Agent Nephele Tempest posted about what makes a book "unputdownable" for readers (and agents).

( Thoughts about her advice and writing advice in general under the cut. )

The most wrong cover I have seen all year.. How does she even fit in her suit with boobs like that. And I think the left one is bigger than the right. And that seatbelt is not even remotely helpful. That wouldn't save you in a crash at all, and would probably leave a lot of men unable to produce children if they got in the slightest fender bender. But hey, anything to draw attention to your crotch, right?

I try to imagine what life on that world is like.

"Gah! Our population is shrinking! Nobody can produce children, it's an epidemic!"

"Uh, have you tried not restraining people in vehicles by their genitals?"

"But...but...the crotch restraint is central to our designs!"

"On the other hand, maybe this is a blessing in disguise."


2. There are no good, powerful queens in fantasy. Mary Robinette Kowal examined several movies for a disturbing trend in queens that are either very good, but essentially powerless or very powerful but essentially evil. She only looks at a few movies, but I think she does have a valid point, though I think novels and other media are doing a better job. One thing that frustrated me about Stardust was that no woman in that movie with any kind of power was remotely good. All the witches who had any kind of agency were completely wicked and all the good women were slaves and captives who's lives were basically about serving men. Even Yvaine, who's a freaking CELESTIAL POWER gets downgraded to glowy love interest who does nothing but help Tristan and then gets downgraded to being a queen who sits there and does nothing until Tristan dies, at which point she assures his immortality by taking him to the stars. Because god forbid she should go on without him. God forbid she should have any other power besides radiating at Tristan (and shouldn't that have given him cancer or something with all the radiation?).

I've been told I think too much, and I believe it is true. Because I have some burning questions concerning the scientific nature of the whammy* the supernatural.

For instance, if vampires don't breathe, how do they speak?

What bits of the sunlight are so bad for vampires? Could they hop in a tanning bed and be just fine? Is the UV rays, the light in general?

After vampires drink blood, where does it go? If it doesn't go anywhere wouldn't they get bloated like a tick? Do they metabolize it? The implications of this are both staggering and disgusting. Somewhere in my head, there's a story that starts with the line: "He pissed blood every day".

If you're a werewolf and you lose an organ as an animal that you don't possess in human form, does it affect you?

What if you ate something that was poisonous to you as a human, but not as an animal or vice versa. Canines are well documented for their inability to eat chocolate and birds can eat holly berries, but humans can't. Do the contents of your stomach remain constant? Would you kill yourself by eating a huge thing of chocolate just before a full moon?

Not to mention questions of what happens if a werewolf/shapeshifter is pregnant. Especially if they shapeshift into something that's not a mammal.

Can you retain language and consciousness as an animal? Animal brains are often very different in shape, size, and structure from ours. Even close primate relatives don't have our exact brain make up. There are areas of the human brain or structures that don't exist in other creatures. If you do become a complete animal in your animal form, where do your human consciousness and brain patterns go?

Yep. I definitely think too much. And as I'm nearing the end of "Dead Witch Walking", I get the distinct impression that finishing it will hurt less if I stopped confusing the situation with facts.


* This is funnier if you have seen X-Files and remember "Pusher".

When I become a professional, I will remind myself not to berate my blog/LJ readers for not commenting enough when I post on a certain topic. Because that seems like a terrible way to Make Friends and Influence People. It could be that people don't respond because they have nothing to say or people were busy with their lives (you mean people don't spend all day reading your blog? the hell you say!) or because what you wrote on the topic isn't terribly interesting or comment-worthy.

I just don't know that making someone feel beholden to say they felt sorry for not thanking you enough for spewing a few paragraphs about your job on your blog like every other jerk on the interwebs who posts about their jobs is the way to garner fans or earn respect. Just sayin'.

I'll work on the being more positive/less snarky thing tomorrow.

Until then, have a link about about the romance genre and scholarship. Because it's only trashy unless you got a degree from Harvard. Although the Smart Bitches, Trashy Books gals got a mention and that's always a good thing.

Best quote of the article:

When Tan tells people she reads romance novels and blogs about them, "I can see it in their eyes that their opinion of my intelligence is just being revised downwards."

Today's twist: "I feel embarrassed for them."

Snap.

It's the "Snap" that really makes it work, I feel. Because I agree. You just got schooled, interwebs.

And for the record, I feel the same way. If you think writing, reading, enjoying, or otherwise studying the romance genre makes someone less intelligent, I will be more than happy to give you some evidence upside your head. The knuckle sandwiches are free all day.

I now resolve to post some more light hearted stuff. Starting with this: Awful library books. Personal favorite? Computer Tutor: Atari.

Does anyone else get really nostalgic at the very mention of the word "Atari"?

Since when the hell did aspiring authors become the whipping boys and girls of the writing world? Because apparently it's okay to treat us the way bullies treat high school freshmen. Complete with derisive comments and stereotyped generalization. Because we're not people or anything like that. Not at all.

For instance, did you know that all aspiring writers hate Harry Potter and Twilight? They're jealous and just like to tear down wonderful published authors and their completely flawless works for no good reason. Because there could never be any legitimate criticism of such books. Never.

Not to mention the many agents who apparently regard us in the same way one would regard bubblegum on the bottom of one's shoe. It's so nice to know that dealing with us and our queries and manuscripts is so unpleasant that it is the bane of an agent's existence and makes their lives nearly unbearable.

Sarcasm aside, I'm getting a bit tired of this. What exactly would these folks like me to do? Stop aspiring? Because I refuse to stop trying and I can't get published any faster than I'm trying to. You can't just pop out of the womb with a publishing deal in hand. You have to aspire and write in order to get one. So, to sum up: Fuck you, I'm an anteater aspiring writer.

I hope this doesn't turn into AgentFail/QueryFail Round #2, because honestly, I don't want that because it was vicious and sticky and made a lot of folks look bad - but it seems that on Twitter there is something going around called #pubtips. So far, it seems wank free.

And no, I haven't gone over to the dark side Twitter, I thought I might as well check it out to comb through for any useful bits of information. And wow, does Twitter make it hard to follow a cohesive thread of thought. I can't tell who is saying what or to whom. Replies don't show up near the comment they're made about, rather they show up on the Twitter stream of the person who made the comment.

Also, the fact that a lot of what I'm seeing is people apparently repeating each other (I think RT means re-tweet or something) is also frustrating. Oh, LJ, no matter how many Russian own you, I will always love your linear structure best.

Anyway, my thoughts about the Twitterpation of the internet aside, there are some tips going around.

Some are useful, some are not. Some are down right contradictory.

Rachelle Gardner offers something that might be useful: "You may not want to open your query with STATISTICS unless you're trying to bore me to death.". That seems like something a querying author may want to keep in mind, though I wish the tips were more specific. Why didn't the statistics didn't work? For a fiction query or a cookbook or something, then yeah. But for a nonfiction query, a strong statistic or two may actually help your pitch. I mean, if you're pitching a "How To Get That High Paying Job" book, mentioning the current unemployment/underemployment rates might not hurt. Again, it depends.

Some tips, however, are not so much with the helpfulness. Like willietrekin's suggestion that: writers and authors need to get more involved in publishing. (I think this is a repeat of something Rachelle Gardner said). Uhhh. It would help if you elaborated. Involved how? Reading books? Blogging? Making friends with agents and editors? Going to cons? Getting a job in the publishing business? What, precisely, is your value for "involved".

As a writer, I'd love to know this. If there's something I can do to help my prospects, I'd really love to know. But 140 characters does not seem sufficient.

I'd also love to know how to reconcile "don't chase trends/write what you love" with "profit matters" - which both can be found if you cruise around the hashtag (I think that's what they're called). Because I've seen plenty of agents, editors and other folks saying that there are certain trends they do want or don't want, and that writing something that isn't going to sell isn't worth your time (or at least not worth submitting for publication).

My snarking aside, some stuff is rather common sense but a good reminder if you're rusty or a first timer, such as: Kate McKean's tip that "All submission guidelines apply to you. Yes, you. Always and "I know it’s difficult to visit individual agent websites and read their guidelines, but it’s worth the effort" bear repeating.

Equally helpful: One project per query, please. No, really. We mean it.

I don't know if I'd encourage you to check it out or not. Some stuff seems like it's pretty Query 101 (don't stalk agents, don't say you're the next J.K. Rowling, don't say how great a movie the book would be, etc), but it never hurts to be reminded of the basics. At the very least, if there's a particular agent you're interested in, it might be good to see if there's something useful to you to be found.

Personally, I like the idea of calling it #pubtips a lot better than #queryfail or #authorfail. Because it keeps the focus on giving tips (either do's or don'ts) rather than creating a perception of one group of people ganging up to make fun of another group. While I understand that the purpose of #queryfail was to give out information and be helpful (free advice, how could it go wrong), attaching the word fail to it was not the smoothest move. In internet vernacular, saying "fail" or attaching it to a word is almost always a way of being insulting and demeaning. In fact, there's a whole blog dedicated to spotting fail in the wild and bringing it to people's attention, and I can see how setting such a derisive tone (unintentionally) could cause hurt feelings and make people feel like agents and authors are in an intensely adversarial relationship - which they are not.

Even professionals can act very unprofessionally, as Alice Hoffman is ready to demonstrate.

The story, in short, is that in response to a somewhat negative review she didn't like, Hoffman twittered about the reviewer in question, then posted the reviewers address and phone number on twitter.

And while I think Twitter is in fact the death knell of civilization as we know it and the finest of Satan's handiwork, I do think it says something for them that her account was suspended for doing that. It says that even Satan has standards*. Which are apparently higher than Alice Hoffman's.



* raise your hand if you, too, were tempted to pull a Church Lady and say, "Could it be....SATAN?!"

Title: The Walls of the Universe
Author: Paul Melko (PaulMelko.com)
Genre: Science Fiction
Page Count: 384 pages
Publisher: Tor


( Review: The Walls of the Universe )

It's a hard thing, sometimes, when you realize just how ingrained racism is in SF/F literature, especially the mainstream. Especially when, if you're like me, you come from the blind, privileged section of the world that has been able to overlook such things and still can, if they choose to.

I try to choose not to, but sometimes that means that I can't feel as warm and fuzzy about books which other people seem to get a kick out. Which is a small thing compared to what fans of color have gone through, and believe me I'm not here to harp on my poor White Woman Pain (oh, the hardship of being white! *swoons dramatically*).

Case in point? Not only did I just get finished with a book about thousands of alternative universes, none of which included a universe in which White/European was not the dominant culture, but I picked up "Dead Witch Walking" by Kim Harrison and got kind of a nasty surprise in a few passages both in terms of race and queerness.

( The bits of text and the problems I find in them and a discussion therein. As always, no cookies and constructive discussion only. )

Doing the meme from the previous entry brought up something that I'll one day get around to doing a full blown post on, which is why I have a love/hate with so called "chick flicks" and "chick lit". I want to make it clear that I separate this from the romance genre as a whole, because I do not consider "The Devil Wears Prada" to be equivalent to, say, Harlequin Romances or classics of the genre.

Chick lit and chick flicks are their own category, though they borrow heavily from some bits of the romance genre.

I think some films and books that fit this genre are very smart. Some are surprising. But my problem with the genre, especially as it's portrayed on covers is the attachment to upper class and upper middle class materialism. Often, expensive brand names (for instance, Prada) are part of the selling point, and there is an attachment, superficially or thematically, to commercialization.

The obsession with connecting women's issues and women's lives with shopping and designer names, with this, "oh, it's so hard trying to be a fabulous appletini-drinking, Gucci-wearing single girl in the big city" attitude makes the blue-collar, coupon-clipping, penny-pinching Southerner in me cringe.

I have that same issue with many of paranormal romance and urban fantasy heroines I read about. I find the thought that somehow possessing a vagina makes me more interested in clothes and makeup and shopping and designer duds offensive and maddening. Especially when I'm not there for the high heels, I'm there for the vampires and, essentially, it's either Fangs or GTFO for me when I'm reading.

Yes, some women like shoes, shopping, fashion. Nothing wrong with that. Some of the best women I know are total clothes horses. And I won't deny there's something nice about occasionally getting prettied up for a special event.

But shopping? Clothes? Fashion? Leather pants? They do not factor into my life in the stereotypical fashion. I own exactly three pairs of shoes. One pair of sandals. One pair of tennis shoes. And one pair of oversized shiny black flats that I stuff tissue into the ends of because they're wide enough but too long. The newest pair of these were my tennis shoes and I bought those in July of last year. I probably purchase one new pair of shoes a year, and I have a hard time doing this. New shoes do not delight me. They scare me. I fear change.

I own exactly one dress. I do not wear high heels. The subject of shopping and clothing causes panic attacks in me. If you're a woman of size who was large as a child, especially in places where there were not a lot of clothes for overweight/obese children, you'll understand this.

I'm not trying to brag or somehow say that I am better because I don't tend to make much of my clothing and accessories other than to look clean, presentable, and at least reasonably clothed. It's not a virtue, it's just a choice.

Being interested in clothes, and having lots of shoes and dresses isn't somehow a sign of being a horrible, shallow person. So long as you're not spending beyond your means or putting your family into debt to buy a Kate Spade bag, your disposable cash is your business. No judgments from me.

But the women who are like me exist. And that is why I resent the term "chick lit", because it implies that such literature is the literature representative of all chicks, of all women. And it is not. More than that, I think it enforces this idea that women must be tied to material and socio-economic ideals that are inherently harmful to them.

I think women are not just a marketing group, but sometimes outright targets of advertisers who prey on the societal pressures and stereotypes women labor under to bilk dollars out of them, and I see that same predatory tendency in these books.

I feel utterly excluded from chick lit at moments. I imagine many women who are lower class, of color, queer, fat or otherwise different may feel the same.

And I think there are a lot of chicks who's stories and struggles aren't being talked about because they don't fit into the urban, wealthy, upwardly striving, college educated, white traditional chick-lit model. They don't wear Prada or Gucci. Hell, they don't even wear high heels.

For some "chicks", yeah, this literature is spot on. But for a lot of us? It isn't our literature. These aren't our stories. This isn't us.

Which, coincidentally, is another reason I separate it from romance. Romance, quite smartly, can divide off and tell the stories of many different types of women. There are lines of books specifically for women of color, and many romance novels I've read do center on women who are not fabulously rich, who are the kind of common-sense, thrifty, trying-to-get-by women with two kids, two jobs, and need for love that I actually know about. Of course, romance has it's problems, as all genres do. For instance: nobody in romance novels is ever fat", and that's a problem, but every genre has it's foibles. Ask me about SF/F and racism sometime.

There's an academic paper in here somewhere about the function of materialism in chick lit relative to the romance genre, but like I said. That's for another time.

I have very unchick-like writing to go do.

I got this from fashionista_35.

1. Reply to this post, and I will pick six of your icons.
2. Make a post (including the meme info) and talk about the icons I chose.
3. Other people can then comment to you and make their own posts.
4. This will create a never-ending cycle of icon glee.

These are the ones that she selected for me talk about:

( icons and explanations beneath the cut )

Project: UF!2Girls 3.0 (Still no viable title yet)

Wordcount: 27,797

Goal: 100,000 (approx.)

Deadline: July 31st

Reason For Stopping: Just reporting in. I'll get back to work right after I post this.

Exercise: None today.

Stimulants/Chemicals: None so far.

Musical Inspiration: Apply Some Pressure - Maximo Park; Killing for Love - Jose Gonzalez; Monster - The Automatic Automatic; The Way You Are - 46Bliss; The Round Dance of the Princesses - Stravinsky/Orchestra of the Kirov Opera; Dying Californian - Moira Smiley & Voco

Other Creative Activities: Nothing much

Reading Materials: Walls of the Universe - Paul Melko.

Darling du Jour: "The future is only for Heaven and the dead to know. I can tell you that you are important, and you must do well. Know that your enemies will wear many masks. Some will look like your friends. And some friends will look like enemies. I have learned this, above all else. You must always be in command. Even if it is only of yourself."

Mean Things: Trauma, vague unhelpful prophecies, attempted infanticide, attempted murder of a pregnant woman, being deprived of the ability to see or speak, rat-napping, impersonating the police, giving fake statements to fake police, being taunted about physical disfigurement, near-death experiences, being bitten by a rat

Things Learned/Discovered: Shifting POV is okay as long as you properly signal. Much like changing lanes or turning while driving. Put the blinker on, check your mirrors, and you're good to go.


*I promise I'm not turning into one of those people who post pretentiously obscure lyrics as inexplicable entry titles. It just seemed appropriate.

Okay, for the project I'm currently working on, I need to do some serious research on China, especially modern China from the end of WWII to the present. Though I'm willing to take something that stops in the mid/late-90's if I have to.

The situation is that the main character in the UF!2Girls project is Chinese. She was brought over by her parents when she was an itty bitty baby, because they had to escape the government at that time who were less than appreciative of their brand of magic. Which means knowing the history, the mythology, the religion, and the culture. So, obviously, a metric ton of reading and learning will be needed.

Even though the story takes place in America, there will be flash backs and of course, if nothing else, I need to understand and have a healthy knowledge of the kind of culture and heritage my heroine is bringing with her.

I'm looking into any resources I can get my hands on. Books, websites, anything. I've been using Wikipedia just to find reference books and articles, and I've been compiling a list of books I'm going to order from Amazon.

But I'm wondering if anyone might have suggestions, resources they consider essential.

There are some surprisingly bitter moments in the writing life, or well, the attempt to become a professional. For instance, seeing someone (not a friend, I should add, because I'd be really happy for a friend) announce they've been offered representation by an agent who rejected you after getting your hopes up for no good reason.

This is why I am ever so glad that I was raised in the South. Because we Southern ladies have a long and proud tradition of being able to smile while gritting our teeth and pretending to be happy for people even as we're silently hoping they accidentally tuck the back of their skirt into their pantyhose and have toilet paper stuck to their shoes for the rest of eternity. We can be vicious bitches when we want to.

Or, as we say in my family, you can insult anyone you like as long as you begin with the phrase, "God bless their heart..."

I suppose it's just kind of a twist of the knife to see someone who obviously beat you out for something you really wanted. I don't do so well with competition. Well, I don't do well with abject defeat. Not one of my finer features as a human being, and it always shocks me how ugly it can turn me.

Well, this game is about being able to lose nine and win ten. So, I will do the only thing I know to do. Go outside, exercise off some of the bile and jealousy and then sit my ass down and keep working on my current project. When in doubt, get back to work, right?

Yay!

Verb Noire's website is finally up. And guess what? They've already got their first novel up for sale.

The novel, River's Daughter, written by Tasha Campbell, is a fantasy set after the Civil War. From their website:

Abigail Richard's earliest memory is of wading with her mother in the cool waters of the creek near their home. The dark-skinned daughter of a mixed marriage in a post-Civil War pioneer town, Gail finds herself ostracized in a way her pale-skinned brothers never are — for her skill in swimming, her mother, and her color. It is only when her mother leaves her behind and she is forced to protect herself against other people's manipulations that Gail dives to the water's depths for protection — and finally learns where she truly comes from.

The book is in PDF format, and can be purchased with either Google Checkout or PayPal.

I definitely encourage you to go over there and check it out!

ETA: Did I mention that it's only $4.99? That's less than five bucks. For less than the cost of a combo meal at a fast food restaurant, you could purchase a fabulous story and help out a great press!

The short story market, not so grate askhully, according to sandramcdonald, which is really sad. Because I think it actually could be thriving right now.

As I said in my last entry, I think the industry is creating a set of market conditions that is driving readers away. And it's not the readers, ultimately, who suffer from getting driven away. They turn to alternate sources. Free downloads or illegal downloads. They go elsewhere to find their wares. They get theirs.

The people who get hurt most are the authors, and along with them the equally overworked, underpaid editors, copyeditors, and other such literary support personnel who make their living off of books or magazines. Somebody somewhere needs to get pissed at their publishers, and by "somebody", I mean a large enough swath of writers, editors, and such that it would force the publishers and the people who own them to pay attention.

I'm telling you guys, seriously. If somebody did for books what iTunes did for music, short stories would make a stunning comeback. In fact, I'd wager that if short stories could be made available very cheaply (maybe 1.99 a pop), you'd see them out sell novels and longer fiction in some instances.

Short stories as a form, though they're not my preferred form, have their appeal. They're quick, they're low investment (for the reader), and they're like the portable, fun sized snacks of the literary work. Now, this isn't to say that they aren't serious forms of literature. Of course they are.

But I can imagine how people might start reading more of them if they could imagine themselves being able to get through an entire story in the time it takes to take the train from home to work, or during the little bit of lunch time they manage to get, or in the car (if they're not driving), or anywhere that they might have free time.

I think this isn't happening right now because the places where short stories are available (internet sites, magazines, and short story collections in books) aren't all that appealing. Sure, books are portable enough, but people just don't buy short story collections. And I don't blame them. I stopped buying full albums years ago because most bands barely manage to produce two or three songs per album that I think are worth my time.

And since iTunes has been around, I can cherry pick those songs for myself. I can say "ooh, I like this one!" and buy it for a nice, fair price and listen to it on my jog/walk/forced exercise death march in the mornings. Everyone gets paid, everyone's happy.

I'd probably get more into short stories if I knew I could go to one place where there were lots of them available to me that I could buy them individually. As it stands, short story pickings are kind of a crap shoot. You go to a website/magazine? Well, maybe this month the stories are good. Maybe this month they suck. Everything is scattered around, and there's no one definitive, complete source where I can go browsing to sate my desires.

As it is, I stick with the longer forms because it's easier to find a large browsable collection of them in a somewhat convenient place (ie, a bookstore or library).

While cruising the f-list, I saw a writer's opinions on pirated e-books linked many times, and as usual, it got me thinking.

In that post, pbray discusses how she feels that downloading or providing free, pirated e-books is wrong and tantamount to theft</a>.

I won't say I disagree with her basic premise. She's right. You download something you didn't pay for and didn't get permission to take, something the writer, editor, and all the other folks involved didn't get paid for, and yeah, you're stealing the results of their hard work. And that's not cool. No matter what your reasons, downloading books you didn't pay for (with a few exceptions) is completely wrong.

I speak both as an aspiring, completely unpublished writer and an avid reader. Let that inform your opinion of what I say as it will. But mostly, I'm speaking as a reader and a buyer of books.

As justified as pbray's anger is, I don't know that it's ultimately useful, nor do I think the tactic of going after the end users or the providers of such pirated wares is at all fruitful. The problem with that is that when you focus your energy on being angry at these folks, you're playing an unwinnable game of wac-a-mole where there are infinite moles and infinite holes and they can work much faster than you.

You take down one site, you take down a few downloaders, good for you. Their replacements are already been trading their black market literature under your nose and will continue to.

I think there are two things are work when people download these books illegally. One is an attitude, the other is a set of market conditions that is actually chasing away readers, making easy downloading a much more viable option.

The attitude at work is one that stems from ignorance of how the industry works (from the reader's perspective) and an economic climate that encourages people to cut corners wherever they can. Whether those corners can or should be cut.

pbray says (with no shortage of sarcasm):

Everyone knows authors are rich and we don't need the money.

Well, actually, that's sort of the problem. How much can you really expect the average reader to know about how much an author makes from a book? After all, it's been much touted in the media that J.K. Rowling is richer than the Queen of England. We see books that tell us over and over that this author is a Best Selling Author and 500,000 copies sold!. Where, precisely, do you expect your audience to get information on your income from?

You're not exactly doing a lot to convince the reader that you need the money when you do that. Or rather, when your publisher does that on your behalf. Readers have no way of knowing what your cut of the profits (if, indeed, there are any) are. So as rightfully angry as you are, there may be a reason that readers are making such assumptions.

Yes, you're hurting for money. So are your readers! Many of them are in the same boat as you are, or even worse boats. Their jobs (if they've kept them) aren't paying enough, their houses have been devalued, their dollar isn't going as far as it used to, the price of everything is just going up, up, up. You think you're alone in your economic woes? You're not.

Which is where the market conditions come in. The current system of publishers and booksellers is just not working for the reader. Not at all. I wish I could find the right statistics to back me up here, but it's clear that the publishing industry is not doing well. I can tell you that retailers are definitely not doing well, including the big chain booksellers.

There are a lot of reasons for this. Some of which are the industry's own goddamn fault. Not the writers, not the readers, but the companies that have been doing business in the ways that lead to them needing to make record lay offs.

And it doesn't need to be that way. The way to lick piracy is not to take a defensive, entrenched position. It's to make piracy less and less appealing and less and less necessary. I think nothing has done more to stem the tide of piracy in the music industry than such things as iTunes, where a song can be easily and reliably downloaded for a mere 99 cents. I, like most people, feel that 99 cents is a fair price to pay for a song you want to have. Especially when you can, if you like, cherry pick from albums to get only the songs you care for without having to buy the inevitable crappy studio songs that some artists do.

Somebody in the publishing industry needs to understand the principle behind this. iTunes works because it's cheap and everything you want is there. The problem that piracy has is that no matter how unstoppable it is, the collections that people are able to offer are always incomplete, unreliable. Very new or very old texts are not to be found. Rarer books by an author are also not to be found. Not even the best piracy sites can offer everything.

A legal, cheaply available library with an extensive collection would easily attract people AWAY from illegal downloading, and ebook formats have, so far as I am aware, lower overhead. Plus, if there were some company that were willing to share collections among major publishers? They'd own the market.

Second, if somebody, somewhere would invest in making a viable and affordable e-Book reader, the revolution would finally begin. While the new Kindles are sexy beasts, I can't afford that shit, to be blunt. At $359, it'll be years before I can afford that shit. I can't think of an ebook reader that is currently a viable option for me to buy.

Not to mention that formatting is a problem, and availability of books.

These problems are not insurmountable. If somebody in the industry would actually make the push for a cheap eBook reader that is under $150. If iPod can make a device that plays music, videos, and games and sell it for $149 (the price of an iPod nano) and a tiny shuffle for under fifty bucks (before tax), then somebody ought to be able to make an eBook reader that's actually affordable for those of us who have to pay rent next month.

The problem is that the solution to these things does not lie with the readers. The solutions lie with publishers and booksellers.

So, yeah, you're right to yell and be furious with the purveyors of these illegal goods, but save some of that vitriol for your publishers, because they're hurting you as much as anything else. In fact, I'd submit that they may be doing more to prevent you from getting the sales you need and turning away YOUR potential readers. More than that, I'd wager that it's not piracy that's taking your sales. The people who pirate those books were probably the least likely to purchase those books anyway and probably would just have given you a pass if they didn't have the piracy option. Not that it justifies their actions or makes them right, but it does mean that your anger may be more beneficially redirected in a way that ends up putting money in your pocket for the hard work you've done.

Title:Kindred
Author:Octavia Butler
Genre: Fantasy
Page Count: 287*
Publisher: Beacon Press*


Reviewer's Note: The page count and publisher are for the 25th anniversary edition of the book published in 2004. Other editions of the book may come from other publishers/imprints and have varying page counts.

( Review: Kindred )

I think it is helpful, if only for my own fun, sport, and edification to enumerate the reasons that I read what, how, and when I do. And why I stop reading books when I do.

First and foremost, I read either to learn or be entertained. Hopefully, a bit of both. I find learning new things to be a form of entertainment. Or if not entertainment, then enjoyment. I derive pleasure and satisfaction from adding to my knowledge of the world, especially if it's done in such a way that it opens a new interest to me, something undiscovered and waiting to be mined for more treasures. I'm sort of sad for this reason that I'm so dysfunctional at math that I could never understand physics beyond what gets explained to me on the History Channel. I think I'd like contemplating the universe and tiny particles and time and space and playing with the fabric of reality in my head and thinking about how you can unify the way the big and small all move together. That is, if there can be unification. I've always suspected that there'll never be a unifying theory of physics because physics isn't unified.

But I digress. The point is, I do like to learn from books. While I'm mostly a fiction reader, I do occasionally have a quick fling with non-fiction, either of science or historical variety, if I am so tempted.

I don't consider reading for sheer pleasure to somehow be less worthy a venture than reading for Important Literary Intellectual Reasons. Entertainment is not, in and of itself, a bad thing. So long as you don't do it to excess or to someone else's detriment. It's good to light up the pleasure centers of your brain with positive activities like sports or reading or enjoying art or playing with the small mammalian creature of your choice (children, dogs, ponies. Anything will do). It's good to have something that affirms that the crap you put up with is balanced out. That there is indeed a pay off for continuing to suck oxygen and belt out carbon dioxide, that there's a reason not to off yourself so someone can have your kidneys and corneas.

You need that, I think, in your life.

So maybe you're not building an ivory tower with your brain cells from reading. Some people do this and it does push their happy buttons. I try not to make judgments or sweeping statements about what is and isn't acceptable. If pushing yourself intellectually through reading, regardless of pleasure, is what makes you feel your time is well spent, by all means. I applaud you. Just don't look down your furrowed brow at those who get their buzz elsewhere.

Maybe you're reading just for the tingly feelings and the warm fuzzy kittens that solve crime and reassuring routines that ease you into a state of satisfaction with each repetition. The bad guy loses, the caper is foiled, the meddling kids win again, the dashing hero sweeps the heroine away with a charming smile and witty rejoinder.

The fact is that life is short, and the hours you spend doing things you don't need to do (work, mandatory school, eating, laundry, cleaning, etc) are your own to dispose of as you chose. But you don't get a refund on those hours if they don't make you happy or justify themselves. Even if they were taken from you unfairly, without your consent.

You won't always get to control these types of things in life. In fact, most times it'll be out of your hands. So I figure that what is in your keeping, what you can control you must control absolutely. People and things and circumstances will steal time from you like seagulls plucking bits of food off an unguarded picnic table. So you must protect what precious bits you can keep to yourself and enjoy it.

If you read a book and it doesn't add anything worthwhile to your life experiences, either pleasure or knowledge or whatever it is you value, you don't get that hour or two or however many you spent back. It's gone forever.

I think this stems from me being an especially selfish person. Not with things, but with time. I'm very greedy and possessive of my time, because I feel acutely aware that one day, I will die. I will be on a deathbed somewhere and I don't think I'll be ready to die. Ever. I'll want to live so bad that I'll wish and pray for God to grant me another hour, another day, another week, another month, another year.

When the end comes, you'll want those wasted hours back. You'll want the time you spent waiting in line, in doctor's offices, in airports back.

But it won't happen. Time doesn't flow that way. Well, not unless you're a very small and strange kind of theoretical particle (at least that's how I understand it). But you're not. You're a very large and strange kind of particle called a Human Being. Time only goes unmercifully forward.

I think part of me believes that if I fill my life with things I think are worthwhile, even if they may be less-than-gratifying in the short term (like *grumble grumble* frickin' exercise and dieting), that when the times comes that I can't stay here anymore, I'll be less hesitant to go. Maybe I'll even be ready.

So, sometimes, I put down a book because I'm not willing to look down that long tunnel and think that I hastened it's coming by plowing through that particular literature. Does that mean it's a bad book? I don't know. It means it's a bad book for me, certainly.

Which is not to say that in a year or two I won't be ready for it. Books, like everything else, have their season. Ones that I hated a year ago I might love today. Books I once was in love with as a kid are now bewildering, boring, or just plain abysmal to me now.

But I've stopped telling myself, in that old English teacher voice that still lingers in my head, that I must finish every book I pick up. I'm an adult, I can stop. I can quit. I can go somewhere else. Maybe that means I miss some satisfying books that would've gotten good if I'd kept going. But maybe it means I get to pick up other books I might not have had time to read if I hadn't stopped.

Sometimes I feel a bit of inferiority complex about this, especially since reading as a physical activity is sometimes a challenge for me, but I tell myself that this isn't school. It's not a competition. I'm not on anyone else's clock by my own, and that there's no prize for wasting time. There's just hours you don't get back, and the Invisible, Imaginary Better-Than-Me Judgmental People I was trying to impress will not hand out refunds, even if I come with receipt and tags in hand.

Having a hard time getting through Eifelheim by Michael Flynn. It was a finalist for a Hugo in 2007 and I picked it up at the Book Barn.

The premise is fascinating and original, but unfortunately, the execution stinks. And once again reminds me why I don't put stock in Hugo awards as any indicator of a book being any good. As my fiancee said, "A lot of the Hugo winners are crap." Never were truer words spoken.

The most annoying feature is the technical-term laden conversation two scientists have in the beginning, with one of the scientists throwing in entire sentences in Latin, German, French, and I think Polish during the conversation without the author bothering to translate or explain what they mean. It had me wondering what editor let that slide without asking the author if it was strictly necessary to piss the reader off from the get-go to achieve what, basically, amounts to a little exposition and the beginning of the plot. Give me a red pen and an hour and I could fix that mess for you so that actual human beings might want to read it, but nobody asked me, unfortunately.

Also? It might be nice if the author bothered defining such terms as cliology, geodesics, and non-Abelian, since they're apparently vital to the plot points that are going to occur. 40 pages in, and so far I've just been really freaking bored and confused and there's no indication from flipping ahead that there's going to be any pay off for continued patience.

Just a note to Very Learned Writer Folk out there: If I need an advanced degree in something just to know what your characters are talking about and you don't make that feeling go away in one hell of a hurry, then you've failed as a writer. Hard.

I think I'll give up on this particular book, because life is short and if I want to learn about such things, I'll go get a non-fictional source so I don't have be annoyed by a cast of characters that I absolutely do not care about and a bunch of scientific terms that are ill-explained and would be better learned about from better sources this this piece of crap.

Title: The Ghost Brigades
Author: John Scalzi (scalzi.com)
Genre Science Fiction
Page Count:
Publisher


( Review: The Ghost Brigades )

A great overview of Indian speculative fiction, past and present by Mihir Wanchoo over at fantasybookcritic.com. I like that site (though it's cluttered and ad-filled), and I really loved his article. Also I didn't know the Mahabharata was available for free on sacred-texts.com's site

I learned stuff I didn't know!

But it made me ask a question: is there a database or list anywhere of short speculative fiction written by authors of color that's freely available on the internet? And would it be a good idea to collect these links in one place?

I debate this, because while I am all for signal boosting and encouraging people to read the works of authors of color as much as they can, I'd also hate to feel like such a collection of links would somehow discourage people from paying for those works, or from seeking out fiction by those authors which isn't freely available. Part of me hopes it would be free advertising for those authors, and maybe a good way to start a word-of-mouth buzz if they were to come out with, say, a novel. But I wouldn't want to be doing something inadvertently harmful.

I wonder if there's a list somewhere of new and upcoming works (novels, short stories, graphic novels, etc) to be released by authors of color. Now, that I'd love to have available. Plus, also it would be a buzz generating tool to make people aware that these awesome works are out there for the reading (and preferably buying).

I know there's a non-exhaustive list of authors of color working in the SF/F field with bibliographies that can be found here (compiled by madam_silvertip. And check the comments for additional writers that others have suggested), but I don't think simply collecting name, rank, and bibliography is the same as a free-for-all linking to free fiction.

Thoughts, internets?

Justine Larbalestier posted all the reasons she's not a real writer, and I thought I'd play that game, too.

And the standard disclaimer: What makes me a "not real" writer may not be what makes you a "not real" writer. What I do or don't do isn't necessarily wrong or right, it's just what I feel doesn't match with the cliches.


1. I have terrible grammar and spelling. I don't care about grammar and spelling all that much.

2. I do not have a "muse" or a clever name for that muse. Instead I call it "my brain". I don't talk to this muse or complain that it's jerking me around like a dog on a leash.

3. I don't read agent blogs for anything but pure enjoyment, and I don't read an agents blog when going to submit to them. I redirect my attention to reading their submission guidelines instead. Those I study intently.

4. I don't Twitter and never will.

5. I don't share random personal tidbits on my writing blog. The fact that I just cleaned the kitchen is not related to how I'm coming along on my latest project.

6. Characters don't talk to me or take over or do anything autonomously. I think up new information about them, I come upon revelations about what I should have been doing with the character, but they're not actually discrete entities in my head. They don't say anything. They're not real.

7. I don't sit down to write a certain amount of words every single day. In fact some days I don't write anything. I go out and do things like visit family, take a vacation, try to find a job, have fun, have a life.

8. I do not seek to make anyone squirm.

9. I neither improvise completely or outline completely, and I don't think either is a right or wrong way to go about it. My outlines are something along the lines of: "And then character A and character B fight. Then something stops the fight. Then flying monkeys appear. Then there's chaos and eventually they end up fighting a zombie army somehow with something magical or other-ish." It's a basic road map that shows me where the beginning and the end are in relation to each other and what pit stops I have to make along the way, with room for detours and sudden exits.

10. I don't write short stories. I don't even like short stories as a rule (there are a few exceptions). I only write longer length works.

11. I do not always hate my work after I'm finished. I go through love/hate cycles. Sometimes I hate it, then I look back and love it, then I hate it again. Like I said, a cycle.

12. While I enjoy a good Diet Coke now and then and believe it to be the brand name of Funky Cold Medina, I have no actual need for regular infusions of caffeine and if I don't get Diet Coke for weeks or months, I don't notice. Coffee often smells like vomit to me and makes my stomach hurt.

13. I'm becoming more and more of a morning person each day. Soon, I may lose my ability to stay up past 10:45 pm.

14. I like chocolate and enjoy it, but don't crave it regularly. I do crave sweets, but I'm a vanilla girl myself. Anything with creme. Or the icing from a cupcake. *drools*.

15. I do not wait to get inspired. Sometimes I write even when I don't feel like and don't feel any great creative impulse. I usually can't tell the difference afterward.

16. I don't believe in classics, or that books are good just because they're old and written by some Very Respected Long Deceased Author. Some books age well. Most just get perpetuated as great literature because enough people say that it's great literature. Not because it actually is.

17. I believe that being depressed, sad, and otherwise tragic is actually the worst state to write in. I think being happy, stable, energetic, and in good health is actually a better basis for being successful.

18. I do not have a cat. Or any pets. I'd like a cat, but I do not think it would feature into my writing life significantly. Except for time away from writing spent cleaning the litter box.*

19. I don't post playlists for novels I've written. Because I don't know what good it would do. If you haven't heard the song, it doesn't mean anything to you and I don't tend to like rock music by Old British Guys who are cool for the reasons that Very Respected Authors are Very Respected, which is that enough people said so that it became true. I might one day like to put up a downloadable soundtrack so everyone can hear the music. But I think that's illegal unless you fork over lots of money.

20. I am not Interesting, Exotic, Larger-Than-Life, Eccentric, or otherwise Artistic. My name is Meg. I am a fake writer. I type up stories from inside my head, I try my best, I hope it turns out all right, and otherwise I'm very boring but hopefully hardworking.





*I had a snake once. Snakes aren't very literary pets. They lack the power of snarky expressions and wacky bloggable interactions with people and other pets. You generally don't want them interacting. Mostly, they lay on fake rocks under a heat lamp and eat mice and poo. I feel this is why T.S. Eliot never wrote of McSnakety, or Lillian Jackson Braun never wrote about The Snake Who Solved Crime.

K. Tempest Bradford is participating in a Write-a-Thon in which half of the money she raises will go to the Octavia Butler Scholarship which helps authors of color attend the Clarion Workshops.

Helping authors of color not only hone their craft, but connect professionally is a big step towards helping them tell their stories and get those stories out to the world. Nothing helps level the playing field more than empowering writers of color to tell their stories, publish those stories, and establish themselves competitively and professionally.

I mean, imagine the fantastic tales that might be lost other wise. Think of the wealth of imagination to be gained! I submit that these types of things are beneficial not just to authors of color, but the SF/F field as a whole.

Not only is it a worthy cause, but there are levels of sponsorship. It ranges from the low end, which is $5-$10 per week or a flat $30 bucks to the high end of $300 bucks. So, even if you can't afford something big, maybe you can chip in $30 bucks. Every little bit helps.

I mean, if 1000 people chipped in just 30 bucks, that's $30,000 dollars. If 2000, that's $60,000. If 3,000 people chipped in 30 bucks friends, they may think it's a movement, well, you get the picture.

And if you want a sample of writing she'll be doing? I suggest checking out Elan Vital, which is one of the best short stories that I've read in a long damn time. And I don't really even LIKE short stories. If you like those little tales that stab you in the heart and make you beg for a twist, I say, get thee hence.

Oh, and there are prizes. Check out her website for the details.

Just thought I'd pass this along.

Did I mention the prizes? And the awesome writing?