Monthly Archives: January 2015

And now, politics

A common right-wing argument is that Roe vs. Wade was bad because abortion policy should be decided at state level. Somehow, though, I doubt they’ll object to Congress trying to ban abortions beyond 20 weeks.

•More protests about the “lying Muslim traitor” being too open on immigration policy.

•Rod Dreher suggests that while the recent Muslim terrorist attack in Paris was wrong, “decadence” like the kind promoted by the terrorists’ victims is a much greater threat to us.

•In an ongoing whistleblower trial of Jeffrey Sterling, the government insists that as journalist James Rosen refuses to talk to the feds about his sources, therefore the defense can’t call him as a witness.

•A Fox News psychiatrist says the person who should be on trial for Michael Brown’s death is Brown’s father. Because if he’d brought the kid up right, he wouldn’t have been so evil, so there you are. Somewhere …

•Mike Huckabee explains that if you’re not a thug, police won’t shoot you, so protesters shouldn’t pretend there’s a problem.

•Congressmen are pushing to exempt Internet providers from FCC net neutrality regulation.

•From last year (but new to me), a look at Oakland’s desire for a mini-surveillance state that will crack down on political protest.

•United has replaced unionized baggage handlers at the Denver Airport with cheap contract labor. Astonishingly, the quality of the work is less.

•Senator Marco Rubio is shocked that the courts can overturn Florida’s gay marriage ban—how can that be Constitutional? As someone says in comments at the link, it’s unlikely he’ll have the same reaction if the courts overturn Obamacare.

•Digby suggests American attitudes aren’t as far removed from the terrorists in the Paris killing as we’d like to think.

•The National Review fights against income equality—government shouldn’t make solar energy companies richer by giving them special benefits. Apparently the welfare millions of other businesses receive is A-OK.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

The inevitability of bad days (#SFWApro)

Today was less than productive.

My sister and I are sorting out some financial stuff for Mum and this morning the questions consumed quite a bit of time. And when I was done, my concentration was too sliced-and-diced to focus on writing.

So I didn’t. I watched time-travel movies rather than struggle futilely (which as I’ve mentioned before, I utterly hate). But I still wasn’t pleased with myself (in the short term, the movies don’t pay the bills). And this evening I dropped out of the writer’s group given the probability of snow on the roads by the time I get out (around 30 percent. For a former Floridian, that’s risky enough).

All of which put in mind of Nicholas Taleeb’s Fooled by Randomness, a nonfiction book about the difficulties we have understanding randomness and chance. One of the points he made in passing was that it’s often a mistake to check your stocks or your weight every day. Suppose, for example, you’re exercising every day, eat sensibly, but once in a while you go out to a big event and pig out. Next daily weighing, you see an uptick in your weight and you freak out—all your good work, ruined! Whereas if you checked every week or so, the regular weight loss effect would probably neutralize the pig-out, and you wouldn’t feel bad. And whatever you’re doing, some sort of misstep is inevitable, because nobody gets it right every single time.

Which is a roundabout way of saying I shouldn’t kick myself about having one crappy day. Much like returning to the mean, it’s probably inevitable. And if I do a good job the rest of the week, shouldn’t be a problem. More of a problem, unfortunately, than it was pre-puppies when I could do more paying articles a day, but still, not a disaster.

I shall take that to heart, relax and enjoy the evening.

3 Comments

Filed under Time management and goals, Writing

So, Illogicon (#SFWApro)

I’m pretty sure it’s a rule all specfic writers have to post about cons they attend, particularly when they’re guests. So …

This was third year visiting Illogicon. The first year was fun, the second would have been fun except that it was a horrendously rainy, dank, miserable weekend which made me want to stay home and watch movies (TYG is invariably away—it usually coincides with an annual alumni event—so I have the rare pleasure of the house to myself).

professor2(Prof. Schrodinger, the mascot for the con). This year, I was a guest rather than just visting. I had a reading (One Hand Washes the Other with enough time left for He Kindly Stopped For Me), and three panels: Writing sf/fantasy humor, how to get past the technical details and tell the story, and writing stories set in a past when racism, anti-semitism, homophobia, etc. were not only more common but perfectly mainstream and acceptable. The last two were my suggestion.

The panels went well. The “historical attitudes” one, however, I discovered at the last minute I was moderating; fortunately Gail Z. Martin, who’s much more experienced at being a guest, did a lot of the work. I did a better job with moderating the technical-details presentation, as I was ready and thought up some useful stuff to keep discussion going.

I also went to one on the use of religion in fantasy, and a very good one on diversity.

I was also unusually social. At Mensa events I’m a social butterfly. At most cons, I’m into looking at the cosplay, chatting with friends (I’ve rarely been to one where I knew nobody), browsing the dealer room, attending events … but other than the chatting I’m mostly flying solo. This one, though, for some reason, went differently. The panels I was on, of course, involved a lot of interaction. Plus I went out to dinner on the Friday with my friends Ada Milenkovic Brown, Natania Barron and Samuel Montgomery-Blinn, plus a few people I barely knew, such as Gail Z. Martin.

I also talked with people in the con suite, which had very good vegetarian chili. And with some non-writing group friends who showed up. And a long conversation after the diversity panel with author Terri-Lynne Smiles. Plus my writing buddies. And I was at the con, among the other congoers for a looong time each day (I showed up around starting time on Friday to avoid Durham-to-Raleigh rush hour traffic). So by Sunday morning, I was actually on the overstimulated side (I’m enough of an introvert that lots of interaction wears me out). I came in for the religion panel (I had friends on it), then sat around chatting for about an hour, then called it quits and headed home so I could have a couple of hours before TYG returned.

After she came back, we got the dogs from the vet’s, where we’d boarded them. Trixie was quite nervous at first in the car, as if she wasn’t sure where we were taking her. As soon as we got home she started sniffing around the floor, nose to the ground, with great enthusiasm. By evening they were back to normal.

I’m looking forward to the next Illogicon. January, 2016, for anyone who happens to be in Raleigh-Durham.

Leave a comment

Filed under Personal, Writing

The Story Behind the Story: Affairs of Honor (#SFWApro)

No reviews today, either—I just discovered my historical fantasy Affairs of Honor is out on Abyss and Apex. In fact, it’s been out since summer but when I got the check, I assumed they were paying early and never checked (why yes, I am sometimes a doofus). So here’s the backstory on how it came to be written.

The story was inspired by a nonfiction work of the same name, Affairs of Honor by Joanne Freeman. It’s a fascinating book that deals with reputation, honor and the code duello among the politicians of the newly born United States—Alexander Hamilton’s duel with Burr was only one of several he’d been involved with, for instance. It wasn’t necessary to actually fight (all Hamilton’s previous duels were resolved amicably by the seconds), but to prove that you were willing to fight—to show your honor by challenging anyone who insulted you, or to show you’d stand by your words if you were on the receiving end. It was also fascinating to learn what were considered fighting words back then, such as “scoundrel” or even “puppy.” There’s a lot more to Freeman’s book, such as how whisper and innuendo campaigns worked in that very-pre-Internet age, and I highly recommend it.

Somewhere in the middle of reading Freeman, I realized that a)I wanted to do a story in this setting; and b)it would be a fantasy (of course), with a wizard’s duel. The basic concept took shape immediately. The protagonist, Knorr, wasn’t in the duel himself, but his relative (I settled on older brother). His hot-headed sibling has written an honor-blackening, insulting letter about a much stronger wizard who now demands satisfaction. To complicate things, the other wizard’s uncle is a former comrade from the Revolutionary War, now estranged from Knorr an old dispute.

Then the nephew turns up dead. And all the evidence points to Knorr having killed him to save his brother’s life.

To this I brought something else that fascinates me about the early United States, the conviction (common to many revolutions since then) that they were creating a new world, a better world, a world such as had never existed before. In an age of monarch, they were a Republic, such as hadn’t been seen since the Roman Republic of old, full of “Republican” virtues (regrettably I decided that phrase would sound like a modern political reference, so I didn’t employ it). So in my alt.history, wizardry is part of that.

Wizards fuel their power with intense emotion, and the easiest place to find that is in the midst of battle. So part of the “republican” vision is to change that, to turn wizardry from a tool for kings to wage wars to a science that serves humanity in peacetime.

Of course, anything that involves magic and early America makes me think of Salem. It seemed logical there’d be witches at Salem but I so did not want to go the “No, in this world where magic works, witches are evil and they were guilty!” route (something I’ve discussed previously). So I decided no, they were witches but they were innocent, framed and hung by a cabal plotting to drain the magical power from their dying bodies.

I also worked in one really obscure historical reference, to “Inkle” as a synonym for “betrayer.” Inkle was a British planter’s son in an account published in the 1730s. Living in the West Indies, he took a slave woman as his mistress, then sold her when he needed money—getting a better price because she was with child. The shocking story was still remembered in the early 1800s, so I worked it into a reference to Judas and Benedict Arnold, figuring the meaning would be clear even if nobody knew the story.

I had a lot of fun with this one. I might go back to the setting sometime and do more.

3 Comments

Filed under Short Stories, Story behind the story

Urgh (#SFWApro)

Walking around Illogicon all day has exhausted me. So no reviews today. Soon!

Leave a comment

Filed under Personal

A good start to 2015, wheee (#SFWApro)

My first week trying my new schedule went very well.
I submitted one story and two queries for possible freelance gigs. I put in three hours on fiction which ain’t much but it’s the most I’ve done since we got the puppies. Plus my Demand Media stuff, plus the usual array of movies for my book.
Thursday, admittedly, was off. I had to drive TYG to the airport for a trip, and as I’m attending Illogicon in Raleigh this weekend, we also took the dogs in to be boarded. Not that I’ll be there 24/7, but this way I don’t have to worry about getting back to walk them.
I do feel a little guilty—this is the first time we’ve boarded them and I’m haunted by the image of sad puppies wondering what they did to disappoint us so. But TYG called and checked today and the dogs are doing what they usually do most of the day, eating and sleeping.
Today was the first day of Illogicon and it was good. I was on one panel, on dealing with historical attitudes when writing fiction (e.g., the days when racism, sexism or anti-semitism were both commonplace and unremarkable), browsed the dealer room and attended a panel on SF based on the social sciences. I also hung out with several friends in the local specfic community and chatted with Gail Z. Martin, who is Charlotte based.
A productive and fun week, what’s not to like?

Leave a comment

Filed under Now and Then We Time Travel, Personal, Time management and goals, Writing

An odd day, so links!

Many errands done, and then my last estimated taxes for 2014. But that pushed everything else back, so now I’m too tired for more than links.

There’s an old argument on the left that the Republicans don’t really want to ban abortion because then they couldn’t use it as a rallying cry to get out the vote. I’ve always found that daft–”Dems are going to change the law and kill babies!” would probably work just as well as “Liberals are going to change the law and take your guns!” In any case, while it’s not completely banning abortion, a new bill in the House would make it illegal after 20 weeks.

•A devil’s bargain? AT&T allows users to access certain apps without using their plan data. The catch, as Consumerist points out, is that it makes it easier for big companies to squeeze out little ones that can’t pay for the same privilege.

•A Democratic senator is shocked that Obama would do anything as undemocratic as threaten to veto a bill. Surely that’s not how our democracy works?

•Rand Paul shows his commitment to civil liberties by discussing how the terrorist attacks in Paris show we should restrict Islamic immigration to keep out the terrorists. Because Christians and Jews don’t do murderous stuff like Muslims do. And of course he’s right, the only time a non-Muslim commits terrorism in America is if it’s a legitimate target like a Martin Luther King Day parade. Or a government building. Or plant bombs at the Olympics to protest abortion. So if we just keep out Muslims, we’ll be fine. Here’s a related post from Slacktivist apologizing for all terrorist acts committed by his fellow Southern Baptists.

•John C. Wright is horrified that The Legend of Korra ended with what appears to be a gay relationship.

•Higher gas taxes just to pay for infrastrucutre? Better to let it crumble, John Boehner says!

•Conservatives who protest when someone’s fired for anti-gay statements like to present it as an issue of free speech rather than well, anti-gay. Somehow I don’t think they’ll be championing this case: a Miami archbishop has said that any employee who tweets or posts online in support of gay marriage will get the axe.

For the record I don’t think employees, in general, should be fired for anti-gay posts on Facebook (or wherever) either.

•Another cardinal complains that feminism has destroyed the Catholic Church because of their tremendous power and influence in the all-male hierarchy. At one point Cardinal Burke talks about the “manly discipline” involved in becoming an altar boy serving at the side of a priest—rather creepy from a guy who participated in the priestly pedophile cover-up (he has, by the way, been stripped of official duties by Pope Francis).

•Doctor Science points out that police work isn’t as dangerous as several other jobs, such as fishing for a living or driving a taxi.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tonight, political links because why not?

One of the standard reasons given for not cutting homeowners more relief on their mortgages is moral hazard—if people get to shuck off their debts, they’ll just become irresponsible. But of course, when it’s major corporations or big cities, it’s moral hazard, moral shmazard.

•Republicans continue trying to nibble Obamacare to death. Now it’s a proposal that only 40-hour-a-week workers are entitled to health care through their employer.

•First the NY Daily News reports that a “hulking brute” attacked a woman on the subway. When it turns out it’s a cop, suddenlu he’s not hulking or a brute and everything that happened was “alleged.”

•Why has the economy been picking up? Obviously, Repubs say, it’s because there’s a Republican majority in both houses, even if they haven’t done anything! And their immediate goals are slashing money for the disabled and requiring the budget office to use “dynamic scoring”: Rather than assume a $3 billion tax cut (for example) will cost $3 billion in revenue, just assume that it will boost the economy to the point it generates $6 billion in added revenue!

This is actually a game they’ve been playing since the Reagan administration. Assume that tax cuts increase growth, and therefore taxable revenue, and therefore less taxes=more government money! Except facts have repeatedly shown it doesn’t work. And sometimes they admit it. For example, when the 1990s economy was in full bloom and the government was posting a surplus, the argument (from the WSJ, my old employer Freedom News and George W. Bush) was not that “You see, cutting tax rates boosted revenue!” but “You see! Tax rates are too high! We must slash them to lower revenue!”

•A county official threatens to sue because a reporter used his name in a news story without permission. I’ve actually been threatened with the same, but only by a private citizen (who did, however, speak at a city council meeting so it’s automatically on the record) and not quite so publicly and obviously.

•Phyliss Schaffly comes out in favor of affirmative action—women shouldn’t be allowed to make up more than 50 percent of college students! For their own good, because if women outnumber men, men will be able to force them into degrading hook-up culture (women, of course, hate one-night stands and the like).

•You may recall that George Will declared last year that liberals make “rape victim” a “coveted status.” Turns out president wanna-be Jeb Bush thinks the same thing of feminists, civil-rights activists and gay-rights activists.

•Boston University gives fathers paternity leave. So one professor takes it and more or less brags/jokes about how he let his wife do all the work while he sat around and drank.

•I linked recently to the case of Republican Steve Scalise speaking to a white supremacist group. Group founder David Duke says if anyone makes an issue of it, he’ll out all the other politicians who’ve courted the group. Oh, and when Scalise first ran for Congress, he described himself as sharing many of Duke’s beliefs but being more electable.

•Ultra-orthodox Jewish men delay a flight out of JFK because they demand seat assignments get rearranged so they’re not sitting by women.

•This article explains how nerds can have miserable, insecure lives and still benefit from male privilege. As John Scalzi once put it, having male privilege doesn’t mean you win the game, just that your level of difficulty is automatically lower than if you were a woman.

•Proving foreign politicians can be just as obsessed about the importance of women breeding as Americans, Turkey’s Erdogan says women who use birth control are committing treason.

•Conservatives insist that their violent rhetoric cannot possibly cause violence. But of course, when people criticize cops, that automatically leads to violence!

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

Is Our Writers Learning? The Brothers Cabal by Jonathan L. Howard (#SFWApro)

20613481

(Cover rights to current holder. The book doesn’t name the artist)

THE BROTHERS CABAL by Jonathan L. Howard really didn’t work for me. So mostly what I learned from this one (which since I’m behind again, is my November Writers Learning entry) was cautionary tales.

The Story: Picking up (I gather) from the previous book in the series, this opens with the necromancer Jonathan Cabal dying, only to be saved by his vampire brother Horst. Horst then devotes much of the rest of the book to his experiences dealing with a sinister fellowship of dark occultists, before he and Jonathan go out and kick their butts.

WHAT I LEARNED: Well for one thing, I hate it when I can’t figure out the setting. Howard’s style is faux-Victorian, but the book didn’t seem Victorian, and when there’s no date, I assume the story is contemporary. And then it has airplanes and trucks, making it definitely contemporary … except Prussia’s still around. And when some kind of weird helicopter shows up, I assume it’s steampunk alt.history. But I could be wrong.

At my last reading of the intro to Southern Discomfort, someone said I didn’t need to set the specific date because it was obviously early 1970s from context. Reading Brothers Cabal makes me confident I was right: Location and time is not something I want readers to have to guess at.

Humor is Tricky. Early on in the book, Howard makes a footnote to the effect that if you don’t understand Cabal’s reference to the Dreamlands, either read Lovecraft or the earlier series novels—preferably the series, because Lovecraft doesn’t need royalties. Which didn’t work for me because it didn’t seem to fit with the humor tone in the rest of the book. Though that didn’t really work for me either. It seemed to focus mostly on how Horst isn’t really a dark creature of the night and feels slightly ridiculous being called a Lord of the Dead, and jokes about uncomfortably supernatural beings go back a long way.

And when humor falls flat, the result is usually less satisfying than when drama falls flat. Like the old theater line goes, dying is easy—comedy is hard.

Style is Tricky Too. Howard’s ornate, somewhat Victorian style is presumably meant to be a big selling point for his work. It certainly grabs me more than his plot or his characters. And again, it didn’t really work for me—certainly not enough to make up for plot and characters not grabbing me.

That’s a subjective assessment, but that’s the thing about style—if you’re relying on that to hook readers and it doesn’t, you’re out of luck. I like Lovecraft’s style despite its flaws, but plenty of people just can’t stomach it. I’ve read several interviews where the writer says anyone who’s described as a stylist is really a bad writer, because if he was good, nobody would notice the style (“Style should be invisible!” is an absolute for some writers).

I like style (not necessarily a specific style) but it needs a story under it. Lord Dunsany is an excellent storyteller, as is Raymond Chandler and they’re both great stylists. Howard? Not so much on the story. I might have liked it better if he focused on the necromancer from the start, as that’s a fresher field to plow than vampires. But I don’t feel inclined to read one of the earlier volumes to find out.

seStyle ranges from writers who use as little of it as possible (“style should be invisible” is a maxim for some) to storytellers with tremendous style such as Chandler or Dunsany.

Leave a comment

Filed under Is Our Writers Learning?, Reading, Writing

Books and TPBs (#SFWApro)

RED SUMMER: The Summer of 1919 and the Awakening of Black America by Cameron McWhirter looks at the year which resulted in the record high for lynchings in the US, but was also noteworthy for black Americans’ new willingness to meet the attacks with violence. McWhirter shows how the NAACP shifted from an organization largely dominated by white liberals to one run by more assertive blacks, while black soldiers back from the Great War refused to accept that they deserved second-class status. Against this came increasing assertions of white dominance as servicemen, county officials and plain everyday folks attempted to draw a line in the sand against black rights. I find the ending a little too optimistic: McWhirter (following the rule of such popular histories that the year they cover has to be The Big One) argues that this represented some sort of turning point from which white dominance began to recede, but I’m not sure the history of Jim Crow bears that out. Still, a good, informative book (but if I had to pick one on this topic, Lost Battalions is better).

REVIVAL: Live Like You Mean It by Tim Seeley and Mike Norton has the characters from the first TPB beginning to crack under increased pressure as the nation watches and tries to figure out the meaning of the dead coming back. Plus there are still crimes to solve, and new crimes only possible in a world of the Revived. This was a lot stronger than the first collection, but I’m not in any hurry to check out the rest of the series.

SUPERMAN: Secrets and Lies by (primarily) Dan Jurgens is a reasonably fun collection of Superman adventures: Clark gets a date with Lucy Lane, the Daily Planet outs someone as Superman’s secret identity, the Russians are up to something sneaky and the alien Helspont plots the takeover of Earth. Readable, but Clark’s personality is a bit too schmucky to work for me (partly because it seems to genuine, rather than a sham put on to fool people), and the comic interactions with other characters don’t mesh well with the rest of the story. And I can see why some reviewers refer to the New 52 as the Marvel-izing of DC, with all the muttering Superman is an “alien being” rather than a heroic icon.

1 Comment

Filed under Comics, Reading