wisb-Guardian-Express

The question is actually more complicated than the title suggests.  It reads as follows:

In a science fiction world where guns can be made of deadly lasers, pew pew pew, that you'd have to move at the speed of light to avoid, would there be a need for guns? I mean, if you got mad at someone and whipped out your laser gun, they could be dead before they heard the gun go off, sonic boom style. So... why guns?

I take as the underlying assumption here that such guns use realistic laser technology and not the sort of thing we see in science fiction from practically everything written in the 30s, 40s, and 50s to Star Wars to even the absolutely gorgeous trailer for the film adaptation of David Mitchell's Cloud Atlas.  In other words, lasers that likely make less noise than contemporary guns, have
beams that shoot at the speed of light (or close to it), and so on.

Real laser weapons would actually present a lot of challenges for humankind.  Here I must express minor disagreement with Kathlyn Hawley about the impacts of such technology.  Laser technology would be limited by a number of factors, the most important of which are:  1) power supply, and 2) beam strength.  It is unlikely, for example, that we will have developed a power source capable of making beam weapons with the strength to blast through ship hulls and so on.  People certainly wouldn't be a problem, but I find it hard to believe that we will have solved the power gap in the next 100 years (though I could be wrong).

From that perspective alone, we likely won't use beam weapons.  They will cost too much money and take up too much space and power.  It's easier to detonate a bunch of modified explosives against the hull of an enemy ship or over enemy personal than it is to charge and maintain lasers with the same general effect.

The same will likely remain true for hand held weaponry, such as rifles and pistols.  In a far future setting, it's possible we could make the weapons light enough to warrant using as assault weapons, but even then, you're dealing with a weapon that will run out of charge mighty fast.  Even if you loaded up a mechanically augmented soldier (in a kind of exoskeleton), you'd have encumbered that soldier with a power supply that could be just as dangerous as the weapon itself.  There's a reason why we still don't load up soldiers with excessive amounts of protective gear:  they become slow and easy targets.  Tanks and other kinds of vehicles serve the function of massive fire power, yet here we run into the same problem as before:  where do you put the power supply and is it worth it when you can solve the problem with modified nuclear shells that leave no radiation behind (we'll probably figure out how to suck the radiation out or neutralize it, thus making nuclear warfare a standard model).

For me, lasers are just another of those science fiction concepts that you either accept or reject.  Like FTL.  Like millions of species of aliens that look vaguely human.  Like so many tropes of the genre that violate all manner of scientific "rules."  Because if we're going to be realistic about future weaponry, I doubt lasers are going to be useful for much more than stopping other weapons from doing their job.  We might see lasers used to take down planes, but since combat ships in space will have considerable amounts of shielding to combat radiation, I don't see these as being applicable except to take down missiles and other explosive devices.  We should be more concerned about the kinds of weapons we already have.  Future advances will make such things more deadly and easier to use.  And that will make for an interesting future.

Now it's your turn.  What do you think?  Do you disagree with me or Kathryn?  If so, why?  The comments are yours!

(Question suggested by Kathlyn Hawley on Google+.)

It's an obsession.  The contemporary fantasy genre has been making sweet, soft, dirty love to vaguely medieval Western cultures for almost a century now.  You can tell because the two have made so many degenerate babies that the bookshelves are full with them.  Some of them are more degenerate than others, taking those medieval Western cultures as mere background rather than as setting.  Others are clearly the product of a well-managed, passionate marriage (or other applicable union).

Joking aside, the reason for the clinging behavior of fantasy has more to do with the heritage of colonialism than it does with anything else.  The last 400 years of empires, scientific racism, hierarchical anthropology, and so on have created a deep link within our conscious and subconscious minds that privileges the West.  At some point in our cultural history, we started calling some "ancient cultures" by a new name:  "primitive."  Thus, Rome became the pinnacle of the West, despite also being an "ancient culture," and all those non-Western cultures, from Africa to Asia to the Americas, became "primitive."  "Primitive" ceased to mean "old, dead culture" and
came to mean "unsophisticated, lesser culture."

Note the problematic distinction made between these terms.  How can an equally ancient culture be "superior" to other ancient cultures?  What makes them superior?  A hard question to answer.  Some would suggest that the West appeared superior because it rapidly advanced while the rest of the world seemed stuck "in the past."  There's not enough space to deal with such a questionable argument here, except to say that there might be good reasons for why some cultures did not "progress" the same way as others.

In contemporary anthropology, however, "primitive" represents the earlier forms of Homo Sapiens sapiens.  The Cro Magnon.  The first cultures.  Rudimentary.  But the wider culture has yet to catch on to this usage.  Instead, anything "not West" is "primitive" and, therefore, "other."  That stems from centuries of imperial rhetoric and Western superiority (a complex, really).  Our culture is a product of being told we are special, and that everyone else strives to be like us, to take from us the modes of progress, and so on.  The "primitive cultures" were simply "on their way to being advanced, Western ones."

From that perspective, it shouldn't be hard to imagine why the pseudo-medieval setting is the one that dominates fantasy, a generic tradition that began in the West and unfortunately remains there (with some exceptions).  For all people in the West, the medieval period is the only medieval reference we can call "ours."  This despite the fact that many people in the West have links to other cultures (often intimate links).  While these exceptions certainly value non-Western cultures, they are up against a wall which tells them "our history [the West's] is most important, and so you should write analogues of it."

We are starting to see a serious push against this history.  The "other" is creeping its way into the dominant discourse of the West, supplanting its authority to remind us that culture is mostly relative.  It's a slow, drawn out process, just as imperialism and its cultural parasitism took decades to build and decades to tear down.  That's the way it goes, though.  When you build an immense hegemonic system of oppression, control, and assimilation, you can't expect tomorrow to be full of sun when we've only just started pulling its ropes on the horizon.  At least we have an explanation for the obsession, though.  And having that knowledge might be useful some day.

What do you all think?  Which recent fantasy novels have you read that don't include Western settings?  I immediately think of work by N. K. Jemisin, Nalo Hopkinson, and Karen Lord.  Things I haven't read included Saladin Ahmed's Throne of the Crescent Moon, the numerous Philippine SF/F anthologies that Charles A. Tan reminds us about, and a number of interesting works mentioned on the World SF blog (are Lavie Tidhar's fantasy novels set elsewhere?).  Let me know of some others.  We could make a wicked list of fantasy set somewhere other than the West!

(Question provied by Mike Reeves-McMillan on Google+)

Recently, I've been reading Star Carrier Book One:  Earth Strike by Ian Douglas.  I was intrigued by the epic military SF setting and decided to plow into it.  What begins as a solid piece of action writing, however, quickly dissolves into a linguistic nightmare in the first chapter written from an alien POV.  In this chapter, Douglas stops using standard words for time or distance and instead opts for a series of nearly incomprehensible terms:  mr'uum, g'nyuu'm, g'nya, g'nyurm, and lurm'm. 

I'm not sure what these terms actually mean, nor do I care to find out.  What annoys me about them isn't just that they are incomprehensible, but that no other vaguely scientific (or intensely scientific, for that matter) elements are written in this way.  Douglas is careful to avoid turning all
scientific references into alien gibberish, and yet chooses to turn the simplest of these concepts into words that have no inherent meaning.

For me, this is an utter failure to properly worldbuild.  If you are going to maintain all the other scientific references so that your audience can understand what the aliens are talking about, then it is absolutely necessary not to disengage that audience from the spatial and temporal logics of the narrative's world.  It is worse still if there is no logical reason for these linguistic invasions.  What purpose does providing alien terminology as replacements for human terminology serve?  To alienate us?  Isn't that accomplished by providing the perspective of the alien itself?  Of course it is.  Since we're already in a futuristic society, taking us into the alien means we can still relate to something.  But "mr'uum" has no obvious relation.  It is not derived from a language English speakers would be familiar with.
After two or three pages of these terms, I decided to read something else.  I may not go back.  The linguistic intrusions served as barriers to entry for me as a reader.  I became overly aware that I was reading a fiction, and especially that I was reading a fiction comprised of words on a page.  In other words, escape became impossible.  Each new intrusion meant severing me from the imaginative realm of the novel.  Once you do that to me a few times in a row, you've likely lost me for good.

These choices are best avoided.  There are better ways to convey the alien; one need not use linguistic trickery to get the job done.  Aliens have different physical features, different cultures, and different worldviews.  Any of those elements could serve to heighten the reader's sense of alienation without pulling them from the story.  Ultimately, however, there must be a reference, a "thing" for us to cling to so that we don't get lost in the alien.  But more on that another day...

The title says it all.  Brent Bowen took the winning bid on a signed/personalized copy of Stina Leicht's amazing second novel, And Blue Skies From Pain, at a very reasonable $40.  That means he gets:

1. Stina's book
2. A personalized collection of short stories by me
3. A pre-order for Edison Crux's Tales of the Wisconsin Werewolf
4. An internet hug

New things are happening with my attempt to get financial help from the public to replace my busted laptop.  In particular, two wonderful people have offered up books to help with donations.  Details to follow:

Author Stina Leicht has kindly offered a signed/personalized copy of her latest novel to help me out.  Those familiar with her work will know she's an amazing writer.  Those who aren't should check out the interviews over at The Skiffy and Fanty Show (there are two).  Either way, this is a wonderful thing for her to do for me.

How the auction will work:

1. Bidding will start at $15 (the cost of the book).
2. You may up the bid by leaving a comment on this page (please provide a contact email).  Any increment is fine.
3. The auction will run until Monday (July 23, 2012) at 11:59 PM.
4. The winner will be announced shortly thereafter and contacted for shipping details, which I will forward to Stina.  If you want your book personalized, let me know in the email.  All you do at that point is send your bid amount to arconna[at]yahoo[dot]com and a magic book will be on its way to you.

It's that simple.  Bidding starts right now.  I will keep track of all bids at the top of this page.

You can learn more about And Blue Skies From Pain here.

By bidding, you will automatically receive a collection of short stories from me (see the details about my general funding project and perks here).  There are also other perks for winning bids of $50 or more.

Additionally, if you donate or have a winning bid of $20 or more, you will be eligible for the following perk:

Anyone who donates (or has donated) $20 or more will receive a copy of Crux's upcoming novel at release.  The novel is based on urban legends from the Elkhorn, Wisconsin.  Sounds pretty interesting to me.

Donations are easy enough:  Paypal + arconna[at]yahoo[dot]com + $20 (or more) = Pre-order of Tale of the Wisconsin Werewolf.  And, of course, doing so means you receive those free short stories, and larger donations still include lots of other nifty stuff.

And that about does it.  Start bidding!

The marketing long arm of Syfy recently pointed me in the direction of these great sneak peaks into the second season of their hit show, Alphas (starring David Strathairn, Ryan Carthwright, Malik Yoba, and many others).  I must admit that I haven't been able to watch the show, being a poor graduate student who simply cannot afford cable, but I am quite intrigued and may have to check out the first season on DVD.

A bit about the show:

The second season of Syfy's hit series Alphas returns Monday, July 23 at 10PM ET/PT with a deep roster of guest stars. New this season are Sean Astin (The Lord of the Rings trilogy, Rudy), C. Thomas Howell (Southland), Lauren Holly (NCIS), Steve Byers (Immortals, Total Recall), Kandyse McClure (Battlestar Galactica) and Noah Reid (Rookie Blue). Summer Glau (Dollhouse, Firefly) who was a fan favorite last season playing an Alpha, Skylar Adams, will return for three episodes.

The new season picks up eight months after last year’s stunning season finale with the stage set for an explosive turn of events at the Binghamton facility (the Guantanamo of the Alpha world) that could have devastating, far-reaching consequences. Dr. Lee Rosen, having exposed the existence of Alphas to the unsuspecting public, finds himself discredited and imprisoned by a government desperate to cover up his stunning revelation. Some of the team have disbanded and without Dr. Rosen’s care and guidance, have regressed to their old, destructive ways. They must now battle their individual demons, reunite and try to save their own.

For those of you who have been watching, the following clips should get you salivating for the upcoming season!


Who is going to watch?

Obviously, I'm in this thing called a PhD program.  In English (not Creative Writing).  And that means I have to take a series of exams (half written component and half oral).  As such, it's necessary for me to have a reading list of primary and secondary texts (in my case, literature for the primary and theory/history/architecture for the secondary -- some English majors do it the other way around).

Before I give you the list, it might be important to tell you want I'm doing.  I am studying the spatial organization of empire in the Caribbean.  In other words, I want to know how empires constructed themselves as physical and social spaces and how that reflects in the literature of Caribbean peoples.  That's the short version anyway.

Now for the list:
Novels

Too many TV shows have come and gone.  Some of them never should have been killed.  These are the five I wish hadn't been cancelled.

In no particular order:

Need I explain why?  Browncoats are everywhere.  They are one.  They are vocal.  They are legion.  And if they all had $10,000,000,000,000, they'd bring back Firefly in a heartbeat.  For 10,000 seasons.  They'd probably clone Nathan Fillion and the rest of the cast just to keep it all going.  You know I speak the truth.

But in all seriousness, who didn't love Firefly?  To be fair, I didn't get to watch the show on TV.  I came to it through the DVDs after hearing all the hype.  And now I regret not having added myself to the ratings.  It's such an endearing show with a wonderful cast of characters.  With a lot of potential!  But it's gone, and now we have to dream about what might have been...

I know fans of the books didn't care for this show, but I never had that experience.  There was nothing to ruin for me when Syfy put this show on the air.  And you know what?  When you throw out the adaptation aspect, it's really not a terrible show.  Sure, some of the episodes are a little crummy, and there's a clear tug-of-war between making all the episodes connected to a larger story and keeping the anthology format.  But the best episodes are really good, and the cast is, for the most part, well chosen (I personally liked Paul Blackthorne as Dresden and Terrence Mann as Bob).

Given a second season, it might have grown into something akin to Castle, but with weird critters and what not.  One day...

Let's get one thing straight:  this is not a perfect show by any stretch of the imagination.  There's a hell of a lot of weirdness going on from the first episode to the last, and some of the characters and acting are a little on the silly side.  But the concept is fantastic.  Maybe a reboot would be a good idea.  Maybe not.  It was good...

After all, it has Tim Curry as a villain (win), a ragtag group of survivors living on a world with weird people (sounds like Outcasts, no?), and a decent soundtrack and visual design.  Considering all the things that usually go wrong in SF TV, this show had a lot of potential.  And then they killed it...

You remember this show, right?  Aliens get dropped off on Earth and are integrated into the Los Angeles populace.  Discrimination ensues.  District 9 will ring some bells.  Yet Alien Nation was a very American affair.  Where District 9 was an allegory for the refugee situation in Africa, Alien Nation was about the Civil Rights Movement, anti-immigration, and all the stuff tied into that at home.  And it was brilliant, in part because it didn't just take a bunch of people, put some alien makeup on them, and stick them in hairy situations.  No.  Alien Nation asked us to consider how discrimination leads to criminalization, how relationships with humans (platonic and romantic) would work, and the politics of a world hell bent on protecting human interests.

Plus, my grandma loved it, and if she likes it, it's good.  Trust me.

This show should sound familiar.  That's because I mentioned it above and because it really does share a lineage with Earth 2.  There are major differences, of course, and I think those differences make Outcasts something else entirely.  Unfortunately, reviewers were not kind to this show, or the fact that its title actor, Jamie Bamber, gets killed off in the first episode (big mistake in my mind).  But the visuals and concept are solid, pitting man against its darker nature and against nature itself.  There was so much potential.  I've intentionally avoided watching the last episode because I hate the idea that the adventure might be over...


What would you add to the list and why?

One of the things that fascinates me about the Bourne movies is the question raised by his amnesia within the ideology of terrorism (read:  War on Terrorism, etc.).  To think about Bourne's amnesia as a symptom of a particular form of national ideology is to understand that his amnesia is not simply a convenient plot device (though it is one), but also a symptom of a public amnesia.  In other words, just as Bourne's condition enables him to alter the real by making it imaginary -- i.e., changing one's identity entirely -- so too do the cast of characters who use ignorance (or willful amnesia) to wipe themselves clean of culpability (ex. Ward Abbott).  The public does not know, and those that do know fulfill one of three identities:  1) true amnesiac; 2) willful amnesiac; and 3) maintenance amnesiac (Conklin, who maintains the barrier between those that don't need to know (the public) and those that don't want to know (Abbott)).

Bourne's identity, however, is split by a seeming contradiction.  On the one hand, his amnesia defines him as one who does not know himself; on the other, he is defined by what he does not (or cannot or will not) remember, but about which others have profound knowledge.  To not know
oneself, therefore, does not necessarily mean one cannot be known, as is the state of the amnesiac in nature.  But for Bourne, those with knowledge of his true self are those who want him buried, not least of all because awareness of self threatens the security of the system. 

Here the political moment rears its ugly head.  To have knowledge of the undesirable opens a new series of relations:  1) the one who knows, but doesn't want to know (Bourne); 2) the one who doesn't know (the public); 3) the one who doesn't know, but doesn't want to know (Abbott); and 4) the one who knows (Conklin).  It becomes crucial for #3 and #4 to keep #2 in the dark, because the public is the body who ultimately controls the others.  But the public's lack of knowledge is a choice, albeit one that reads more like a handwaving than a direct order (if the order were given, they would know what is being done in their name); they live in perpetual amnesia. 

For Bourne, however, the question stems from who he was before and who he has become after the traumatic moment.  This makes him dangerous not least of all to Conklin (#4), but to the mental security of the public (#2).  Just as Bourne's identity is shattered by the realization of who he was, so too is the public's identity subject to traumatic exposure.  Thus the threat that Bourne poses:  forcing a public to re-imagine itself in light of torture, assassination, and rampant civil rights abuses, all part of an image of American selfhood that cannot exist concurrantly with the image Americans have made for themselves.  That Bourne exists in this political structure suggests, I think, something profound about the Bourne movies:  an awareness of what the years immediately following 9/11 have done to the public consciousness -- namely, put us all into a relation between amnesiacs.

Bourne, however, does reject the past he cannot remember -- and its attending identity -- before knowing who he really is or what he has really done.  In choosing not to remember, he attempts, albeit unsuccessfully (see The Bourne Supremacy), to erase the traumatic through accepting the amnesiatic moment.  But in that erasure, his position in the relation of amnesiacs shifts only in relation to the public, who will never know so long as Bourne tries to move on with his life.  For Conklin and Abbott (the latter more in the second film than here), there is no possibility of security; Bourne will always constitute a threat until he is brought back into the fold or destroyed.  And yet, as the movies show, in holding dogmatically to the desire to control knowledge, the system which Conklin maintains and Abbott reboots (and Noah Vosen takes up in The Bourne Ultimatum) inevitably collapses under its own weight.  To put it another way, systematic extermination of the 1st of the four relations (i.e., the one who knows, but doesn't want to know) results in exposing one's hand and opens holes in the structure to be exploited.

None of this is a perfect explanation of what I'm trying to get at.  Obviously Abbott has some knowledge of Conklin's activities, but I take as given that Abbott only set up the system, but intentionally extricated himself from the chain of information to make it possible to feign ignorance.  And I have left out the women in the film (specifically, Marie), but only because I suspect they will play a more crucial role in future Bourne-related posts.  I hope what I've tried to elucidate gives some indication of the complexity of the social dynamics of the film.  If not, then I'll make myself the amnesiac and pretend this post doesn't exist.

Feel free to let me know what you think of The Bourne Identity, or to poke holes into what I'm saying.  The comments are yours!

For those following my progress on G+, this will not be news to you.  If you're not, then lots of news to come.  If you have no idea what I'm talking about, then you should probably read this.

Apparently some people read "getting a PhD in English" as "getting a PhD in creative writing." I find this hilarious because it demonstrates a profound ignorance of what studying English entails.

Things I don't do as a PhD student in English (that is as a necessary part of getting my degree):
--Meet up for weekly book clubs
--Join critique groups
--Learn how to write fiction
--Read fiction and nothing else
--Make up imaginary interpretations for books so that I can sound smart

What I actually do:
--Read fiction with the intention of understanding its impact on culture (vice versa) or its critiques or its various other components, which are important as product of culture
--Read philosophy, theory, history, politics, science, and other types of texts which are relevant to a cultural understanding of literature (in other words, everything relevant to a particular field)
--Write essays which incorporate these elements as part of the same argument. (Basically, almost all English studies are Cultural studies these days.)
--Anything related to these topics and not related to writing fiction, creative non-fiction, or other forms of non-argumentative of writing.

Odd how different they are, no?

What would you add to the lists?

I've finally finished my bloody syllabus for the survey in American lit that I will be teaching this fall.  Since some folks expressed interest in what I will be forcing my little college students to read, I've compiled the list in no certain order here (mostly chronological, though it may be).  The theme of the course is "labor and race," though that is loose theme since the course is a survey, not a special topics.  But you'll notice that the majority of the texts have to do with the working class, the Great Depression, race, Civil Rights, and so on.

Anywho.  Here's the list:

• (1901) "Old Rogaum and His Theresa" by Theodore Dreiser
• (1915) "War Brides" by Marion Craig Wentworth
• (1918) "Mine Eyes Have Seen" by Alice Dunbar-Nelson
• (1901) Up from Slavery by Booker T. Washington (selections)
• (1926) "Smoke, Lilies and Jade" by Richard Bruce Nugent
• (1931) Black No More by George Schuyler
• (1922) "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" by F. Scott Fitzgerald
• (1930) As I Lay Dying by William Faulkner
• (1933) "Miss Lonelyhearts" by Nathanael West
• (1935) "The Grave" by Katherine Anne Porter
• (1939) Christ in Concrete by Pietro di Donato
• (1955) "The Artificial Nigger" by Flannery O'Connor
• (1965) "Going to Meet the Man" by James Baldwin
• (1977) "Advancing Luna--and Ida B. Wells" by Alice Walker
• (1990) "The Death of the Last Black Man in the Entire World" by Suzan-Lori Parks
• (1968) "Lost in the Funhouse" by John Barth
• (1972) "When it Changed" by Joanna Russ
• (1969) Slaughterhouse Five by Kurt Vonnegut
• (1987) Dawn by Octavia Butler
• (1973) "The Girl Who Was Plugged In" by James Tiptree, Jr.

Suggestions and thoughts welcome!

From Google+:

All the details are below (what I'm doing, why I need to do it, what happened, etc.). Read through or skip right to the end for info about the cool painting John Ward is putting up for auction to help me out or other ways to donate (and some perks for doing so).

What is it? 
An attempt to raise $482 $306 to replace my laptop without taking out another student loan. I already have $30,000 in student loans for my B.A. and part of my M.A. The only way I can replace my laptop in a timely manner is to take out another loan, or crowd-fund.

John Ward,  Mike Reeves-McMillan,  and Alison Marlowe were kind enough to suggest I try crowd-funding so I can keep doing what I do. I am eternally grateful for their support.

Why do you need a laptop? 
Much of what I do involves being mobile. While I can do most of that work from home on my desktop, it does severely limit me, as I cannot take notes in real time, record podcasts, etc. when I am not at home. It comes down to what enables me to do my PhD and "hobby" work at optimum efficiency. A laptop lets me do it all in one unit.

The big issue is that I have my PhD exams this coming spring, which means I have to get a replacement ASAP.

What happened?

Unfortunately, what happened is more my fault than anything else. I made the mistake of leaving a glass of water too close to my laptop and my new cat (10 minutes before I decided to keep him) knocked it over while I was in the bathroom. After several unsuccessful attempts to fix the laptop, I came to the conclusion that it had died. Luckily, I did not lose any relevant work (Dropbox), but I did learn a valuable lesson.

How do I help? 
There are two ways you can help:
1) You can donate via Paypal using the my email -- arconna[at]yahoo[dot]com (see below for a perk for donating)
2) You can head over to John Ward's page and bid on his amazing zombie painting, which he has kindly offered up to help me out. Details for the auction will be located on that page. To sweeten the auction deal (for me, really), Mike Reeves-McMillan has offered to match the auction up to $250, which is incredible. 

What are those perks you keep babbling about? 
Here's Captain America trying to explain all of this in typical Captain America fashion:

Perk #1:  Those who you follow my podcasts will know that my friend and I do a special segment for The Skiffy and Fanty Show called "Torture Cinema," in which we review bad science fiction and fantasy movies (sometimes books) while drinking alcohol. Anyone who donates $50 or more (including via the auction) will get to pick a movie for us to watch starting in August. No voting. You get to be dictator for the day.

There are only two rules:
1) the film must be SF/F (broadly defined)
2) it must be something we haven't reviewed yet. You can find the list of previous Tortures here.

Perk #2:  I'm giving away a small collection of short stories for donations $10 and up (whether direct to me or through John's zombie painting auction).  The stories will include:
--"Burned by Sol's Rain" (high-octane military SF involving time dilation and human/machine hybrids, among other things)
--"Irlgem" (sword and sorcery story about a female knight and a murder and a dangerous magic item)
--"Dear [Redacted]" (a humorous letter explaining why a planet has been marked for extermination, more or less)
--"Interstellar Realty" (a humorous far future tale about customer service, real estate, mortgage payments, and robotic dogs)

Perk #3 (alternate to #1): If you'd like to torture me in a more direct way, I will read the first chapter of any crappy SF/F book of your choice. It will be on video, and it will involve drinking. Yes, I am aware this may give me a brain disease, but sometimes pleasing others is worth it. Same donation level as #1.

Perk #4: Anyone who donates (or has donated) $20 or more will receive a copy of Crux's upcoming novel at release.  The novel is based on urban legends from the Elkhorn, Wisconsin.  Sounds pretty interesting to me.

Is that all?
For now. If you've got other ideas, such as forcing me to read from a really awful book while doing an impression (a bad impression), I'm not against the idea. You just have to let me know. As long as it's reasonable, I'll do it for $50. Call it whoring myself out for your entertainment, only I'll have my clothes on and we won't be in a cheap pay-by-the-hour hotel.

If you have any questions, let me know.  And feel free to share the word!

I love musicals.  And I'm sure some of you love them too.  If you need a pick-me-up, sometimes a musical is just the right thing.

These are what I consider to be the best SF/F musicals, selected by a jury of 5,000 Americans kept in an underground bunker for six weeks (part of the previous sentence is untrue -- also, the following are not in any particular order):
Dr. Horrible's Sing-a-long Blog
Neil Patrick Harris + Nathan Fillion + Felicia Day + Simon Helberg = one of the best musicals ever made.

Need I say more?

Urinetown
I saw a community college rendition of Urinetown a few years ago with my grandma and fell in love with it.  The humor is spot on and I find the socio-political theme interesting (tempted to teach this musical one day, actually).  I've included the show the cast put on at the Tony Awards, but you should also look up "Act 1 Finale," which is one of my favorite tunes.

Wicked