Nicola Griffith's Blog, page 108
December 21, 2012
Annual Christmas tradition: blowing up the tree
In what has become an annual tradition at the Griffith-Eskridge household, Kelley loving selects a tree and drags it home.
We decorate it. That is, Kelley does most of the work while I half watch something familiar on TV--this year, a Buffy the Vampire Slayer ep ("Prophecy Girl")--and half watch the progress through the glass door that separates the TV room from the living room.
We admire it for a while.
Then I blow it up.
I'm definitely beginning to get into the holiday/apocalypse spirit. How about you?
We decorate it. That is, Kelley does most of the work while I half watch something familiar on TV--this year, a Buffy the Vampire Slayer ep ("Prophecy Girl")--and half watch the progress through the glass door that separates the TV room from the living room.
We admire it for a while.
Then I blow it up.I'm definitely beginning to get into the holiday/apocalypse spirit. How about you?
December 17, 2012
My portrait is finished
Riva Lehrer's portrait of me is finished (for a long, ruminative explanation of the project, read this post). Unframed, it measures 32 x 44 inches. Its formal title is MIRROR SHARDS: NICOLA/SNOW LEOPARD.
Riva sent me some snaps. Professional photos and, with luck, some video to follow. I'm really looking forward to the video; it'll be easier to see how three-dimensional the whole thing is. There are three layers. Take a look:
I don't know what kind of frame it will have (ETA, from Riva: "The frame will be a simple dark grey painted oak, 3" deep to accommodate the pins") or what paper Riva used but I know there are at least three kinds, and special pins, and feathers...
At some point next year, if all goes well, we hope to do an event together in Chicago and have the portrait on show. I've no idea of details. Maybe I'll read from Hild; maybe it will be just me and Riva talking about the picture and the process, about how it is for an artist from one medium to collaborate with an artist from another. (A bit like working with someone from another dimension: really fucking interesting.) Whatever we decide--whoever chooses to fund/host the event--I can pretty much guarantee there will be Champagne. Stay tuned.
I don't know if Riva has a buyer yet (I'm doing this just for the sheer curiosity of seeing myself through another artist's eyes). So if you're interested, get in touch.
Meanwhile, here are the snaps. Enjoy.
Riva sent me some snaps. Professional photos and, with luck, some video to follow. I'm really looking forward to the video; it'll be easier to see how three-dimensional the whole thing is. There are three layers. Take a look:
I don't know what kind of frame it will have (ETA, from Riva: "The frame will be a simple dark grey painted oak, 3" deep to accommodate the pins") or what paper Riva used but I know there are at least three kinds, and special pins, and feathers...At some point next year, if all goes well, we hope to do an event together in Chicago and have the portrait on show. I've no idea of details. Maybe I'll read from Hild; maybe it will be just me and Riva talking about the picture and the process, about how it is for an artist from one medium to collaborate with an artist from another. (A bit like working with someone from another dimension: really fucking interesting.) Whatever we decide--whoever chooses to fund/host the event--I can pretty much guarantee there will be Champagne. Stay tuned.
I don't know if Riva has a buyer yet (I'm doing this just for the sheer curiosity of seeing myself through another artist's eyes). So if you're interested, get in touch.
Meanwhile, here are the snaps. Enjoy.
December 11, 2012
Love, life, and Hild
Yesterday I finished the sixth draft of
Hild
. The manuscript, excluding ephemera, weighs in at 1002 pages: 207,333 words.
In the next six days I'll be giving it one more smooth, things like changing POV on a couple of small scenes, restructuring one sequence, sharpening a moment here and there. Then I'll write the acknowledgements.
But not today. It's our anniversary. Twenty-three years ago today I moved to this country to live with Kelley. We will be having a selfish, satisfying and utterly sinful twenty-four hours.
I'd wish the same for you but, hey, I bet you can't match what we have planned...
In the next six days I'll be giving it one more smooth, things like changing POV on a couple of small scenes, restructuring one sequence, sharpening a moment here and there. Then I'll write the acknowledgements.
But not today. It's our anniversary. Twenty-three years ago today I moved to this country to live with Kelley. We will be having a selfish, satisfying and utterly sinful twenty-four hours.
I'd wish the same for you but, hey, I bet you can't match what we have planned...
December 8, 2012
What the SCOTUS announcement means for marriage equality
Last month I wrote:
In the Proposition 8 case (more properly known as Hollingsworth v Perry), some commentatators think that the Court has five options regarding its ruling, ranging from a decision that affects only two counties of California (which, of course, would eventually affect the entire state) to eight states (those that currently have 'everything but marriage' domestic partnership for same-sex couples). It's a complicated legal situation. For a nicely laid-out argument, see the SCOTUS blog.
The New York Times has a simpler, clearer overview of the Court's choices here. If I had to guess, I'd say that the court will strike down Section Three of DOMA and that from next June, those of us who live in states where marriage is legal will have full access to the rights and privileges of marriage. In other words, same-sex couples would have access to the tax, immigration, and social security rules governing other married couples.
If that happens, then at some point some lesbian or gay couple in a state like Mississippi will sue to get married, their case (which will be a challenge to other sections of DOMA) will creep towards the Supreme Court, and eventually we'll get a Loving v. Virginia-like ruling that will make it illegal in this country to forbid same-sex marriage in any state.
Many people believe I'm a crackpot, hopelessly optimistic. But that's how I read the evidence. As I've said before, though, I'm not remotely qualified to pose as an expert, so go read about it and make up your own minds.
In all likelihood, the case SCOTUS will take up will either be the Prop 8 case, or that of Edie Windsor, the 83-yr old lesbian widow whose wife died in 2009. If it were my choice, it would be the latter. And, indeed, the Department of Justice has asked the supreme court to prioritise the Edie Winsor case... I think this will happen very, very soon--perhaps early next year.Today I am delighted because the Supreme Court has decided to hear both cases. They will hear oral argument early next year (most likely March) with a decision probably in late June.
In the Proposition 8 case (more properly known as Hollingsworth v Perry), some commentatators think that the Court has five options regarding its ruling, ranging from a decision that affects only two counties of California (which, of course, would eventually affect the entire state) to eight states (those that currently have 'everything but marriage' domestic partnership for same-sex couples). It's a complicated legal situation. For a nicely laid-out argument, see the SCOTUS blog.
The New York Times has a simpler, clearer overview of the Court's choices here. If I had to guess, I'd say that the court will strike down Section Three of DOMA and that from next June, those of us who live in states where marriage is legal will have full access to the rights and privileges of marriage. In other words, same-sex couples would have access to the tax, immigration, and social security rules governing other married couples.
If that happens, then at some point some lesbian or gay couple in a state like Mississippi will sue to get married, their case (which will be a challenge to other sections of DOMA) will creep towards the Supreme Court, and eventually we'll get a Loving v. Virginia-like ruling that will make it illegal in this country to forbid same-sex marriage in any state.
Many people believe I'm a crackpot, hopelessly optimistic. But that's how I read the evidence. As I've said before, though, I'm not remotely qualified to pose as an expert, so go read about it and make up your own minds.
December 6, 2012
New Star Trek teaser trailer
I mostly don't bother seeing movies in the theatre anymore, but this I will see. I will be there opening week. Enjoy.
November 28, 2012
Me doing a cover of "My Girl is Queen of the Savages" on ukulele
Yesterday was the 13-week anniversary of getting Jeepster: she is a quarter of a year old. To celebrate, I'd meant to record a beautifully rehearsed bit of...something. But because I wasn't sure what--though I was pondering both "Hallelujah" and "Bird on a Wire"--I got around to neither.
But then I did a tweet, around 5 pm, saying, Hey, I was going to do this thing, but didn't, so any requests? And Alyx Dellamonica said, Do "My Girl is Queen of the Savages!" And I said, Never fucking heard of it! But then I went to YouTube and listened to it, and it seemed easy enough. So I thought, Ah, what the fuck, sat down, ran through it a couple of times, and recorded it on my phone.
From hearing the name of the song for the first time to posting my cover version: about 90 minutes (maybe 2 hrs, it's hard to figure out, exactly). It's a wee bit out of my range--a bit high--but hey, sometimes life is all about taking things on the volley. It's less than two minutes. Enjoy.
November 26, 2012
Do not sent naked pictures to your favourite writer
I sometimes accept invitations from readers to meet for coffee or a drink. Sometimes these readers travel for the purpose. Sometimes they're long-time readers who, for a variety of reasons, have just moved to the area and are brave and think, Ah, fuck it, I'm going to try meet one of the people I know for sure lives here!
Each invitation is a leap of faith. So is my acceptance. But while I have occasionally wished I'd said no--and can only imagine the same is true for the other party--frankly, this is rare. Mostly I delight in these conversations with readers; they tend to be smart, and kind, interested and interesting; fine human being. We rarely spend much time talking about me or my work. What I have fun with is finding out about them, where and how they live, how they feel, what they think, what makes them tick. Sometimes we go way, way beyond the time allotted--which is anywhere from thirty minutes to four hours depending on my previous guesstimate of the fun quotient. (As a rule of thumb, if you're just from the other side of the city, you get coffee; if you've driven a reasonable distance, it's lunch; if you've flown in, it's dinner.) Sometimes, yes, it's true, I'd have to characterise the meeting as more tedium than fun--but I can always escape early with a "Gosh, is that the time?" and a reference to the exigencies (completely true) of work. But the occasional an hour or so lost to experiment is more than made up for by the number of fine people I've met this way--a couple of whom I now count as true friends.
A certain percentage of emails from readers demand refusal but most of the time I accept. Every now and again, though, I get a vibe from an email, something I can't quite put my finger on, and I dither.
Our unconscious mind is expert: it can spot weirdness even when consciously we're not paying attention. And I admit, I haven't been paying much attention to the world the last little while: rewriting Hild means living in the seventh century; living in the seventh century demands the majority of my processing power.
Yesterday I was glad I had dithered over one particular invitation. And today I'm moved to made a Public Service Announcement:
DO NOT SEND NAKED PICTURES OF YOURSELF TO A WRITER YOU WANT TO MAKE FRIENDS WITH.
That's all.
Each invitation is a leap of faith. So is my acceptance. But while I have occasionally wished I'd said no--and can only imagine the same is true for the other party--frankly, this is rare. Mostly I delight in these conversations with readers; they tend to be smart, and kind, interested and interesting; fine human being. We rarely spend much time talking about me or my work. What I have fun with is finding out about them, where and how they live, how they feel, what they think, what makes them tick. Sometimes we go way, way beyond the time allotted--which is anywhere from thirty minutes to four hours depending on my previous guesstimate of the fun quotient. (As a rule of thumb, if you're just from the other side of the city, you get coffee; if you've driven a reasonable distance, it's lunch; if you've flown in, it's dinner.) Sometimes, yes, it's true, I'd have to characterise the meeting as more tedium than fun--but I can always escape early with a "Gosh, is that the time?" and a reference to the exigencies (completely true) of work. But the occasional an hour or so lost to experiment is more than made up for by the number of fine people I've met this way--a couple of whom I now count as true friends.
A certain percentage of emails from readers demand refusal but most of the time I accept. Every now and again, though, I get a vibe from an email, something I can't quite put my finger on, and I dither.
Our unconscious mind is expert: it can spot weirdness even when consciously we're not paying attention. And I admit, I haven't been paying much attention to the world the last little while: rewriting Hild means living in the seventh century; living in the seventh century demands the majority of my processing power.
Yesterday I was glad I had dithered over one particular invitation. And today I'm moved to made a Public Service Announcement:
DO NOT SEND NAKED PICTURES OF YOURSELF TO A WRITER YOU WANT TO MAKE FRIENDS WITH.
That's all.
November 21, 2012
Thanksgiving 2012
Short and simple this year.
I am thankful for people. Friends, family, readers, neighbours, and colleagues have made my year better. Your kindness, generosity (in a myriad ways) and patience have helped turn an occasionally humdrum and stressful existence into an exhilarating life.
I'm lucky. I'm grateful. Thank you. Now let's go eat PIE!
I am thankful for people. Friends, family, readers, neighbours, and colleagues have made my year better. Your kindness, generosity (in a myriad ways) and patience have helped turn an occasionally humdrum and stressful existence into an exhilarating life.
I'm lucky. I'm grateful. Thank you. Now let's go eat PIE!
November 20, 2012
Same-sex marriage in the US is inevitable
Same-sex marriages will begin in Washington State on December 9, 2012.
So now there are nine states--Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, and Vermont--plus the District of Columbia, the Coquille Indian Tribe, and the Suquamish tribe, where same-sex marriage is legal. In California, of course, some couples who married are still married but there won't be any more, thanks to Proposition 8, until the Supreme Court of the United States makes some decisions.
And SCOTUS will be making some important choices on the matter very, very soon. Today At the end of the month (was November 20, but just postponed to November 30), the justices meet in private session to decide whether/when to hear any of the six ten queer rights cases that have been brought before them: four eight about the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and its constitutionality, one about lesbian and gay rights (specifically health care) in Arizona, and one about Proposition 8*.
If the court doesn't take up one of these cases I will eat my ukulele chord book.
I am excited about this. (Not about the chord book--though perhaps consuming it whole would give me superpowers, the instant ability to play any chord, for which my neighbours would no doubt be most grateful...) In all likelihood, the case SCOTUS will take up will either be the Prop 8 case, or that of Edie Windsor, the 83-yr old lesbian widow whose wife died in 2009. If it were my choice, it would be the latter. And, indeed, the Department of Justice has asked the supreme court to prioritise the Edie Winsor case.
Here's the interesting thing: in this last election, four out of the four states in which the electorate expressed an opinion on lesbian and gay rights at the state level voted in favour. SCOTUS will be influenced by this: their job, when it comes right down to it, is to obey the will of the people.
It's my belief and hope that, following recent precedent set by various circuit courts of appeal, SCOTUS will apply 'heightened scrutiny' to lesbians and gay men as a class. And that they will, as in the case of Loving v. Virginia, the case that struck down anti-miscegenation laws, find simply that states' rights are secondary to the rights set out in the Fourteenth Amendment, those of equal protection and due process:
It's my belief that SCOTUS will rule in favour of marriage equality. I think they might rule by a majority as high as 6-3. (Many of the Appeals Court rulings have opinions worded very carefully--and, in my opinion, aimed squarely at Justice Kennedy, the swing voter. And then there's Chief Justice Roberts' recent opinion on Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), that is, the health-care law.) I think this will happen very, very soon--perhaps early next year.
However, you should bear in mind that I'm most definitely not an expert and, compared to most people, I'm wildly optimistic. I had dinner the other day with a board member of a prominent LGBT legal rights organisation. She was of the opinion same-sex marriage would be legal on the federal level "in the next ten years." I disagreed. I said: "2014." So, hey, let me repeat: I'm not an expert. But I just can't imagine, I really can't, how this isn't going to happen very, very soon.
Legally, socially, culturally, same-sex marriage is inevitable.
* Read this for an overview of the court situation regarding marriage equality.
So now there are nine states--Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, and Vermont--plus the District of Columbia, the Coquille Indian Tribe, and the Suquamish tribe, where same-sex marriage is legal. In California, of course, some couples who married are still married but there won't be any more, thanks to Proposition 8, until the Supreme Court of the United States makes some decisions.
And SCOTUS will be making some important choices on the matter very, very soon. Today At the end of the month (was November 20, but just postponed to November 30), the justices meet in private session to decide whether/when to hear any of the six ten queer rights cases that have been brought before them: four eight about the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and its constitutionality, one about lesbian and gay rights (specifically health care) in Arizona, and one about Proposition 8*.
If the court doesn't take up one of these cases I will eat my ukulele chord book.
I am excited about this. (Not about the chord book--though perhaps consuming it whole would give me superpowers, the instant ability to play any chord, for which my neighbours would no doubt be most grateful...) In all likelihood, the case SCOTUS will take up will either be the Prop 8 case, or that of Edie Windsor, the 83-yr old lesbian widow whose wife died in 2009. If it were my choice, it would be the latter. And, indeed, the Department of Justice has asked the supreme court to prioritise the Edie Winsor case.
Here's the interesting thing: in this last election, four out of the four states in which the electorate expressed an opinion on lesbian and gay rights at the state level voted in favour. SCOTUS will be influenced by this: their job, when it comes right down to it, is to obey the will of the people.
It's my belief and hope that, following recent precedent set by various circuit courts of appeal, SCOTUS will apply 'heightened scrutiny' to lesbians and gay men as a class. And that they will, as in the case of Loving v. Virginia, the case that struck down anti-miscegenation laws, find simply that states' rights are secondary to the rights set out in the Fourteenth Amendment, those of equal protection and due process:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.Marriage, the Supreme Court has been saying since the 1920s--in a variety of ways--should not be interfered with by any kind of government, local or federal; it is the right of every citizen to marry whom they wish. This applies to race, to ethnicity, to age (within certain agreed-upon bounds) and soon--if I'm right--to sex.
It's my belief that SCOTUS will rule in favour of marriage equality. I think they might rule by a majority as high as 6-3. (Many of the Appeals Court rulings have opinions worded very carefully--and, in my opinion, aimed squarely at Justice Kennedy, the swing voter. And then there's Chief Justice Roberts' recent opinion on Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), that is, the health-care law.) I think this will happen very, very soon--perhaps early next year.
However, you should bear in mind that I'm most definitely not an expert and, compared to most people, I'm wildly optimistic. I had dinner the other day with a board member of a prominent LGBT legal rights organisation. She was of the opinion same-sex marriage would be legal on the federal level "in the next ten years." I disagreed. I said: "2014." So, hey, let me repeat: I'm not an expert. But I just can't imagine, I really can't, how this isn't going to happen very, very soon.
Legally, socially, culturally, same-sex marriage is inevitable.
* Read this for an overview of the court situation regarding marriage equality.
November 15, 2012
Masters of the misty morning
.JPG)
Sometimes I feel like this morning's Steller's Jay: captain of my day. Sometimes more like the squirrel: hurry, hurry, so much to be done!But I love the mist. Love autumn. I just want to wander about in it. But there's work to do--thrilling work. So that's my day, followed by dinner out with friends.
I wish the same for you.
