that Rob sounds great. Since finishing the book, he has turned around changes literally in hours. I sent him back a bunch of editing feedback; a new version was ready the next day. We submitted to ACX and they came back with technical issues; Rob fixed them in hours.

And now, finally, four years after I first thought of Waterways being an audiobook, it is one. You can see it right here. You can listen to a sample or buy it. As always, if you get a new Audible membership and mine is one of the first books you get, Rob and I share a bonus. But what I would love for you to do, even if you’re already an Audible member, is leave a review. Leaving a review helps the rest of the world find this book and gives first-time readers or listeners confidence that they’re getting a good story read well.

I know a lot of you love Waterways, and it will be hard for anyone to do justice to the voices you’ve given to Kory and Samaki, but I think Rob did a terrific job. I hope you like it. I think it’s worth the wait.

Good News, Everyone!

The audiobook of Waterways will shortly be available for purchase on Audible/Amazon/iTunes.

That is all. But I think it’s enough.

(I will OF COURSE tweet/post again when it goes live.)