wisb-Guardian-Express

If the title doesn't entice you, then maybe this will:

The lovely folks at ooShirts, a Bay Area independent shirt company, has offered a few t-shirts to us for The World in the Satin Bag and The Skiffy and Fanty Show.  Rather than shoving our logos on the shirts and enjoying them by ourselves, we thought we'd give folks a shot at a t-shirt of their own!

Here's how it will work:
We want a new logo design for The World in the Satin Bag and The Skiffy and Fanty Show that reflects the content or feel of the sites in some way.  Roughly translated, that means we have no clear rules whatsoever, in part because we are artistically handicapped.  The designs should look nice (obviously) and it should have something to do with the sites, but we are more interested in seeing what you come up with than bogging down the artistic process with rules and rigid desires.

These will break down into two contests:  one for The World in the Satin Bag and one for The Skiffy and Fanty Show.  And you can enter both.

What you get if you win:

1. The two winning logos will receive a t-shirt with their winning logo on the front.
2. Free books -- winners will receive a $10 gift certificate to their preferred online bookstore AND a choice of a selection of books to be announced later.
3. A bio and thanks in the About sections of both sites (because you're awesome and we love you)

Leave a comment or email me at arconna[at]yahoo[dot]com tell me one thing you like about fantasy novels.

Your response need not be long (though more discussion is always welcome).  Winners will be chosen at random at 12 PM EST on Dec. 9th, 2011 (that way the publisher can hopefully get the book to you before the end of the month).

Here's a little about the book to get your brain juices flowing:

When allies become enemies, to whom can a clever thief turn? 

Armed with one of seven Ancient Blades, Malden was chosen by Fate to act as savior . . . and failed dismally. And now there is no stopping the barbarian hordes from invading and pillaging the kingdom of Skrae. Suddenly friends and former supporters alike covet the young hero’s magic while seeking his destruction—from the treacherous King and leaders of the City of Ness to the rogue knight Croy, who owes Malden his life. 

It will take more than Malden’s makeshift army of harlots and cutpurses to preserve a realm. Luckily the sorceress Cythera fights at his side, along with the ingenious, irascible dwarf Slag. And the wily thief still has a desperate and daring plan or two up his larcenous sleeve . . .

The first two books in the series are in mass market paperback (available just about anywhere).  If you don't have the first two, you should get them for the holidays and enter anyway!

Listen at your own risk.  Discussing Modelland may cause inner ear infections, brain cancer, or leprosy.  You have been warned...

I don't think I need to say anything more than this:  the new episode involves my friend and I talking about one of the worst books ever released by a traditional publisher.  That is all.

I just broke the news over at The Skiffy and Fanty Show, but I figure you all should know about it too!

Lauren Beukes, South African author of Moxyland and Zoo City, has sold the film rights to her Arthur C. Clarke winning novel, Zoo City to Helena Spring, a renowned South African filmmaker.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Helena Spring, widely regarded as one of South Africa’s most accomplished motion picture producers, has just been awarded the highly sought-after film rights to Zoo City, the Sci-Fi thriller penned by South African author Lauren Beukes – who garnered the 2011 Arthur C. Clarke Award for best Science Fiction novel. In the wake of whopping sales figures, multiple awards and critical acclaim Beukes’ book generated fierce interest from numerous bidders in the entertainment industry, putting Spring alongside major US and UK producers eager to tell Beukes’ unique tale. 

And:

Spring’s career in the entertainment industry spans nearly three decades, during which time she has produced over twenty motion pictures – including the first ever South African film to receive recognition at the Academy Awards®: Darrell Roodt’s Yesterday earned a Best Foreign Picture nomination in 2004. 

Spring, who has worked with some of the foremost filmmakers in the world – such as Paul Greengrass who helmed the box office smash hits The Bourne Supremacy and The Bourne Ultimatum, and Academy Award® winner, Tom Hooper (The King’s Speech), will soon be putting the project out to a select party of directors, while Beukes has first look as screenwriter to adapt her novel for the screen. “Lauren is perfectly placed to do this. The characters are alive inside her,” says Spring.

This is huge news!  Congrats, Lauren!

You can read my review of Zoo City here and the Skiffy and Fanty interview with Lauren here.

When it comes to surreal or downright bizarre movies, you can always count me in.  The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus.  Donnie Darko.  Existenz.  Love them all.

Now comes John Dies at the End, a 2012 film based on David Wong's (a.k.a. Jason Pargin) novel of the same name.  And Paul Giamatti is in it, which means I'll probably see it even if everyone else says it sucks.  Giamatti is bloody brilliant!

Here's the trailer (after the fold):

Unlike a lot of my fellow Americans, I won't pretend that this holiday celebrates anything other than being with family and eating an insane amount of food (which could probably feed a small, poor country for a year).  I won't pretend that this holiday is about how great the Pilgrims were to the Native Americans, because that would be historical revisionism at work (and I'm a stickler for getting my history "right," as far as right can be).

Instead, this post is about celebrating what the holiday really means to me:

• Being with friends or family and enjoying a meal together, without all the hubbub of daily life
• Saying thanks for the things I have, whether material or personal

It seems that Anne McCaffrey, one of the great science fiction writers, has passed away.

Needless to say, the genre community has suffered some big losses in the last few years.  McCaffrey will be remembered for a long time to come, if not for being a great writer (she was), then certainly for helping shape genre fiction (she did).  She'll be placed along side E. E. "Doc" Smith, Isaac Asimov, Octavia Butler, Robert Heinlein, Poul Anderson, Joanna Russ, and many more.

We'll miss you, Anne.

Jason Sanford joins Jen and I for another riveting episode of The Skiffy and Fanty Show.  Okay, so it might not be so riveting, but we're pretty sure it's at least moderately interesting.  Or maybe not.  We're biased!

To the point:  this latest episode involves a short discussion of some interesting news going on in the SF/F community, a roundtable on magical realism (which is sure to annoy some people), and a long game of book love, in which we tell the world what we want for Christmas.

We hope you'll tune in, but most of all...we hope you enjoy it!

Nothing I will say here should be misconstrued as "original thought."  Rather, these are the things that spring to mind when I read posts like this one by Bryan Thomas Schmidt on how science fiction lacks optimism and hope.

But before getting into the reasons why SF is naturally optimistic, I want to explain where I am coming from.  In a general sense, the world today appears to be in a worse position than it was at the height of the Cold War (a culturally relative position, to be sure).  We still live in a time where nuclear weapons are a legitimate threat, but also in a time where economic-, environment-, and resource-based threats are immediate and unavoidable.  When you break down the troubling world in which we live on the individual level, what you get is an existence which is, in and of itself, perpetually tenuous.  In the United States (where most SF is published), these facts are incontrovertible, and have been for the last 30-40 years, when sweeping reforms to our country reached the tipping point as politicians and corporations sought to deregulate and otherwise neuter the social safety nets put into place from WW2 to the end of the Vietnam War.

It's from this position, then, that I arrive at the central rationale for considering SF as inherently optimistic.  For me, waking up is the most optimistic thing about life.  Because at the end of the day, I am still alive.  I could be dead or dying.  I could be suffering endlessly.  I could be in a
million other possible situations that would make waking up anything but a blessing.  But I'm not.  I awake, crawl out of bed, and go about my life -- which may or may not be as great as I would like (or as great as it should be), but is at least marked by that most wonderful of optimistic realities.  Life.

And that's where we have to start.  Because SF, at its heart, is almost always about humanity in a state of persistent existence.  SF isn't just set in the future; it is set in a future in which we still exist.  If you can't find optimism in that, then you have not only lost touch with what is wonderful about life itself, but also with why SF is a grand genre.  While it's true that SF has grown less adventurous in terms of its narratives (that is that much SF, though not all, avoids the adventurous nature of the pulps and the Golden Age in exchange for a more well-rounded and "real" approach to the world -- SF = always about the present), it has done so without losing the inherent optimism of its makers.

Yet throughout all of those dystopias and (allegedly) negative narratives, we find heroes and natural optimism.  The world is always getting better in SF, even when the story we're presented appears to show us moving backwards.  We're not only still around, but we're creating spaceships, building new civilizations, surviving plagues and other ills, and otherwise doing what humans have done best since the first humans left the African plains tens of thousands of years ago.  Surviving.  And in the middle of it all, we find heroes, who may be just like us, just like we want to be, or something else entirely.  But they are heroes nonetheless, doing the job of solving problems, defeating "enemies," etc.

And if you can't find optimism in that -- in reading about man confronting new problems in the future, whether on Earth or in space, whether in a dystopian landscape or a relative utopia -- then perhaps the problem isn't that SF appears to be less optimistic; rather, perhaps the problem is that we've forgotten what it means to be surprised when we see people just like us in stories set so far ahead.

I don't think the sensawunda died.  I think we killed it by making SF into something it could never be.

I giggled while watching this.  It's hard not to.  The falls are hilarious, but you can also imagine how frustrating it is to get tripped up for almost no reason so many miles from home.  You come hundreds of thousands of miles only to trip over air and fall flat on your face...

Here's the video:

I don't know if what I did today in my ENC 1101 class (intro to college argument) could be called properly experimental, but it was certainly science fictional.  I've been doing a lot of playing around with education as of late, in part because I find the traditional educational forms rather dull as models for teaching traditionally dull classes.  As I mentioned here, my 3254/2210 (professional communication or tech writing) class has become a test bed for an educational card game, which I am now developing into a proper educational tool for others who teach the course.  And I expect a great deal of experimentation to come in the future.

Today's post isn't about 3254, though.  It's about 1101 and what happened when I inserted a heavy dose of science fiction into an educational environment.  Here's the recap:

What my students were reading:

An essay called "Ethics for Extraterrestrials" by Joel J. Kupperman, published in American Philosophical Quarterly in 1991 (Vol. 28, No. 4).  Kupperman posits a scenario in which an alien species known as the Throgs, who are technologically (and, perhaps, intellectually) superior, have taken to flaying humans for unstated (or unclear) reasons.  What follows is a brief exploration of several moral/ethical positions, from which Kupperman tries to determine whether any human ethical models would have a reasonable chance of convincing the Throgs not to flay us.

What I did:

I created a detailed (though brief) scenario involving two imaginary species of alien who have been in conflict for hundreds of years.  The class would divide into two groups (representing each side) and debate in the form of speeches to a small number of their peers (representing the Interstellar United Nations).  The purpose of the exercise was to put the students in two unique positions, in which the moral and ethical ground from which each species could argue was by no means absolute (i.e., there was no pure right and wrong response).

What was on the agenda:

1. A quiz on Kupperman's essay.
2. A thought experiment in which two alien species had to present ethical arguments in favor of their particular position (group Y wants to be granted planethood in the Interstellar United Nations; group X believes allowing planethood for group Y would be a bad thing -- basically).
3. A small group of students (and the person evaluating me during class, as happens once a year) were tasked with determining which group made the better argument.

Here are the slides:



What happened:
Both groups took the exercise relatively seriously, with some students participating more vigorously than others.  I suspect much of this has to do with the fact that free pizza was on the line (which all of them are going to get in the end anyway, because I'm like that).
Group Y (who amusingly renamed themselves after one of the judges -- the Shannonites), took to arguing why continued denial of sovereignty (my words) meant contemporary Shannonites were being punished for behaviors for which current generations were not responsible.  Revenge, therefore, was a poor excuse for denying people the right to participate in the interstellar community, particularly since contemporary Shannonites were willing to acknowledge that the war was a terrible response to the partition.  One student argued that the Shannonites were clearly interested in a peaceful transition, since they were going through the "proper channels" to achieve peace.
Group X (arguing against planethood) renamed themselves the Free Masons and made a logical argument about why the recent aggression by the Shannonites should deter any consideration of planethood.  While they acknowledged the temporal distance of the Collusis-Free Mason War, they also were quick to remind the IUN that guerrilla campaigns were still being waged by the Shannonites -- if not by government decree, then at least by personal choice.  This meant that the Free Masons were under strain to maintain order and protect citizens from attacks on territories currently owned by the Free Masons.  The argument was a solid one, since it played heavily on the ethical implications of allowing an apparently aggressive group wider access to the political community.
But where the Free Masons fell from the diplomatic tree can be summed up by a direct quote from the debate:  "We own you."  The Free Masons, in a rebuttal, argued that one of the consequences of war is the complete loss of property and planethood.  In effect, the Shannonites were no longer Shannonites, but Free Masons -- except, obviously, in spaces relegated to the Shannonites.
The Shannonites responded by pointing out that the Native Americans on Earth were treated similarly, and that such behavior doesn't make one right (an inaccurate example, for obvious reasons).  But they also reiterated why revenge (or consequences) is unfair to contemporary Shannonites, and also a poor excuse for aggression and alien rights abuses.
The result of the debate hinged on this major exchange.  The judges believed the Free Masons had made a stronger argument, except when they exposed their imperialist/colonialist/aggressor status by uttering "we own you."  Therefore, they decided the Shannonites should be granted planethood.  The Shannonites, oddly enough, actually cheered (not because they were getting pizza, but because a number of the students pretending to be Shannonites -- and those in the Free Mason camp -- started to adopt the mentality of their alien masks -- in a superficial way, certainly).
What I thought:
In the end, I was quite pleased by the experiment.  While there were certainly flaws -- many of which were exacerbated by the 50-minute time limit -- I would say that the entire thing was a success.  And the experience has led me to wonder whether it is possible to create an introductory course like 1101 within the confines of a fictional -- though allegorical -- universe.  Would such an experiment work on such a large scale?  Could it be sustained?  Would students still learn from the experience, or would the knowledge they acquire be useful only in the context of the course?  
I think students would still pick up information about argumentation and writing, but I suspect such experiments are inherently limited by the reality that my students should be engaging with topics of relevance to their current or future lives.  But I'm not altogether sure students care so much about what is going on in the world.  Some of them certainly do, but most are probably too overwhelmed by the college experience to devote enough attention to the complexities of the political field (among other subjects).  
I don't blame them.  I was an undergrad once, after all.  In any case, I hope my students came out having learned something about the experience, because I certainly did.
------------------------------------------------------
Has anyone else tried anything experimental in their class?  Or am I making a silly assumption that there are other teachers out there reading this blog?

I'm late as heck at getting to all the books I've received recently.  Just wait until I decide to crack open the books I bought at the local book sale (for research purposes, primarily -- no, I'm not joking).

What I want to know is:

1. What have you purchased recently?
2. Which books below most interest you?

Here's the list:


After the Apocalypse by Maureen F. McHugh (Small Beer Press)

The apocalypse was yesterday. These stories are today.  

In her new collection, Story Prize finalist Maureen F. McHugh delves into the dark heart of contemporary life and life five minutes from now and how easy it is to mix up one with the other. Her stories are post-bird flu, in the middle of medical trials, wondering if our computers are smarter than us, wondering when our jobs are going to be outsourced overseas, wondering if we are who we say we are, and not sure what we’d do to survive the coming zombie plague.

Antiquitas Lost:  The Last of the Shamalans by Robert Louis Smith (Medlock Publishing)

Move over Harry Potter. From American cardiologist Robert Louis Smith comes the unique fantasy novel Antiquitas Lost, peppered with more than seventy eye-popping illustrations by Marvel Comics legend Geof Isherwood. This epic fantasy tale tells the story of a boy named Elliott, a lonesome kid with deformities on his hands and feet, who is uprooted from his home after his mother falls gravely ill. When they move to New Orleans so his grandfather can help care for her, Elliott learns that the old man's eighteenth century mansion hides an ancient secret. While checking out some strange relics in the basement, Elliott strays through an ancient doorway into a tumultuous parallel world, full of bizarre creatures and warring races. He has stumbled into Pangrelor, the most ancient of all worlds and "mother to all the stars in the sky." As he learns to navigate his new surroundings, he discovers wondrous abilities he never dreamed he possessed, and an abiding connection to the primitive, alien world that will forever change him.

To Sleep Gently by Trent Zelazny (Crossroads Press)

When career criminal Jack Dempster gets caught and put away for five years in prison, he finds time to seriously reconsider his chosen line of work. Before he can make any serious decision, some old acquaintances track him down with a proposal. They want him to go to Santa Fe, New Mexico. With the help of an inside man, he’s to lead a small group of professionals on a daring robbery of the El Dorado Hotel, one of the finest, and most secure establishments in the Southwest.  

Double-crosses, love triangles, and immersion in his own self-destructive past conspire to lead him to ruin. It’s not easy to sleep when searching for normalcy in the heart of a brutal past.

 The Crimson Pact (Vol. 1) edited by Paul Genesse (Alliteration Ink)

The moment of the demons' defeat became their greatest victory. 

In the carnage after the last great battle against the demons, a doomed general discovers their hidden victory. Instead of being annihilated, unspeakable evil escaped into many unsuspecting worlds. To fight them, the men and women of the Crimson Pact must sacrifice everything—including their own lives. 

Explore 26 stories based on the world created in “The Failed Crusade,” by Patrick M. Tracy and included in The Crimson Pact Volume 1, about the valiant men and women who refuse to let the demons win, and those unfortunate souls caught in the epic struggle raging across the multiverse. 

New York Times Bestselling author and Campbell award nominee, Larry Correia, and many urban fantasy, steampunk, sci-fi, horror, and fantasy writers tell the tales in this diverse collection of short stories, flash fiction, and novellas. 

With stories by Patrick M. Tracy, Richard Lee Byers, Jess Hartley, Donald J. Bingle, Chris Pierson, Barbara J. Webb, Kelly Swails, Sarah Hans, Patrick S. Tomlinson, Sarah Kanning, Isaac Bell, Elaine Blose, Kathy Watness, Daniel Myers, Justin Swapp, Rebecca L. Brown, Gloria Weber, Garrett Piglia, T.S. Rhodes, Lester Smith, Chanté McCoy, Suzzane Myers, EA Younker, Craig Nybo, and Larry Correia. 

Join the pact. Fight the demons now.* 

* Note: The proceeds from the sale of this book go to the continued eradication of every red-eyed, soul-stealing, shadow-lurking, flesh-eating, baby-stealing demon in the entire multiverse.

The Pact is back and demons are as devious as ever in The Crimson Pact Volume 2. 

Read 28 original stories (over 500 pages in print!), including many sequels to stories in volume one. Suzzanne Myers’s powerful flash fiction piece, "Withered Tree" continues with the exceptional short story, "Seven Dogs." Chanté McCoy’s "Inside Monastic Walls" is followed by the literally gut-wrenching follow-up short story, "Body and Soul." Urban fantasy mayhem is off the charts with rising star Patrick Tomlinson’s "Monsters in the Closet" and D. Robert Hamm’s "Karma." Steampunk your thing? EA Younker’s steampunk apocalypse tale "Stand," Sarah Hans’ sequel about professor Campion, "A More Ideal Vessel," and Elaine Blose’s steampunk Western "Wayward Brother" will whet your appetite. The dark fantasy and adventure continues in "Dark Archive," Sarah Kanning writes how Danielle from "Hidden Collection" must deal with the lingering effects of being possessed by a demon. Volume two mixes sequels from Gloria Weber, Justin Swapp, and Isaac Bell with new stories from Lester Smith, K.E. McGee, Adam Israel, Valerie Dircks, T.S. Rhodes, Elizabeth Shack, Daniel Alonso, and Nayad Monroe. 

New York Times Bestselling author and Campbell award nominee Larry Correia presents an exclusive short story, "Son of Fire, Son of Thunder" co-authored by Steven Diamond, about an FBI paranormal investigator and a bad ass marine who knows the exact moment of his own death. Travel to the alternate history Earth of the "Red Bandanna Boys" by Patrick M. Tracy and find out how ruthless you have to be to survive the slums of St. Nikolayev. Follow "The Trail of Blood" by Alex Haig, a horrifying Western about a bounty hunter who wants vengeance, not money. Hunt for Nazis in a disturbing 1950’s America in "Hunters Incorporated" by Kelly Swails. Patrol the steaming jungles of Vietnam with a squad of soldiers in Lon Prater’s "Last Rites in the Big Green Empty." Then enter the mind of a godlike demon in Donald J. Bingle’s ambitions tale, "Dark Garden," or visit the creepy shadow world created by Richard Lee Byers in "Light and Dark." 

Watch your back, the demons are coming. 

This digital special edition of volume 2 includes eleven bonus behind-the-scene "about the stories" essays from the authors.

Cassandra's Time Yarns:  A Shared World Short Story Anthology edited by Erin Lale

Stories accepted for publication in Cassandra's Time Yarns so far: "The End of History" by Gordon Yaswen. "Noble Northern Spirit" by Erin Lale. "Testing Time" by Tony Thorne MBE. "Choice" by Ralph Ewig. "The Beginning" by J.L. Toscano. Art accepted for Cassandra's Time Yarns so far: "Paradise Lost" by Maria Arango. "Mandalas" by Lisa Yount. This anthology will be published in 2012. The submission deadline in Dec. 31, 2011. 

Anarchy Zone Time Yarns:  A Shared World Short Story Anthology edited by Erin Lale

Stories accepted for publication in Anarchy Zone Time Yarns so far: "The Anarchy Zone" by Erin Lale. Poetry by Gordon Yaswen. "An Etonean Dilemma" by Humberto Sachs. "1400 Hrs" by Ian Miller. "Host" by Giampietro Stocco. Art accepted for publication in Anarchy Zone Time Yarns so far: "Hope" by Alex Storer. "It All Goes Away" by Lisa Yount. This anthology will be published in 2012. Submission deadline is Dec. 31, 2011.

Daphne and the Silver Ash by Joss Llewelyn

For fans of The Last Unicorn, Labyrinth, Legend, and other fine stories that begin with "L":  

In the weary old city of Trevell, young Daphne happily divides her time between caring for her family and crafting the finest shoes in town. But when she is summoned to sing for a panicking phoenix afraid of its fiery rebirth, Daphne is swept up in a thousand-year-old struggle for survival between immortal spirits.  

Endowed with the phoenix's powers of air and fire, as well as the creature's beautiful golden skin and ruby feathers, Daphne has only a few hours to save a dying tree, restore a crumbling city, and stop an invading army before the phoenix's fire consumes her mortal heart.

(I originally posted this mini-rant on Google+, but figured those of you who don't bother with all that social networking B.S. would also be interested.)

I just finished watching a martial arts movie called Chocolate.  The movie itself is pretty awesome:  it's about girl whose autism allows her to learn fighting styles at a young age; her mother and father were part of a gang/Yakuza dispute in Thailand, which led to her father's exile (before she was born).  And when her mother contracts cancer and can't afford the medicines, Zen (the girl) and her "cousin" Moom set out to try to collect on debts once owed to Zin (the mother).  But things go terribly wrong, as you can imagine.  Point is:  touching little story with a whole bunch of amazing fight scenes a la Ong Bak (only, you know, with a seemingly pre-teen girl beating the crap out of fully grown men).

But that's not the amazing part.  The really amazing part is when you get to the end and they start showing you the results of some of the fights.  This stuff wouldn't be allowed in the U.S., I imagine.  All the actors do their own stunts, and they get stabbed, break ribs, get smacked in the face, fall badly, and so on and so forth.  It adds a whole new dimension to the experience, because you start to realize that a lot of the things you see on the screen, while scripted, really do lead to the people getting effed up.  And that's, well, kinda awesome.

In any case, if you haven't seen Chocolate and you're looking for a little magical realism in your martial arts obsession, this is one to check out.

(Psst.  It's on Netflix stream!)

(I should note that I'm well aware that injuries occur in martial arts films quite regularly -- and probably with some regularity in other kinds of stunt-heavy films.  We just don't get an opportunity to see the carnage to the extent that you see in Chocolate.  Everyone gets messed up in this film at some point or another -- even the main actress.)

Another episode is coming your way from The Skiffy and Fanty Show.  This week, Jen and I interview author Michaele Jordan (Mirror Maze).  Topics include:  Victorian pulp fiction, Victorian morality, names, mysticism, and a lot of other cool stuff you all need to listen to.

If you want to get the episode, you can do so here (or on that iTunes thing).

The basis for this post comes from a troll who left a frothy list of accusations and assumptions about what I know, and, most importantly, what I do.  As trolls are wont to do, much of what was said can be waved off as pish posh and poppycock, but it's the attack on the English degree that, I think, stems from a much larger misunderstanding of the field.  I'd like to address those misunderstandings here.

What We (Don't) Do
There are a lot of myths about English majors, some of them perpetuated by films and others by people who really don't know anything about the state of the field today.  But it would be more efficient to deal with what English majors do rather than refuting the long list of things that they don't.

English is an interdisciplinary field.  That means that rather than only studying literature and literary criticism, English majors also study sociology, history, science, economics, anthropology, archaeology, philosophy, and dozens of other fields -- depending, of course, on individual study interests.  My research, for example, requires me to be familiar with at least half of the disciplines already lists, as studying empire demands knowledge from a variety of directions.  While it is true that English majors are not trained in most of these fields (in the proper sense of the term "trained"), they are also not lazy wanderers.  They take
interdisciplinarity seriously because they understand the value of research in other disciplines.  And those disciplines bleed into one another -- research from one field becomes important to another, and vice versa.

In fact, much of what English majors are concerned with are the ways language has been used in the past, how it is used now, and how it will be used in the future.  Recall that language has and will continue to be used for everything from propaganda to public outreach to exploration of the self.  There are infinite numbers of uses for the written word, and studying such uses (what it means, what it does, how it influences the formation of nations or groups or our conception of self, etc.) is the domain of English majors.  And those things are important, not least of all because understanding where we come from and how we go to where we are today will help us, as a species or culture or nation, to figure out where we are going (or how we can get somewhere else).

Likewise, English majors are concerned with processes of thinking.  At the same time that we teach "stuffy literature classes," we are also attempting to foster independent thought through an almost scientific process. Learning literature is not about figuring out what hidden meanings Shakespeare put into his work, but about making hypotheses, finding evidence, and using that evidence to support an argument -- rinse and repeat.  And because the field is interdisciplinary, that often means examining literature in a wide range of social, political, or philosophical contexts.

Not So Non-Essential
As I've argued before (on Google+ somewhere), English is not a non-essential degree program.  In fact, without English majors, civilization cannot function.*  English majors teach the language to children or people in businesses in other countries.  They teach adults who went to underfunded schools and were left behind, or adults who made poor choices and want to get back on their feet.  They teach people to write, to read, to comprehend, and to argue.

English majors are journalists -- who bring the world to our doorstep -- and authors -- who teach us something about ourselves.  They are technical writers, social workers, lawyers or legal assistants, copywriters, editors, grant writers, PR specialists, administrative assistants, etc.**  They work for the various departments of the government, non-profits, schools, and businesses in a variety of fields for which their degrees qualified them.

Basically, English majors are essential to the fabric of the nation, much like many other majors.  Because English degrees generally require immersion in a variety of disciplines, those who acquire those degrees are not only uniquely trained for non-academic jobs, but are also uniquely trained to teach the next generation of thinkers to think from a variety of avenues.  It's not all about stuffy, ancient literature in these parts.

What Others Think (Updated Periodically)

Kea Worthen

English majors are important because it teaches a type of observation and thinking skill set that many other disciplines don't allow. I mean, we call ourselves English majors, but we really should be in the school of Interdisciplinary Studies. I have never met an English major that just studies English. We look at sociology, culture, gender, history, religion, etc...And we think about things in terms of what happened in the past, what happens in the present, and what will happen in the future. That is, I think, the main problem with society. Too many people have tunnel vision. And that tunnel vision limits so many possibilities. English majors are trained to look at those other possibilities--even if those possibilities makes us uncomfortable sometimes. But it is about self-improvement. And having a thought process that is not prearranged by an ideological apparatus. Sure, we suffer under our own ideologies, but at least we are cognizant of it. I think that is why the English major is so important. Because we learn to observe and think about what we are observing. That is, to me, an important thing.

Paul Genesse

English majors are some of my best friends. A number of them are also excellent teachers. Getting an English degree is not the best move if you want to assure yourself a high-paying job, but most English majors are very resourceful people.

Jennifer Bagley

Kea stole my answer! So I will just concur with her. English majors are not only interdisciplinary, but they are valuable in nearly every career field - communications, politics, law, business, even science related careers who need a bit of a hand in terms of creative thinking and expressing ideas. There's a reason that most technical writers are English majors. We facilitate communication with the world.

Aishwarya Ganapathiraju

English majors are important because the world needs people who focus on language. We construct our worlds - our ideas, our concepts - through language. And so, to me, English majors (okay, without language majors) help clarify the world, call the world on its bullshit and to kick down walls that language builds up. (All of this ties in to the idea that as instructors of English we teach a specifically interdisciplinary thinking - and also to the idea that we foster competencies, rather than skills.)

Gwendolyn Spencer

Because the world needs people who can interpret language and meaning, and eloquently explain it to others. And so that we have people in this world who can contribute to the understanding of the world rather than complicate it.

Terra Whitesitt

English/lit/Humanity majors create discourse, on anything, on everything. It's flexible that way. It's imperative, also, to have schools of thought. The sciences and mathematics are extraordinary, don't get me wrong, but you find your thinkers in the liberal arts. It's in the liberal arts where we learn to dismantle what we were taught our whole lives, and where we learn to create new ideas, new possibilities, and learn to defend these thoughts with sound logic, creativity and humor.

Kelsey Ray

As an English major, I find it necessary to study anything I can get my hands on outside of class. The major is more of a study of effective and creative techniques, from the point of view of one going into creative writing. But one also needs the knowledge of several subjects to be able to analyze a work appropriately in all of its contexts. Also, depending what you are working on, such as science fiction or fantasy, you need to know how the world works in terms of science. As an English major, you learn skills specific to analyzing and communicating ideas not only with precision but with creativity. But to function at the fullest, a lot of outside research is required, in my opinion.

A great deal of people seem to think of the English major as a teacher of a thinking process.  This is not something I had initially thought of when I made this post.  But it is true.  Part of what we have to deal with as teachers is the problem of unidirectional thinking, which our public schools have been forced to teach our students.  You can get an impression of what this has done to young people in the West by watching this TED talk by Sir Ken Robinson.

And Scene
To put an end to this long-winded post, I want to address one last problem with the title of this post:  namely, that English is a "fun" degree.  I bring this up not because I disagree about the fun-ness of English, as I do have a great deal of fun doing what I do, but because it assumes that "fun" and "non-essential" are tied together.

Why do something you don't enjoy?  Is not the point of higher education to find something you love and pursue it wholeheartedly?  Such a pursuit may be fun at times, but it is also hard work.  But at the end of the day, you're still doing something you enjoy.  To me, that's the entire point of higher education.  Yes, it is about paving the way towards a career, but it is also about doing something that stimulates you.

Maybe I'm an idealist for thinking one should be able to pursue the career that most interests them.  Life would be a terrible curse if we all had to spend the rest of our lives in jobs we hated.  I'm not willing to live that way, and I don't think anyone else should either.

*I use English as an amalgam here.  If you are from a country where English is not the dominate language, then substitute your spoken form and the same argument applies.  This post is less about English as a global language (which is a separate argument to be had) and more about why the written form, wherever it comes from, is valuable.

**If you want to see an incomplete, but exhaustive list of things English majors can do with their degrees, here you go.

Good news!  I got another book review published.  Awesome, right?  Go read it and let me know what you think.  And if the book sounds interesting to you, go buy it on Amazon or B&N or somewhere else!

The lovely Kay Kenyon joins Jen and I for a discussion about The Entire and the Rose series, worldbuilding (what we love and what bugs us), and women in science fiction.  We get into some heady stuff, too -- like the recent charges of sexual harassment at the World Fantasy Convention.

Amusing as it may be to play the "the liberal media is going after Herman Cain" card when it comes to the allegations recently made against Jesse Jackson, it is also prudent to remember one incredibly important fact:  Jesse Jackson isn't running for President.  Let's also be honest about something else:  if he were running for President, you better believe that liberals and conservatives alike would, in their own way, go after him for his numerous failings as a "moral person."  Jackson is not unfamiliar to the controversy bucket, as his 1984 comments about Jews (shortly after losing the Presidential ticket) and his numerous infidelities make clear.  And I think his history makes him unlikely as a legitimate Democratic candidate for the Presidency in the future.

Of course, The Huffington Post did report on the incident.  But I suppose we can just pretend they aren't part of the "liberal media" or the "media" in general.  Ever so insignificant that Huffington Post... In any case, the predominately right-leaning base will take this oversight as an indictment
of the evil liberal media and its evil ways of leaving out the truth.  This great conspiracy theory falls apart when you actually look at who comprises the liberal media:  corporate-owned, largely conservative agencies who are no more liberals than their right-leaning counterparts.

 While such agencies may espouse liberal values, they do so only by paying lip-service to them, for the moment any challenge comes to the conservative elite, those very agencies flip over like dogs begging to be scratched and pounce on their liberal audience.  We know this because various "liberal" papers supported the Bush post-9/11 narrative in order to justify gross human rights violations -- they did so by changing the language they used to describe "torture."  We know this because the way the Occupy Everywhere protesters have been presented by almost all of the major news outlets has been less favorable than similar coverage by media sources from elsewhere, often at the expense of the messages actually being presented by OWS and her allies.  This is because OE represents a threat to the establishment, who owns most of the so called "liberal media" and is quite apt at putting pressure where it needs to be in order to keep the narrative peddled by the media as divisive, entertaining, and supportive of the status quo as possible.

And that's really where all this rests:  talking about who is a liberal and who is a conservative and who has the right narrative, blah blah blah, is all a giant game of ideology that serves no other purpose than to keep people nipping at one another's throats.  The truth of matter is that very little "truth" gets through corporate media.  If you want to see what's going on in the world, you have to go to independent media sources, or the rare corporate media source that doesn't have its hands caught in the cookie jar (I would look at The Guardian as one such source).
But to return to the original point:  why is Herman Cain getting the shaft and Jesse Jackson a pass?

1. Herman Cain is running for President.  I can't say whether Cain is innocent of the charges, but it goes without saying that a Presidential hopeful should be subject to public scrutiny.  This includes Obama, who I will undoubtedly criticize throughout the next year in my evil liberal circles.  But since Jesse Jackson is not running for President, and remains little more than an activist whose core values are really hard to disagree with (justice for people of color, etc.), I really don't see the point in putting Cain and Jackson on the same public pedestal.
   
2. Cain has a tendency to shove his foot in his mouth whenever he talks, which makes challenging him on allegations of sexual harassment all the more important.  Any candidate who cannot keep his narrative straight deserves the kind of scrutiny Cain is getting.  Did Cain know about the settlement or not?  Should abortion be illegal or a choice?  Whose fault is it for the high unemployment rate -- those without jobs or the system?  I could go on, but I think the point is made.  I have the same misgivings about Romney and Perry, whose rambling and flip-flopping make it rather difficult to determine where they actually stand.  And I have the same misgivings about Obama, who I think betrayed his progressive base by cowering before the opposition.
   
3. Jackson isn't really getting a pass.  Plenty of news sources are covering the incident.  But the truth is that very few people actually care.  That's not because Jackson is unimportant in a general sense.  It's that he's unimportant when compared to the vast array of problems and events happening all around us.  Are we really concerned with whether Jackson fondled someone's testicles or whether Presidential hopeful Cain sexually harassed a woman, or whether the economy will bounce back or Obama's Jobs Bill will get passed (and if it will be good for us), or whether Occupy Wall Street will effect any changes (or if it is really bad for the country), or whether the Arab Spring will produce good results in the Middle East, or whether we'll withdraw troops from Iraq or Afghanistan, and so on and so forth.

The folks over at Entangled Publishing brought this interesting book to my attention, and so I am passing on the information to all of you.  (FYI:  Lynn Flewelling, author of a whole bunch of lovely books, has a blurb on the back cover!)

Here goes:

Heaven can go to hell. 

Until her cousin slaughtered the supernal family, Anazakia’s father ruled the Heavens, governing noble Host and Fallen peasants alike. Now Anazakia is the last grand duchess of the House of Arkhangel’sk, and all she wants is to stay alive. 

Hunted by Seraph assassins, Anazakia flees Heaven with two Fallen thieves—fire demon Vasily and air demon Belphagor, each with their own nefarious agenda—who hide her in the world of Man. The line between vice and virtue soon blurs, and when Belphagor is imprisoned, the unexpected passion of Vasily warms her through the Russian winter. Heaven seems a distant dream, but when Anazakia learns the truth behind the celestial coup, she will have to return to fight for the throne—even if it means saving the man who murdered everyone she loved.

You can find out more about the book at Entangled Publishing (which includes an excerpt).  The book will be released in print and electronic forms.  The author can be found on her website.

Some interesting stuff is flying through my email.  I can't read it all, so I've offered to toss up some information for all of you who might be interested.

Here goes:

1494 Barcelona. As Torquemada lights the fires of religious fervor throughout the cities of Spain, accused heretics are not the only victims. Thousands of books and manuscripts are lost to the flames as the Black Friars attempt to purge Europe of the ancient secrets of the gods and the bold new ideas that are ushering in the Renaissance.

Nadira lives a dreary life as servant to a wealthy spice merchant until the night a dying scholar is brought to the merchant’s stable, beaten by mercenaries who are on the hunt for The Hermetica of Elysium. To Nadira, words are her life: she lives them as her master’s scrivener and dreams them in her mother’s poetry. She is pursued as passionately as the fabled manuscript for her rare skill as a reader of Ancient Greek, Latin, Arabic and Hebrew that makes her valuable to men who pursue the book to exploit its magic.

Kidnapped by Baron Montrose, an adventurous nobleman, she is forced to read from the Hermetica. It is soon revealed to her that ideas and words are more powerful than steel or fire for within its pages are the words that incite the Dominicans to religious fervor, give the Templars their power and reveal the lost mysteries of Elysium.

As Nadira begins her transformation from servant to sorceress, will she escape the fires of the Inquisition, the clutches of the Borgia pope, Alexander VI and the French king, Charles VIII? And will Montrose’s growing fear of her powers cause her to lose her chance for love?

You can find out more about the book at Knox Robinson Publishing (where they have a magic excerpt).

(I first must apologize to Mr. Smith for the lateness of this post.  The email containing the guest post below got buried, which has happened far more times than I think is fair.  This will be resolved ASAP.)

In 1954, J.R.R. Tolkien published the first of a breathtaking series of books that would go on to become some of the most influential novels of the 20th century. As anyone who has ever read The Lord of the Rings knows, Tolkien's books are so imaginative and unexpectedly powerful that his fantastic tale still captures our imaginations more than a half century after its original publication. These stories gave birth to the modern fantasy genre, and it is perhaps inevitable that so many contemporary fantasy books replicate aspects of Tolkien's writings. So pervasive is Tolkien's influence that the English Dictionary offers a word for it: Tolkienesque. Perhaps this is why we see so many fantasy tales that feature elves, dwarves, wizards, magic rings, and magic swords. The presence of these features is, in many ways, what we have come to expect from a modern fantasy novel.

But over the course of 57 years, these constructs of classical Northern European (or Tolkienesque) fantasy fiction have been imitated to the point of monotony. In tome  after tome, we see elves and dwarves wielding magical swords or speaking in Northern European conlangs (fictional languages) as they follow some particular heroic quest. And let's be honest. Although there are many wonderful and imaginative novels that feature these elements, no one has done it as well as Mr. Tolkien.

When I sat down to write Antiquitas Lost, I promised myself there would be no magic rings, magic swords, elves or dwarves. A major goal was to create a fantasy novel where the creatures and setting were fresh. Pangrelor, the fantasy world described in Antiquitas Lost, is envisioned as a pre-industrial, medieval society with beautiful artistic accomplishments set in a savage and magical natural environment -- the Renaissance meets the Pleistocene, with magical beings and crypto-zoological creatures. Devoid of elves and dwarves, Pangrelor is inhabited largely by creatures that we are familiar with, but different from the usual fantasy fare -- gargoyles, Bigfoot creatures, Neanderthal types, Atlanteans and dinosaurs, to name a few. These differences give Pangrelor a much different feel from Middle Earth and the countless, adherent worlds that have followed. Hopefully the reader will find this refreshing. Over time, I have come to think of Antiquitas Lost as more of a "North American" tale, with many references to new world mythologies, as well as a hint of Native American influence.

 Although Antiquitas Lost is not immune to Mr. Tolkien's sweeping influence, it is unique in many ways. When you take your first journey to Pangrelor, it is my sincere hope that you will experience a hint of the joy that accompanied your maiden voyage to Middle Earth, and that you will connect in a meaningful way with this unprecedented new cast of characters as you explore an altogether unique fantasy destination.


For more information please visit http://www.antiquitaslost.com/ and follow the author on Facebook and Twitter

The title is intentionally provocative.  Why?  Because I think it is utterly ridiculous that an organization claiming to be about "the news" needs to do a story about a guy who threw a party to prove female comic book geeks exist in order to put this whole B.S. argument to rest.  And here's why I think that:

It was all of the hubub on the Internet about women not being part of the hobby at all. Day in and day out, I can see that’s an utter lie. I see customers walking in my door who are female and of different ages every single day — everyone from women in their 60s to teenagers. I see lots of daughters coming in with their moms and dads, and they love the stuff.

The above, by the way, is Brian Jacoby's response to the first question.

Perhaps I'm being unfair to CNN, but it seems to me that this whole story could have been avoided if someone had simply walked into a comic book shop, spent more than three seconds inside during "rush hour," and then went home to report, "Women enter comic book shops.  Myth busted.  Goodbye."

Of course, CNN's correspondent (Erika D. Peterman this time around) had to ask this question:
Why do you think the idea that women don't read comics persists?

Jacoby responds by referring to the lack of demographic studies on the comic book industry.  I think that has something to do with it, but I also think it has a lot to do with the fact that comics have been and continue to be seen as the "domain of men."  By saying that, I in no way think such opinions are accurate.  In fact, any assumption that a "thing" can be the "domain of men" should be taken with a grain of salt (or as patriarchy trying to announce its existence the same way a racist announces him or herself by saying "I'm not a racist, but").
The point is this:  anyone who goes to comic book shops knows that there are, in fact, plenty of women who read comics.  And we know this in part because there are comics written specifically for the female market.  Comic book companies are in it for the profit just like other publishers.  And they're not going to create comics for women if they don't think there are women there to read them.  But women are there.  Plenty of them.  They read Buffy and Twilight comics.  They read X-Men and Iron Man and The Avengers and Batman and indie comics and violent comics and comics with bunnies.  Because women like stuff.  Go figure.  They like lots of stuff.
So now that this stupid myth is put to rest, can we move on to more important discussions?  Such as:  What is the demographic makeup of creators vs. readers in the comic book industry?  What kinds of things most appeal to women in comic form?  What do women think of their position in the comic book community?  Do they feel included?  Do they feel excluded?  And what comics are out there for all readers that don't resort to stereotypical images of women?

That's what I want to know.  How about you?

If you haven't heard about the latest pile of B.S. already, then you need to read this, this, and this.  The short version:

A man at the World Fantasy Convention made several women incredibly uncomfortable by a) inappropriate comments made towards them, b) groping or touching them inappropriately, and/or c) blatantly disregarding their complaints and the complaints of others who had witnessed his behavior.

To start, we should probably get a few things out of the way:

1. The man in question is most likely mentally ill, as comments he made about his magical abilities seem, in my mind, to extend well beyond typical masculine bravado about one's prowess with the opposite sex.
2. Being mentally ill doesn't excuse bad behavior.
3. Conventions in our community must have a clear, printed, and official policy and procedure for dealing with any instance of harassment, sexual or otherwise.