wisb-Guardian-Express

The wonderful folks at Tachyon Publications are up to mischief again with a new anthology called Kafkaesque, edited by John Kessel and James Patrick Kelly.  I'm letting you all know about this book because I want it, and one of you is going to buy it for me for my Birthday, which is on the 6th of October.  Seriously.  You are.  Or we're not friends anymore, you hear?  And I don't care that the book doesn't come out until November 2011.  You can pre-order it.  Or steal an ARC from a reviewer.  It's only wrong if you get caught...

Anywho.  Enough of that.  Here's the back cover blurb (ToC to follow):

Franz Kafka died in obscurity in 1924, having published a handful of odd stories in little-known central European literary magazines. Yet modern culture has embraced the stark ideas and vivid imagery of his work. Even those who have never read a word of his fiction know enough to describe their tribulations with bureaucracy as “Kafkaesque.” 

Kafkaesque explores dystopian, comedic, and ironic fictions inspired by Franz Kafka’s work. In Philip Roth's alternate history, Kafka survives World War II and immigrates to America, Jorge Luis Borges envisions a labyrinthine public lottery that evolves into bureaucratically-mandated mysticism. Carol Emshwiller invents an exclusively male society faced with its first (mostly) female member. Paul Di Filippo’s journalist by day, costumed crime-fighter by night, copes with the bizarre amidst the mundane.  

Also includes Kafka’s classic story “The Hunger Artist,” in a brand-new translation, as well as an illustrated version by legendary cartoonist R. Crumb (Fritz the Cat). Additionally, each author discusses Kafka’s writing, its relevance, its personal influence, and Kafka’s enduring legacy.

The table of contents are as follows:

1. "A Hunger Artist" (translated by Kessel) by Franz Kafka 
2. "The Drowned Giant" by J.G. Ballard 
3. "The Cockroach Hat" by Terry Bisson 
4. "Hymenoptera" by Michael Blumlein 
5. "The Lottery in Babylon" (tr: Hurley) by Jorge Luis Borges 
6. "The Big Garage" by T. Coraghessan Boyle 
7. "The Jackdaw's Last Case" by Paul Di Filippo 
8. "Report to the Men's Club" by Carol Emshwiller 
9. "Bright Morning" by Jeffrey Ford 
10. "The Rapid Advance of Sorrow" by Theodora Goss 
11. "Stable Strategies for Middle Management" by Eileen Gunn 
12. "The Handler" by Damon Knight 
13. "Receding Horizon" by Jonathan Lethem & Carter Scholz 
14. "A Hunger Artist" by David Mairowitz & Robert Crumb 
15. "I Always Wanted You to Admire my Fasting", or "Looking at Kafka" by Philip Roth 
16. "The 57th Franz Kafka" by Rudy Rucker 
17. "The Amount to Carry" by Carter Scholz 
18. "Kafka in Brontëland" by Tamar Yellin

I had a rather strange and characteristically "me" conversation with my friend Adam the other day about the state of science fiction as a genre.  One thing that keeps coming up in our conversations is how fantasy has seemingly abandoned the trappings of respectability for the more lucrative pursuit of market share, while science fiction has done the exact opposite.  I'm not sure why science fiction lovers (not all, but a good enough chunk) have doomed themselves to respectability at the sake of readership, nor am I altogether certain that SF is weakened by its bid for respect (in part, yes).

I'm going to direct you all to read Geek Feminism's post entitled "'Geek Girls' and the Problem of Objectification" as a starter, because much of what I'm going to say below stems from the fascinating discussion taking place there.  But to start, I'll offer the following quote:

There’s nothing wrong with wanting attention and approval in one’s community. What cosplayer and geek wouldn’t want those things? What female geek doesn’t want to be welcomed into the community with enthusiasm and excitement (instead of derided as a harpy feminist or annoying squeeing fangirl)? The problem, then, isn’t what women do, but a culture in which the only way that women can be recognized as a desirable part of the culture is when they participate by making themselves consumable sexy objects for geek men.

One of the problems with geek culture is how readily it has moved to adopt the paradigms of the cultures that exist outside of it (the very cultures which at one point looked down at geeks for being, well, geeky).  I don't have a problem with sexy geeks, or sexy geek clothing.  In fact, most people don't, in principle.  There's nothing wrong with looking sexy, or wanting to look that way.  The problems arise when the sexy geek becomes the image we hope to attain (or, rather, that women hope to attain, since men, by and large, are not compelled to fulfill particular and very
impossible physical images in order to achieve acceptance and "love" from others).*  Specifically, it's a very particular kind of "sexy image."  An image which says "only people with certain dress sizes and certain body proportions look sexy in the sexy clothes."  Because that's an image that women will try to fit, even if their bodies aren't designed for it.  Even if doing so is bad for them.  Even if doing so could end up killing them or destroying young girls from the mind out.  There's nothing wrong with sexy, but there's something very wrong with the way we use it.

Geek culture really shouldn't have ideal body images.  Not in any immediate sense.  We should be just as willing to commend someone for wearing cat ears and a tail in any body shape (or gender) as we would someone wearing a skimpy ninja costume (is it fair to say that certain clothing is body specific?  I don't know.  It seems horrible to suggest as much...).  They should be seen as equal forms of expression.  But I don't think we'll ever be there, in part because we have and will always be a highly sexualized culture.  Clothing deemed "sexy" will always elicit seemingly positive responses (objectifying responses, but positive nonetheless because of our perceptions).

I would be lying if I said I didn't have those responses for Slave Leia cosplayers, or that sexy geek calendar everyone is talking about (I won't buy such a thing, but seeing the images will undoubtedly elicit a reaction).  But I'm aware of those responses.  And it's never stopped me from saying hello to people who don't dress like Slave Leia (and, in fact, it's helped me talk to those people, because I'm uncomfortable around half naked people in public).  But I'm also aware of how many of those responses are socially conditioned -- of all those times when I've seen someone who doesn't look like a "hot girl" and reacted poorly in my head.  I've had to shut those things out, because geek culture should always be about the geekery, not about what people look like, how they dress (unless they dress in people's skin or something), and so on.  It's not about who should be pretty or who wears the sexiest clothes.  It's about a whole different set of ideals (in my head).  This is turning into a ramble, though, so I'll shut up and move on.

I say all of this as a geek and someone who has attended geek-oriented events (and hopes to do so in the future).  I'm not particularly pleased by the subversion of geek culture's original disaffected attitude towards standardized models for engagement.  Maybe what I see in my head is utopian nostalgia, wherein women were more likely to be accepted into the group as people because they were geeks too and not because they wore bikinis.  And, well, it probably is utopia and formed out of nothing.  Because women haven't been a part of geek culture, largely speaking.  They've been excluded for all kinds of stupid or sexist or unintentional reasons.  Not to the extent that women weren't a part of it at all, mind you, but certainly to the point where you could look around and not find a whole lot of them there.  Now?  It seems like they're all over the place (and hello to you all), but following on their heels are the ideologies that still turn entire generations of young women into anorexics, etc.  Nobody should have those things forced on them.

What are we going to do about it?  I don't know.  I really don't.

----------------------------------------------------

* -- I don't want to suggest that men are not susceptible to "ideal" body images.  They are.  But the pressure is less pronounced than it is for women, and likely not as well-researched.

I won't profess to understand the full history of the Lambda Literary Foundation (to which the award belongs). As a Foundation that has in recent years honored lesbian, gay, bisexual, transexual, and other-sexuals (genderqueer, etc.) writers, the place is near and dear to my heart.  But then they announced this:

LGBT authors will be recognized with three awards marking stages of a writer's career: the Betty Berzon Debut Fiction Award (to one gay man and one lesbian), the Jim Duggins Outstanding Mid-Career Novelist Prize (to one male-identified and one female-identified author), and the Pioneer Award (to one male-identified and one female-identified individual or group) - Awards for the remaining Lambda Literary Award categories will be based on literary merit and significant content relevant to LGBT lives. These awards will be open to all authors regardless of their sexual identity - All book award judges will be self-identified LGBT

The above is the result of a lot of discussion and arguing among differing camps of the LGBT community (supposedly, though I've yet to hang out with any LGBT people who disagree so much as to make a concession like the above remotely rational).  But it is also the third major response to criticism about how the awards are structured.  According to their 20+ year history, the award went from accepting submissions "based solely on a book's LGBT subject matter" to being restrict to self-identified lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer authors" in 2009.  This, apparently, is what has created the divide.  Some believe the award should go only to writers of the LGBT persuasion (broadly defined), while others think that the awards should reflect LLF's function to promote positive LGBT images, as their mission statement makes clear:

The Lambda Literary Foundation nurtures, celebrates, and preserves LGBT literature through programs that honor excellence, promote visibility and encourage development of emerging writers.

But even more importantly:  the previous guidelines couldn't be reasonably enforced, as Nicola Griffith points out in her post on the recent changes -- "if you can't substantiate (check, prove, police, ensure) eligibility, it's pointless."

The problem, then, has to do with representation.  The new categories are oddly LG- and gender-normal-centric.  One of the new awards (for debut fiction) is oriented only towards gay and lesbian people (both of which would be associated with standard genders); the other two are geared towards people who identify as male or female.  The other categories, presumably, are open to just about anyone, so long as the content of their work is relevant to LGBT people.  But the new awards are oddly exclusionary, giving the T side of the "LGBT" label little room to "play."  Where exactly to transgender or transsexual or genderqueer people fit into all of this?  While Cheryl Morgan and I have had our differences (in days of yore, as they say), I think people should read her slightly angry response to the changes, or at least this juicy quote:

First of all, why is one award specifically restricted to “one gay man and one lesbian”, while others are for “male-identified and female-identified” people. At least the latter appears to include some bi people, which the former seems to exclude. As for trans people, apparently they are OK for the first award if they identify as gay or lesbian, but not otherwise, and they are OK for the other two awards is they are male-identified and female-identified, but not otherwise.

Let's face it:  When an important award which is supposed to celebrate LGBT issues in literature doesn't get how its policies discriminate against its own target demographic, then something is seriously wrong...

Our listeners were kind enough to select Mansquito for our Torture Cinema feature this week (which might include some of you).  If you don't know anything about the movie, that's probably a good thing.  I strongly suggest listening to our humorous and slightly angry review instead.  It'll save at least 60 minutes of your day (seeing how the movie is about an hour and a half, and our review is 1/3rd of that).

In any case, here's the episode!

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go edit something, and then blog about something else...

In the interest of giving all of you the floor to talk about books, I'd like to know what you all are reading and what you think of it (anything counts, from articles to audiobooks).

I am currently smack dab in the middle of the following:

• Down the Mysterly River by Bill Willingham (and Mark Buckingham)
• Loving it!
• The Uncertain Places by Lisa Goldstein
• Interesting, but I need to get deeper before I can make a valid judgment.
• Gateways edited by Elizabeth Anne Hull
• Some really smart stories in here!
• Future Media edited by Rick Wilbur
• Just started!
• When the Great Days Come by Gardner Dozois
• So far:  loving it!
• Imperial Eyes:  Travel Writing and Transculturation by Louise Pratt
• Just started!  But I've read it before, and it's an interesting text.
• Maps of Englishness by Simon Gikandi
• Just started!
• The English in the West Indies by Froude (can't remember the the first name)
• Just started!
• The Portable Harlem Renaissance Reader
• Just started!
• The New Negro:  Voices of the Harlem Renaissance
• Just started!

selfishness and debauchery.  And the best allies are sometimes you most recent enemies...
I keep saying that I am not an urban fantasy fan, and then I read a really good urban fantasy book like Hexed and have to eat my words.  Hearne's novel is simply a great deal of fun, and it's also quite refreshing. While many of the stock urban fantasy "creatures" are present here, the novel itself avoids doing the same old nonsense, perhaps because the main character is an Irish Druid instead of a tramp-stamped clone.  Atticus as a character is not only "new" -- in the sense that his character "type" hasn't been seen very often -- but also fascinating.  Hearne writes him with a modest sense of self-confidence, which I found rather endearing.  Here is a character who has an extraordinary amount of power, who occasionally gets a little cocky about it, but knows when he's been outmatched (though he wouldn't tell his enemies as much, seeing how that would be stupid).  Since we're in his head, however, we get to learn who Atticus is in a very intimate way, a feature that gives Hexed an extra edge.  First person is hard to do, too, but Hearne manages it with flare.  (One example of "flare" I can't help bringing up, even if it's not the best written of Hearne's near-nerdfests, is when Atticus and Oberon, his canine companion, have a brief discussion pertaining to why a local road is suspiciously like Mos Eisley; if you don't get the joke, then something is wrong with you.)

One of the other interesting aspects of Hexed is how Hearne has taken most, if not all, of the major or memorable forms of religion and inserted them firmly into the real.  While Atticus "worships" (though that's the wrong word) the Celtic gods of his origin, others adhere to a strictly Abrahamic faith (Christianity primarily), while still others stick to their Native American or "dead religion" roots.  I couldn't help finding it endlessly amusing, especially when traditional figures of the various faiths make an appearance in Hearne's book (such as the Virgin Mary, various Celtic gods, and plenty of mentions of the Norse varieties).  Most interesting is what the book suggests about the various human myths:  that co-existence is not that far from possible, so long as you accept that a world which takes the supernatural at face value would inevitably present the supernatural as strangely less-than-powerful than our ancestors seem to remember them.  Hearne's world is one in which gods can die, albeit with great difficulty.  They all have weaknesses, and many of the gods, true to their mythological nature, play power games to off one another (just as humans do, which perhaps explains why so many of our various versions of mythological faith are about gods and creatures that are suspiciously human in personality).  Placing Atticus in the middle of this, in the field of the mortals as opposed to the realms of the gods, lets us imagine (and see) what surviving in a world of vindictive and egotistical deities is really like -- granted, with a heavy dose of humor and snark.

The only things that presented problems for me as a reader were:  a) the way Atticus sometimes presented information; and b) the distinct feeling that there was supposed to be a book prior to this that I hadn't read yet.  The former is a result of the first person narration, which occasionally falls prey to matter-of-fact telling in chapters.  Atticus reminds us too often of details we need to know, without attempting to find other ways to convey the same information; these moments sometimes pulled me out of the story, but they also bothered me because they reflect the fundamental flaw of the first person narrator:  namely, that presenting information in FP is uniquely challenging if one intends to avoid the pitfalls of telling.

The latter is a problem that the publishers should have fixed from the start.  Hounded, which precedes Hexed chronologically, should be read first, something which I could only find by comparing publication dates.  Some of the events that happen in that book are at play, at least peripherally, in Hexed, and most of those events shape Atticus in ways which become important to later volumes.  While jumping into the middle doesn't detract from the strength of Hearne's story, I would still avoid doing so in exchange for a better reading experience.

But don't take the previous two paragraphs as a reason for avoiding this book.  Unless you dislike first person narration, Hexed's main character is a joy to read.  Perhaps the only thing lacking for Atticus is character development (in terms of "growth" as opposed to "presentation").  But what I learned about him by the end of the book allowed me to see Hexed for what it is:  a darkly humorous game of fiddling with the encyclopedia of myths that have and continue to dominate our modern world.  Atticus comes through as a strong character with a fun personality; the myths and legends spill from the page like paint on a godly canvas; and the fast pace and amusing plot spins the (urban) fantasy trope of good vs. evil on its head.  And let's face it:  even if stuffy literary critics can't accept Hexed for what it is, SF/F fandom sure as hell can.

If you want to lean more about Kevin Hearne, check out his website (and the publisher's website).  You can find the book just about anywhere, if you're so inclined.

I've been following Mark Charan Newton's blog for some time now.  He's the author of Nights of Villjamur, City of Ruin, and Book of Transformations, an environmental activist, reviewer, and too many other things to put in a post without wandering into random topics.  He recently posted an interesting response to a Guardian article about Tobias Wolff, from which I draw the following quote:

While I’m in no way intending to put myself anywhere near Wolff on an achievement level, I can really agree with his statement about faking it. Every single time I sit down to write, I feel like I’m winging it. From all the research I do to watching all the reviews come in, it still doesn’t feel real. Those poor Amazon reviews seem like a plot to expose me by those who know the Truth.

I should be just as humble about what I will write below, as I am even less accomplished than Newton in my writing career (a couple of short fiction sales, no novels with agents, and a long list of rejects for stories I am told are quite good -- thanks Adam).

The interesting thing about writing is how muddled the field has become.  There are so many classes and workshops and books about the process of writing that the reality of the writing process seems to have gotten lost.  Everything about writing is about "faking it" or "winging it."  Fiction is always already a symptom of overactive imaginations, its very formation founded in
the campfire dramas and ancient mythologists who made up lofty explanations for the strange world in which they lived and the great heroes and monsters that inhabited it.  We keep this tradition going by telling stories about people that don't exist (or about people who do exist, but have become caricatures of their former selves).  Some of us make up our own mythologies and worlds (such as Newton and myself), while others wander into the realm of the everyday or the extraordinary of the real world (the good, the bad, and the ugly).

And at the end of the day, there aren't any rules or standards for the writing process beyond the arbitrary ones we set in regards to the language itself -- and many authors break that too by providing stories written in various kinds of non-standard English (Nalo Hopkinson and Tobias S. Buckell, for example, use different version of island-based dialects in their work).  So when writers get down to talking about their successes, of which I have very few, I think they are exposed to the inadequacy of the method:  that is that we can't exactly say "why" we have succeeded, except to say that someone liked whatever it was we wrote.

There are no hard and fast rules of writing.  There is no magic advice that holds true for everyone.  Some say to be a writer, you have to write all the time, but plenty of writers do the exact opposite and do just fine.  Do this, or that, or do both at the same time, at different times of the day, half on a Tuesday, three times on a Friday, and never on a Sunday unless it's the 1st of the month...when it comes down to it, we're just making it all up -- the rules, the stories, the methods, our styles, etc.

I suspect that the more accomplished a writer becomes, the more able they are to put a brick wall in front of that part of themselves that reminds them of their obliviousness.  You'd have to, right?  Because to spend your entire life thinking that this might be the day someone figures out you've tricked them into thinking you're a good writer...well, that would suck.

Erin Hoffman's debut novel is a traditional high fantasy romp formed from the ashes of a collaborative project.  It's origins are a bit unusual in a field of secondary world fantasies created by individuals with Tolkien on the mind, and the effort to move beyond the collaboration shows in the development of the world's magic system, mechanics and all.  As a novel, Sword of Fire and Sea leaves something to be desired, but as a fantasy adventure, it hits all the right marks.

Vidarian, a reputable ship captain, gets caught up in a complex web of magic-wielding priestesses when he reluctantly agrees to ferry fire priestess Ariadel to a safe haven.  There, the priestesses hope, the Vkortha, their mortal enemies, will not be able to find Ariadel, whose abilities might threaten Vkorthan power.  But the journey takes Vidarian and his crew through dangerous waters, where pirates and sorceresses await.  Yet more shockingly, the journey reveals a destiny that Vidarian never knew he had, one which puts the fate of the world in his hands:  in the end, he will
have to choose between one future and another, digging through centuries of myth and legends to find the right "choice."

One the interesting things about Hoffman's novel is its bipolar adherence to the traditional forms of fantasy.  While at the heart of the narrative can be found a cliche "chosen one" story in the form of Vidarian, the narrative also takes away the security of knowing what is the "right choice" for the mythical figure.  Vidarian not only must choose which future is the right one for his world, but he must also do so without knowing for sure which choice is the right one, all while fending off Imperial soldiers who want to prevent him from making any choice whatsoever and others who want him to choose one path or another.  The novel never betrays its answers in this regard, which might help boost it above other high fantasy novels floating out there.

But beyond that, Sword of Fire and Sea is essentially an adventure fantasy akin to the adventure novels of the romantic period.  There isn't anything wrong with this, but it is important to recognize.  A great deal of the novel is occupied with action:  ships in combat, the heroes fighting back enemies of various shapes and sizes, heavy uses of magic, searching for enormous mystical creatures and combating unknowns.  Thankfully, the novel avoids the pitfalls of D&D dungeon crawlers.  While the characters do have to "collect things" in order to succeed in their mission, Hoffman avoids making such collecting about fighting back nameless, faceless monsters in "secret places" (a.k.a. a dungeon or magical forest).  The people involved in stopping Vidarian and Ariadel are the very people one wouldn't expect to turn their backs, which adds some depth to a novel which doesn't show itself as particularly "deep" (as most adventure novels don't, even when "depth" does exist).

In many respects, Hoffman's balance between adventure, manipulated cliche, and character make for a compelling novel that is a lot of fun to read.  Personally, I am not an adventure fantasy fan, and I have a very short leash for the trappings of the fantasy genre.  But Sword of Fire and Sea navigated those trappings in a way that allowed me to get lost in the excitement.  If not for all of the characters being adults, you might expect this story to show up on your young adult shelves, enticing teenagers (and the adults like me who sometimes pretend to be teenagers) with its magic and wonder.  There's something to be said about the way we read YA fantasy, as opposed to fantasy marketed for an adult audience (in which teenagers undoubtedly implant themselves, because they like Tolkien and GRRM too).  But that's something to think about later.

The adventurous nature of Sword of Fire and Sea, however, is also where a some of Hoffman's flaws can be found.  While enjoyable, the novel often moves too swiftly, jumping through significant moments of conflict to get the characters to the next "level."  The result is a lack of tension for many important aspects of the novel.  Yes, Vidarian often must fight against unusual things, sometimes at overwhelming odds, but his success in these ventures sometimes feels too easy; he rarely sheds blood, or Hoffman allows her characters to escape.  One examples involves the fire priestesses, in which Vidarian and his companions learn and ugly truth and are trapped by the Vkortha.  Without much in the way of physical conflict, they manage to escape, taking flight in a gryphon-pulled basket that conveniently lay in wait.  There are other instances like this; each of them detracts from the worry we should have as readers that something might actually happen to Vidarian or his friends.  Of course, things do happen to them, but I would have liked some of the physical conflicts to take part in those "happenings."  Largely speaking, the physical conflicts in Sword of Fire and Sea serve to maintain the adventure narrative.

One other aspect of the novel which is given weak treatment is the growing romance between Vidarian and Ariadel.  Their relationship develops far too swiftly, the result of which is a strain on our ability to suspend disbelief.  Hoffman skips a lot of time early in the novel in order to avoid pages and pages of people walking on the deck of a ship, but more scenes between Vidarian and Ariadel might have helped show how they went from mere acquaintances to close friends to lovers.  Without such scenes, the romance comes out of nowhere and Vidarian's motives for much of the last half of the book lack the power needed to justify his actions.

Despite this, however, the book is a load of fun, and it does leave a lot of interesting questions to be answered in future volumes.  Unlike some traditional fantasy narratives, Vidarian's stint as a "chosen one" ends in the first book, hinting that what will occupy the next two in the series (yes, another trilogy) are the conflicts arising from his choices as a chosen one.  I have a feeling that Hoffman is going to take us into very different territory from this point forward.  I, for one, am looking forward to it.

If you want to learn more about Hoffman and her work, check out her website (and Pyr's website).  You can also check out the interview my friend and I did at The Skiffy and Fanty Show about the book and Hoffman's other interests.

There's something troublesome about what is going on with Weird Tales.  Yesterday, Ann VanderMeer, the current-(no-longer)-editor of the magazine posted an announcement that she would not longer be editor.  More disturbing was the news that Weird Tales had been sold to another editor who seems to have purchased it in order to edit it himself (this fellow being Marvin Kaye).  The entire staff has been dropped, without much in the way of warning or transition.  Poof.  Done.  Over.  I'm sure there was something going on behind the scenes that we don't know, but it doesn't seem all that relevant when you consider the lack of professionalism going on here.

I've already apologized for putting off a lot of things I promised.  One of those things was the dance(s) I said I'd do if I reached my funding goal (over a month ago).  Since I met that goal, I'm required to provide a video of me performing Peanut Butter Jelly Time and the Truffle Shuffle.  But then my laptop died, taking with it my webcam and my only method for making those videos...

That barrier has now been solved.  I went ahead and bought one from the store.  It's a pretty good one, too (for the money).  Which leads me to the point of this post:

In order to "pay you all back" for making you wait so extraordinarily long for an embarrassing video, I've decided to let you all select a third dance for me to do on camera.  It can be anything, so long as I can reasonably do it (or look funny trying) and it's not vulgar (sorry, I'm not taking my pants off or anything like that).

What would you have me do?

I'm stealing this from SF Signal because I know my sister needs to see it.  She's not a Doctor Who fan (in part because she's a mutant from another galaxy), but if this doesn't convince her that Doctor Who is the greatest science fiction TV show still running (poor BSG is no longer with us, after all), then I don't know what will.

Enjoy!

P.S.:  To my sister -- if you don't enjoy this, we will no longer be siblings.  I will disown you like an evil overlord disowns his henchmen.  That means I'll send you to your untimely death knowing full well you can't defeat the good guy.  Or something like that...

The title says it all.  Erin Hoffman, author of Sword of Fire and Sea, joins Jen and I for an interview.  We talk about her debut novel, video games, and even gryphon rights (sort of).

Eileen Gunn was kind enough to put me in my place on Google+ last night.  And let's face it, after a lot of what I said about categories I know nothing about, nor, obviously, have any connection to, I really should have taken my shoe out of my mouth and found a better place for it (or found a better use for my mouth?).  Ms. Gunn noted that I could bypass those categories rather than (and I'm paraphrasing and adding extra words here) malign them because of my lack of interest.

And that's what I'm going to do, because it's really not all that fair to the folks who are nominated in those categories.  In fact, I have nothing against fan artists or anything of the sort.  I don't really have anything against fanzines in the old PDF format either.  I just don't "get" them, which seems to me to be a problem I should try to understand.

Why don't I "get" fanzines and why do I feel like I'm so out of touch with whatever is going on in these various categories?  Is it because I can't attend many of the major conventions in my field (though I've been to small ones and anime conventions in the past; I simply can't afford to attend Worldcon, and it would be a stretch to afford Dragoncon and maintain my academic "career")?

I don't know who reads this blog in terms of fan engagement.  Maybe most of you are of the more "academic" side of things, for lack of a better word.  But I would like to know how people come to love fanzines or fan artists (or discover them before they show up on a Hugo nominee list).  Are there forums I don't hang out in?  Are these things discovered at conventions or through secret club meetings in a dungeon?  And why do you love them?  What about The Drink Tank or File 770 or what have you compels you to read?

I'll shut up now, foot covered in drool...

Time for another edition of the Haul of Books!  I'm almost caught up now, but will have to do another edition soon to account for all the books that magically showed up on my door recently.

Feel free to let me know what books you got in the mail in the comments.

Here goes (after the fold):


Mirror Maze by Michaele Jordan (Pyr)

This is a stunning debut novel filled with ghoulish mysteries, romance and adventure. Jacob Aldridge is still utterly devastated by the death of his fiancee when he suddenly encounters her doppelganger. Livia Aram's uncanny resemblance to the late Rhoda Carothers so transcends coincidence that Jacob becomes obsessed with her. The intensity of his passion terrifies her until her compassion is roused by his desperate plight. A demon is stalking him, a succubus-like entity that feeds on human pain and desire. With the help of Jacob's sister, Cecily, and Livia's guardian, the mysterious Dr. Chang, can they overcome the demon before all is lost?

My Life as a White Trash Zombie by Diana Rowland (DAW)

Teenage delinquent Angel Crawford lives with her redneck father in the swamps of southern Louisiana. She's a high school dropout, addicted to drugs and alcohol, and has a police record a mile long. But when she's made into a zombie after a car crash, her addictions disappear, except for her all-consuming need to stay "alive"...

The Houses of Time by Jamil Nasir (Tor)

David Grant has a singular talent--he can affect the course of his dreams. Quite by chance, he discovers the existence of the Trans-Humanist Institute and their lucid dreaming lessons. He discovers that under the tutelage of Dr. Thotmoses he has more control over his dreams. However, his talent soon runs away with him and he visits dreamplaces while awake. The waking world and the dreaming world collide. Grant ends up sedated in a hellish mental institution . . . but escapes through his lucid dreams, which he is beginning to control--though the control is far from perfect. Grant discovers, to his horror, that Dr. Thotmoses belongs to the Caucasus Synod Western Orthodox Church, and that they have been grooming him because of his fantastic dreaming talents. Only someone with his talent at manipulating reality and dream can bring their prayer to the Divine Presence in the universe. Many have tried this journey, few have succeeded. Those who have returned successful are rewarded beyond their wildest dreams.

Shining at the Bottom of the Sea by Stephen Marche (Riverhead Books)

Shining at the Bottom of the Sea is a vibrant evocation of a fictional country, Sanjania—from the birth pangs of its first settlers and their hardy vernacular, to its revolutionary years, and all the way to the present diaspora—all told through Stephen Marche’s innovative and accomplished writing style.

Down the Mysterly River by Bill Willingham (Starscape)

Down the Mysterly River is the children’s book debut of Bill Willingham, the creator of the #1 New York Times bestselling graphic novel series Fables. Complete with illustrations by Fables artist Mark Buckingham, it is a spirited, highly original tale of adventure, suspense, and everlasting friendship. Max “the Wolf” is a top notch Boy Scout, an expert at orienteering and a master of being prepared. So it is a little odd that he suddenly finds himself, with no recollection of his immediate past, lost in an unfamiliar wood. Even odder still, he encounters a badger named Banderbrock, a black bear named Walden, and McTavish the Monster (who might also be an old barn cat)—all of whom talk—and who are as clueless as Max. Before long, Max and his friends are on the run from a relentless group of hunters and their deadly hounds. Armed with powerful blue swords and known as the Blue Cutters, these hunters capture and change the very essence of their prey. For what purpose, Max can’t guess. But unless he can solve the mystery of the strange forested world he’s landed in, Max may find himself and his friends changed beyond recognition, lost in a lost world…

The Immorality Engine by George Mann (Tor)

On the surface, life is going well for Victorian special agent Sir Maurice Newbury, who has brilliantly solved several nigh-impossible cases for Queen Victoria with his indomitable assistant, Miss Veronica Hobbes, by his side. But these facts haven’t stopped Newbury from succumbing increasingly frequently to his dire flirtation with the lure of opium. His addiction is fueled in part by his ill-gotten knowledge of Veronica’s secret relationship with the queen, which Newbury fears must be some kind of betrayal. Veronica, consumed by worry and care for her prophetic but physically fragile sister Amelia, has no idea that she is a catalyst for Newbury’s steadily worsening condition. Veronica and Newbury’s dear friend Bainbridge, the Chief Investigator at Scotland Yard, tries to cover for him as much as possible, but when the body of a well known criminal turns up, Bainbridge and Veronica track Newbury down in an opium den and drag him out to help them with the case. The body is clearly, irrefutably, that of the man in question, but shortly after his body is brought to the morgue, a crime is discovered that bears all the dead man’s hallmarks. Bainbridge and Veronica fear someone is committing copycat crimes, but Newbury is not sure. Somehow, the details are too perfect for it to be the work of a copycat. But how can a dead man commit a crime?

The Damned Busters by Matthew Hughes (Angry Robot)

A hilariously demonic romp through Hell and Back. When mild-mannered actuary Chesney Artstruther accidentally summons a demon and refuses to sell his soul, Hell goes on strike - but with no demons to tempt mankind, the world slows down. No temptation means no ambition, and no drive - the world's manufacturing and agriculture suffers, and something must be done! Chesney agrees to help, but in return he wants to be a superhero with a demonic sidekick!

Hellhole by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson (Tor)

Only the most desperate colonists dare to make a new home on Hellhole. Reeling from a recent asteroid impact, tortured with horrific storms, tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes, and churning volcanic eruptions, the planet is a dumping ground for undesirables, misfits, and charlatans…but also a haven for dreamers and independent pioneers. Against all odds, an exiled general named Adolphus has turned Hellhole into a place of real opportunity for the desperate colonists who call the planet their home. While the colonists are hard at work developing the planet, General Adolphus secretly builds alliances with the leaders of the other Deep Zone worlds, forming a clandestine coalition against the tyrannical, fossilized government responsible for their exile. What no one knows is this: the planet Hellhole, though damaged and volatile, hides an amazing secret. Deep beneath its surface lies the remnants of an obliterated alien civilization and the buried memories of its unrecorded past that, when unearthed, could tear the galaxy apart.

Phew!  That's a lot of books, right?

Which if this are of interest to you?

(I've added an addendum to this post in order to pull my foot out of my mouth.  Feel free to read it after you read everything below.)

I stayed up nice and late in order to watch the event live, which may or may not have been a mistake.  Now that I'm wide-eyed and bushy-tailed, I feel up to giving my thoughts about the Hugo Awards Ceremony and the winners in the various categories.  Hopefully my attempt at organizing these thoughts won't deter you from reading them.  (Some of these are probably going to get me in trouble...)

Hosting Matters


I don't think I've ever seen these awards before, so I assume having hosts in Academy Awards fashion has been a staple of the Hugos for a while.  For 2011, Jay Lake and Ken Scholes hosted the events, following a scripted set of jokes and jibes in order to keep the audience amused between awards.  It's hard for me to fault them for what turned out to be a not-very-funny event; Lake, after all, has been battling cancer for so long now I can't remember when it all began -- as a cancer survivor, I sympathize and feel it's fair to indulge him in whatever he is interested in doing, even if he's not terribly good at it.

But mostly the jokes and constant references to singing and self-deprecating humor were forced and excessive.  The ceremony is exceedingly long anyway, and it seems to me they could have cut down on the jokes to save a good 45 minutes.  Or instead of following a script, they might have provided more natural discussion points, with some humorous anecdotes from actual interactions they've had (at the Hugos or elsewhere).  Folks seemed to enjoy them, though, so I suppose I'm out of place on this.

Now on to the individual awards:

The John W. Campbell Award for Best New Writer
Winner -- Lev Grossmam
Who I Thought Would Take It -- Lauren Beukes

I haven't read Grossman's novel, so I can't say whether his book is any good.  A lot of folks seem to love Grossman for The Magicians, but I personally thought Lauren Beukes should have taken the award for Moxyland and Zoo City.  She's bloody brilliant and I think it's a shame that she isn't being acknowledged as such through such an important award.

Best Fan Artist


Winner -- Brad W. Foster
Who I Thought Would Take It -- No idea

I don't know who any of the people on the nomination list are, so I have no connection to either of them.  This is one of those categories that I just don't care about, which may make me a jackass.

Best Fanzine


Winner -- The Drink Tank, edited by Christopher J. Garcia and James Bacon
Who I Thought Would Take It -- StarshipSofa, edited by Tony C. Smith

StarshipSofa is the only one of the nominees that I even know about.  I don't think Smith should have won the award, though.  His podcast is not a fanzine.  It hardly produces anything of a fan-ish nature and is more accurately described as a micro-press and audio fiction joint than anything else.  But the other options on the list seem utterly irrelevant to me.  I don't read them.  Most of them I didn't know existed until they showed up on ballots in the last year.  Most of them are old format.  And to be honest, I think websites like SF Signal should be on this list.  But whatever.

The amusing thing about this award was Garcia's emotional response, which could be described as a uber-freak-out.  It was fascinating and amusing in a kind of "good for you, mate" way.

(Edit:  You really should see Garcia's response.  It was honest and, well, clearly winning the award meant a hell of a lot to him.  And you have to appreciate that for someone who has dedicated themselves to a fan pursuit and suddenly gets recognition for it by people who, largely speaking, are the objects of that venture.)

Best Fan Writer


Winner -- Claire Brialey
Who I Thought Would Take It -- No idea

This is another category I care nothing about.  I've never heard of any of the people on the list and am sure I never will beyond seeing them on this list.

Best Semiprozine


Winner -- Clarkesworld
Who I Thought Would Take It -- Clarkesworld

The real question is who I thought should take the award.  And that answer is easy:  Interzone, edited by Andy Cox.  I think Interzone is long overdue for some damned recognition.  It's one of the few print magazines with excellent production values, both in terms of its look and its fiction.  They publish amazing stuff.  I don't get why they haven't won this damned award yet.  Not to mention that Clarkesworld, which is a great magazine (in general), has published some real stinkers in the last year.  It's a good magazine, but this is not a banner year, you know?

Meh.

Best Professional Artist


Winner -- Shaun Tan
Who I Thought Would Take It -- Stephan Martiniere

To be honest, I thought Tan would get an award for "The Lost Things" instead of this particular award.  I think he's deserving of an award somewhere on the ballot, though, so saying that I think Martiniere would have and should have taken the award isn't anything against Tan.  It's more my confusion about his placement.  But good on Tan.  He damn well deserves an Hugo!

Best Editor, Short Form


Winner -- Sheila Williams
Who I Thought Would Take It -- John Joseph Adams

In all honesty, all of the names on the list are names that we've all seen before, which leads me not to care all that much who wins.  Oh, JJA took it?  That's nice.  He'll be there next year.  Oh, it's Williams this time?  Nifty.  Then again, Strahan and Schmidt haven't taken it yet, have they?  Hmm...

(Edit:  Again, this is nothing against Williams.  In fact, she deserves the award just as much as anyone else for all her hard editing work.)

Best Editor, Long Form


Winner -- Lou Anders
Who I Thought Would Take It -- Lou Anders

I think Nick Mamatas is due for a Hugo as editor in the next year or so.  His work on Japanese genre fiction is crucial to the the publishing world.  But I don't think it's his time yet.

Anders has published some amazing books in the last few years, so it's difficult to say he doesn't deserve the award.  And hearing him accept the award with modesty by thanking readers and all the other people involved in the publishing process (including authors) earned him some serious Shaun points.  Plus:  he was dressed like a champ.

Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form


Winner -- Doctor Who ("The Pandorica Opens/The Big Bang")
Who I Thought Would Take It -- "The Lost Thing" (Shaun Tan)

Honestly, if you're going to give an award to Doctor Who, it should go to the best of the lot, which is hands down "A Christmas Carol."  "The Pandorica Opens" was good (and I think "Vincent and the Doctor" is overrated), but nothing from Doctor Who has thus far met up to the quality of "A Christmas Carol."

That said, I seriously thought Tan would take this award.  He got an Oscar for it.  I thought he was a shoe-in...

Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form

Winner -- Inception
Who I Thought Would Take It -- Inception


The competition in this category was intense.  Aside from HP7 Part One and Scott Pilgrim, the other contenders (Toy Story 3 and How To Train Your Dragon) were amazing movies.  But it's hard to ignore Inception, right?  It's a film that got the whole community talking.  Toy Story didn't do that.  How To Train Your Dragon didn't either.

Best Graphic Story


Winner -- Girl Genius, Volume 10
Who I Thought Would take It -- No idea

I don't read graphic novels and what not.  I've at least heard of most of the things on the list, which is nice, but I've never read them and kind of don't care.

The hosts were semi-amusing, but again it was overly scripted and not terribly funny overall.

Best Related Book


Winner -- Chicks Dig Time Lords
Who I Thought Would Take It -- Robert A. Heinlein:  In Dialogue with His Century, Vol. 1


Some book about people who love Doctor Who?  Yippee.  I honestly thought the award could have gone to almost any other item and end up better placed (and I don't think Writing Excuses belongs in this category).  It's a fan book, contributing information we've seen on the Internet and in fanzines of all shapes and sizes for decades.  As a little book of fun, it's nice, but as a book worthy of a Hugo?  Not on your life.  Best Related Work should go to something that contributes knowledge to the genre.

But what do I know?  I haven't read any of the books on the list and I don't know the rules for half these categories anyway.  Honesty and all that.

Best Short Story


Winner -- "For Want of a Nail" by Mary Robinette Kowal
Who I Thought Would Take It -- "The Things" by Peter Watts

Well, at least "Ponies" by Kij Johnson didn't win.  That's all I have to say about that...

Best Novelette


Winner -- "The Emperor of Mars" by Allen M. Steele
Who I Thought Would Take It -- No idea

People said no to whale rape.  This is good.

Best Novella


Winner -- "The Lifecycle of Software Objects" by Ted Chiang
Who I Thought Would Take It -- No idea

I have no connection to any of the novellas, to be honest.  Maybe "Troika" by Alastair Reynolds?  Sure.  We'll go with that.

Silverberg presented this award, though, and he was hilarious.  He should present every award.

Best Novel


Winner -- Blackout/All Clear by Connie Willis
Who I Thought Would Take It -- Blackout/All Clear by Connie Willis

Again, I have no connection to the novels.  I would have preferred to see other books on the list.  That said, I really do like Jemisin and hope her name will appear on the ballot in the future.

And there you go.  Overall, I think the awards were a success.  I wasn't terribly disappointed by the majority of the selections.  Some categories fell flat, while others got it very right.  I think my initial dislike of the hosting has a lot more to do with the late hour.  I don't know why they hold the events so late in the day on the west coast.  It seems like the better thing to do is to have it in the early evening, followed by a kind of mixer or something.  But what do I know?  I've never been to the awards.  There's probably a very different feeling on the ground, one which you can't experience without being an attendee and what not.

Anywho!

• Brad W. Foster
• Randall Munroe
• Maurine Starkey
• Steve Stiles
• Taral Wayne

• The Drink Tank, edited by Christopher J. Garcia and James Bacon
• Banana Wings, edited by Claire Brialey and Mark Plummer
• Challenger, edited by Guy H. Lillian III
• File 770, edited by Mike Glyer
• StarShipSofa, edited by Tony C. Smith

• Claire Brialey
• James Bacon
• Christopher J. Garcia
• James Nicoll
• Steven H. Silver

• Clarkesworld, edited by Neil Clarke, Cheryl Morgan, Sean Wallace; podcast directed by Kate Baker
• Interzone, edited by Andy Cox
• Lightspeed, edited by John Joseph Adams
• Locus, edited by Liza Groen Trombi and Kirsten Gong-Wong
• Weird Tales, edited by Ann VanderMeer and Stephen H. Segal

• Shaun Tan
• Daniel Dos Santos
• Bob Eggleton
• Stephan Martiniere
• John Picacio

• Sheila Williams
• John Joseph Adams
• Stanley Schmidt
• Jonathan Strahan
• Gordon Van Gelder

• Lou Anders
• Ginjer Buchanan
• Moshe Feder
• Liz Gorinsky
• Nick Mamatas
• Beth Meacham
• Juliet Ulman

• Doctor Who: “The Pandorica Opens/The Big Bang,” written by Steven Moffat; directed by Toby Haynes (BBC Wales)
• Doctor Who: “A Christmas Carol,” written by Steven Moffat; directed by Toby Haynes (BBC Wales)
• Doctor Who: “Vincent and the Doctor,” written by Richard Curtis; directed by Jonny Campbell (BBC Wales)
• Fuck Me, Ray Bradbury, written by Rachel Bloom; directed by Paul Briganti
• The Lost Thing, written by Shaun Tan; directed by Andrew Ruhemann and Shaun Tan (Passion Pictures)

• Inception, written and directed by Christopher Nolan (Warner)
• Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1, screenplay by Steve Kloves; directed by David Yates (Warner)
• How to Train Your Dragon, screenplay by William Davies, Dean DeBlois & Chris Sanders; directed by Dean DeBlois & Chris Sanders (DreamWorks)
• Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, screenplay by Michael Bacall & Edgar Wright; directed by Edgar Wright (Universal)
• Toy Story 3, screenplay by Michael Arndt; story by John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton & Lee Unkrich; directed by Lee Unkrich (Pixar/Disney)

• Girl Genius, Volume 10: Agatha Heterodyne and the Guardian Muse, written by Phil and Kaja Foglio; art by Phil Foglio; colors by Cheyenne Wright (Airship Entertainment)
• Fables: Witches, written by Bill Willingham; illustrated by Mark Buckingham (Vertigo)
• Grandville Mon Amour, by Bryan Talbot (Dark Horse)
• Schlock Mercenary: Massively Parallel, written and illustrated by Howard Tayler; colors by Howard Tayler and Travis Walton (Hypernode)
• The Unwritten, Volume 2: Inside Man, written by Mike Carey; illustrated by Peter Gross (Vertigo)

• Chicks Dig Time Lords: A Celebration of Doctor Who by the Women Who Love It, edited by Lynne M. Thomas and Tara O’Shea (Mad Norwegian)
• Bearings: Reviews 1997-2001, by Gary K. Wolfe (Beccon)
• The Business of Science Fiction: Two Insiders Discuss Writing and Publishing, by Mike Resnick and Barry N. Malzberg (McFarland)
• Robert A. Heinlein: In Dialogue with His Century, Volume 1: (1907–1948): Learning Curve, by William H. Patterson, Jr. (Tor)
• Writing Excuses, Season 4, by Brandon Sanderson, Jordan Sanderson, Howard Tayler, Dan Wells

• “For Want of a Nail” by Mary Robinette Kowal (Asimov’s, September 2010)
• “Amaryllis” by Carrie Vaughn (Lightspeed, June 2010)
• “Ponies” by Kij Johnson (Tor.com, November 17, 2010)
• “The Things” by Peter Watts (Clarkesworld, January 2010)

• “The Emperor of Mars” by Allen M. Steele (Asimov’s, June 2010)
• “Eight Miles” by Sean McMullen (Analog, September 2010)
• “The Jaguar House, in Shadow” by Aliette de Bodard (Asimov’s, July 2010)
• “Plus or Minus” by James Patrick Kelly (Asimov’s, December 2010)
• “That Leviathan, Whom Thou Hast Made” by Eric James Stone(Analog, September 2010)

• “The Lifecycle of Software Objects” by Ted Chiang (Subterranean)
• “The Lady Who Plucked Red Flowers beneath the Queen’s Window” by Rachel Swirsky (Subterranean Magazine, Summer 2010)
• “The Maiden Flight of McCauley’s Bellerophon” by Elizabeth Hand(Stories: All New Tales, William Morrow)
• “The Sultan of the Clouds” by Geoffrey A. Landis (Asimov’s,September 2010)
• “Troika” by Alastair Reynolds (Godlike Machines, Science Fiction Book Club)

• Blackout/All Clear by Connie Willis (Ballantine Spectra)
• Cryoburn by Lois McMaster Bujold (Baen)
• The Dervish House by Ian McDonald (Gollancz; Pyr)
• Feed by Mira Grant (Orbit)
• The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms by N.K. Jemisin (Orbit)

Earlier this week, I started writing a short story entitled "The Girl Who Flew on a Whale" as part of my WISB Podcast project.  The story, as my friend Adam Callaway remarked, is a whimsical fantasy for young readers (chapbook level).  I've always wanted to write a story like this.  They're fun to read and the current venture has been fun to write.  But one of the issues I've had is the tug in my mind to turn this short story into a much larger project.

"The Girl Who Flew on a Whale" is about a young girl who lives in a semi-Victorian-era town on the continent of Traea (many centuries after the events of The World in the Satin Bag).  Her mother wants to prune her for the aristocracy, while the little girl, affectionately called the Dreamer, wants nothing to do with that world -- rather, as her name implies, she dreams of the legends and myths of her world, wondering and wishing some of them are true.  The conflict is one that I'm sure has been seen many times before, but it is also a conflict that is close to my heart.  I don't have children, but know that when I have them, I'll do everything I can to foster their creativity.
Because children who have their dreams crushed are children who lose the very thing that makes the world grow:  creativity and innovation.  We need dreamers today more than we ever did before.  "The Girl Who Flew on a Whale" is partly about that conflict, but I've set it in a fantasy world (with plenty of whimsy) to get the message across via an adventure.

And that's where the issues arise.  The story is begging me to expand the narrative I have already started.  It's begging me to bring in swashbuckling pirates and strange creatures and wonderful magic and all sorts of silly and beautiful things.  Many of these I'll put into the story anyway, but the grand adventure my mind is trying to imagine won't fit into a short story or novelette.  I'm having to keep those things at bay while I write a more manageable tale (and one that I can actually read in a single sitting for the podcasted version I promised everyone).

Something I've been thinking of doing is providing the short version and then expanding it into a proper chapbook.  I know many writers have done things like this (writing novel versions of shorts they wrote a long time ago).  But is it as common today as it was in the old days of SF/F?  I can't think of many contemporary examples.

I bring all of this up because I'm curious about some things:

• How do you go about keeping a story under control?  Or do you throw your hands up and give it what it wants?
• Do novel versions of short stories work for readers?  Do you enjoy reading those kinds of stories?

I'm sensing a pattern in Gateways.  One really good story, followed by a bad one, followed by a good one, and so on and so forth.  Larry Niven's "Gates" is one of those bad ones.  Split between two perspectives -- a science fiction writer talking about the singularity/Bill Gates and Bill Gates making the decision to create a virtual world in which he is filthy rich -- "Gates" lacks anything resembling plot or character development.  In fact, beyond presenting a gimmick, I'm not sure if the story has a point.

Is it a story that wants us to buy its premise that the world we live in is a virtual world a la Second Life in which all but Bill Gates and his friends are intelligent programs?  If so, Niven has failed to provide a coherent "world" within which we can come to that conclusion.  Or is the singularity / Bill Gates section a fictionalized account of the tech icon's rise to "power" written by the science fiction writer of that previous section?  That might be interesting, but beyond the fact that the
science fiction writer talks about Bill Gates (from which the title obviously comes), the connection is loose.

Then again, perhaps we're supposed to think of this story as a couple of alternate histories about old Bill.  But each "vision" lacks depth.  The characters are cardboard cutouts -- people we've seen before.  The stories themselves, if you could call them that (vignettes might be a more appropriate term), go nowhere; we never see the worlds these different characters are talking about, or learn anything about the characters to give us a sense of who they are and what they've done to get here.  Maybe that's the point, but there are writers who have approached similar themes more effectively.  This story, however, is one I would recommend skipping.

I thought you all would be interested in this February 2006 talk by Ken Robinson about how schools destroy our creativity. As someone who teaches at the university level, and someone who loves the "what if" aspect of science fiction, I think there is a lot to be said about the way we teach our students. The sad truth is that people who study pedagogy know that our public schools are (at least partially) a failure. They've been saying it for decades. But the people who run our schools are, more often than not, people who either don't have degrees or didn't get them in professions which required them to learn how to teach. 

That's not the case with myself. Part of my educational requirements here at the University of Florida is to teach undergraduate composition and (now) literature courses. We're still teaching formulaic writing at the university level, something which I've tried to go against in my courses. The result of working in opposition to formula has been eye-opening. Many students simply don't know how to be creative.  Some of those students, when challenged to think for themselves and to use their critical thinking skills (what little they have) to move beyond the "right way of thinking and writing" often get flustered, because they haven't a clue what to do, how to do it, and so on.

We're not teaching our young people how to be the builders of tomorrow.  We're teaching them how to fit into a society which works like a repetitive machine.  And as we've seen in the last few years, that machine is running out of oil.  It's breaking down.

Here's the video (after the fold):

"Von Neumann's Bug" (VNB) is occupied with a trope familiar to science fiction fans:  the self-replicating machine.  In this case, the machine is an alien search drone named Bert who terrorizes a small, middle-class family in an attempt to rebuild itself and escape Earth's gravity to resume its mission.  And it does so by inconspicuously tearing apart a man's most prized possession:  his car.