Posted on

Review: Perdido Street Station by China Miéville

Perdido Street Station is not a light, afternoon read. That’s not necessarily a criticism, but it’s absolutely true. The book itself is not even all that long — I mean, it’s no My First Weird Fantasy, but neither is it Infinite Jest — but it really feels as though it is. It’s like a rare ribeye with béarnaise sauce compared to a $8.99 sirloin from Applebees — whether or not the ribeye is any good, it certainly takes more conscious effort to enjoy and digest.

It’s said that any story should only have one or two Big Ideas. These are the philosophical underpinnings of the story — in layman’s terms, they’re what the story is *about* outside of the characters. Terminator is about time travel and robots. Those are its Big Ideas. Harry Potter is about a school for magic. That’s its Big Idea.

One of the reasons Perdido Street Station feels so dense is that it purposely breaks that rule. This novel is about so many things. It’s about art. It’s about dreams. Artificial Intelligence, academia, justice, Theories of Everything, free/potential energy, gods, demons, technology. Miéville touches on all of them, and at such a pace that you’re never quite sure where he’s going with it. As soon as you’re sure that this plot point is going to be the central conflict, it falls by the wayside and becomes a subplot or less. This lack of focus is at once breathtaking and aggravating. There is no denying that the novel could have been substantially trimmed, kept the same narrative and touched on almost all of the same themes. Miéville made a conscious decision to jam-pack his novel with a plethora of topics, not all of which pan out to satisfaction, and while I think that’s a completely valid choice (as opposed to an objective mistake), it didn’t quite work for me.

So what is the actual, central conflict of the novel? Well, we don’t actually find out until about halfway through, and describing it ruins some of the surprise. The story revolves around New Crobuzon, a sprawling, dirty, amazing, problematic, multicultural city within the magical steampunk world of Bas-Lag. The initial circumstances that lead to the conflict concern Isaac, a researcher, and his secret girlfriend Lin, a khepri (that is, scarab-headed) artist. Isaac is attempting to use his research into “crisis energy” to help Yagharek, a garuda whose wings have been sheared off as punishment for an unknown crime, and who can no longer fly. Lin, meanwhile, has been commissioned to complete a massive sculpture by a twisted, deformed crime boss, and though she’s in over her head, the chance to work on something so monumental is too tempting to pass up.

You might have noticed the races I mentioned — khepri, garuda — and those are just a few of the imaginative peoples Miéville uses to populate his world. Those races, incidentally, are the best part of the novel. If you’ve read other Bas-Lag novels (which I haven’t), you might be familiar with some of them, but as a new reader I thoroughly enjoyed being introduced to races outside the traditional elf, human, dwarf fantasy triangle. We have the aforementioned khepri, people with scarab heads and human bodies, garuda, bird-people, cactacae, cactus-people (and as a fan of Final Fantasy, I couldn’t help being reminded of cactuar), vodyanoi, humanoid frogs with watercrafting abilities, and more. Even when the narrative sags, Perdido Street Station is worth the read for Miéville’s fully-realized use of novel, nonhuman societies.

And really, despite its sometimes heavy, meandering nature, I would recommend you read Perdido Street Station. It represents some true forward-thinking for the genre, and contains some absolutely amazing scenes and creations. I desperately want to give it a 4 out of 5, but to me, that attributes a certain level of “couldn’t put it down!”-ness to the novel which it simply didn’t possess for me. Indeed, I had to actively force myself to continue more than once.

To continue the metaphor, Perdido Street Station totally represents that expensive gourmet steak with a crazy French sauce and some vegetable you’ve never heard of. It’s absolutely worth a taste, just to experience what an artist can do when all conventions are thrown out the window. But in the end, it’s just slightly undercooked for my taste.

Perdido Street Station by China Miéville gets a 3.5 out of 5.

Posted on

I’ve been infected with a virus … and the only cure is blogging about my WIP!

Thanks to Jim Reader over at the Central Texas Home for the Terminally Twitchy infecting me with a viral bloghop, I’ve decided to share some information about my current work-in-progress (which is, of course, different from the book I’m currently shopping). I’ve also decided not to tag anyone else, as most of the writing friends who I know are working on novels have already been tagged. SO THERE!

What is the working title of your book?

Chanter: A Song of War

Where did the idea come from for the book?

I always forget the answer to this question as soon as I start writing. I remember the initial seed of the story came from the system of magic (which is based on music combined with the Japanese elements), partially because I love Bard-type classes in video games, and thought they’d never really been given the potential they deserved.

What genre does your book fall under?

Fantasy.

Which actors would you choose to play your characters in a movie rendition?

Hmm. For Magdalena, possibly Christina Hendricks (but, like, a young Christina Hendricks) or Deborah Ann Moll (she’s a bit too thin, but she seems to have the right sort of fiery temperament). For Professor Rylock, uh, maybe Clive Owen or Colin Firth? All are absurdly attractive, but then, lead actors sort of have to be attractive, right?

What is the one-sentence synopsis of your book?

A songstress with an incredible power and a researcher delving into the mathematics guiding magic work together to fend off vicious insectoid invaders.

Will your book be self-published or represented by an agency?

Good question, that. I’m going to do everything in my power to go the trade publishing route, but I won’t say no to self-publishing if years and years pass and there’s no progress.

How long did it take you to write the first draft of your manuscript?

I started last November for NaNoWriMo, and it’s about 3/4ths done.

What other books would you compare this story to within your genre?

I hate this question as well. I suppose the first “Mistborn” book might be a decent comparison, given that there’s a bit of focus on the magic system, and it’s also about a young woman caught up in events as opposed to a predestined hero of the world or anything like that.

Who or What inspired you to write this book?

As I said above, the initial seed of the story was based around music and bards, and it sort of took off from there. I’ve used (limited) experience in high school band and my (more extensive, but also limited) experience in academics to tug at some of the threads.

What else about the your book might pique the reader’s interest?

Aside from the music-as-magic idea, which I happen to think is pretty cool, I think this story’s strength is the same as all my stories, if such strength exists: the characters, their relationships and the themes that come out of them. I try to create flawed, complicated but still admirable characters, and that goes for both protagonists and antagonists. Stephen King said something like “Fantasy needs a really strong, really evil villain to succeed” in reference to Dolores Umbridge from Harry Potter, and while that might be the case, I’ve never really ascribed to that. My antagonists are rarely “evil” — “misguided” is about as far as it goes. If that idea appeals to you, you might enjoy Chanter.

Posted on

Something From My Wonderous Work-In-Progress

Just thought I’d post an excerpt of what popped out of my head these past few days. It’s a stupid project, one that will not amount to anything, but one that seems to refuse to stop bouncing around my thoughts until I write it all down. See if you guess what it is.

CONQUEST
Do you want to know how your sisters died, Amazon? They died screaming, crying for mercy, begging Ares to spare their honor. They died cowering. Not like warriors. Like women. I wish I could have seen it.

DIANA appears on top of a crumbled pillar, clenching her teeth.

DIANA
You want to hit a woman? Here I am. Go ahead and try me, coward. See what it feels like to be a big, strong man. But I promise whatever you give me, I can give it twice back in return.

CONQUEST stomps forward. DIANA lifts a massive piece of rubble from nearby and pelts him with it, halting his progress. She barrels forward into his chest, pushing him back. He swings wildly but misses, and as promised, DIANA hits him with two powerful blows to the midsection. CONQUEST swings again, hitting DIANA with little effect. She drives a heel into his knee, and as he bends forward, she directs a savage elbow into the side of his head. CONQUEST’S helmet falls into the dirt, revealing a bloody, battered head beneath it.

DIANA

Don’t bother begging for your honor. You never had any to begin with.

Posted on

ArmadilloCon 34

This weekend I attended ArmadilloCon, a writers’ convention in Austin, the heart of Texas and my current home. It was pretty laid back, but I still met a lot of interesting people and attended a lot of intriguing panels, so I thought I’d post a short writeup on the talks I listened to. Hope this is useful for the people who weren’t able to make it out!

Writing in Multiple Genres
Panelists: Frank Summers, Bill Crider, Urania Fung, Alexis Glynn Latner, Kenneth Mark Hoover, C.J. Mills

Some of my compatriots weren’t enamoured with this panel, especially as an opening to the convention, but I found it pretty enjoyable. It was less a pragmatic “should you/shouldn’t you” or “should you have a pseudonym” discussion, and more of a philosophical one. The consensus essentially came down to the idea that the story is paramount; genre, if it exists as an inherent part of storytelling, is secondary. Though Ms. Fung made a good point that genre exists for your readers to find something they might like, but they also exist for writers to find readers. Some assorted topics of discussion:

  • Crossing genres, even within the same story, is much more accepted now than it was even 5-10 years ago
  • Some other mediums, such as comic books, were trailblazers in helping readers become more comfortable with crossing genres.
  • Names thrown out of authors that do this particularly well: Orson Scott Card, Dan Simmons, Isaac Asmiov, and even Seth Grahame-Smith, author of Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. 
  • Motivations included listening to the needs of a story, writing for a specific market you’re interested in, and simply wanting to be defiant toward the publishing industry. 

Trends in eBook Publishing
Panelists: Rhiannon Frater, Bill Crider, Liz Burton (Zumaya Publications), Gloria Oliver 

Anyone with a passing interest in writing or publishing knows that eBook publishing is the way of the future (way of the future…), so I had to hit this one. I was pleasantly surprised with the level of discussion on the panel. Excuse my French, but Ms. Burton of Zumaya Publications knows her shit. I can’t hope to do any of the comments justice, but here’s a quick rundown:

  • eBook publishing has obviously exploded lately, but it started back in 1996. Which is, like, woah.
  • One of the biggest misconceptions is that it doesn’t count any money to make an eBook, which is false (or at least, false for good eBooks). That still doesn’t mean $13 is a good price (it’s not). And it doesn’t mean that $1 is a good price either (leaves no room for sales, makes it very hard to raise price for future works). Consensus hovered somewhere around $4-$8.
  • Amazon and B&N provide the majority of sales. This isn’t really news.
  • NO DRM. All the panelists and the audience seemed in agreement about this. It provides no benefit to stopping piracy and just annoys reader. Ms. Frater also made a good point on this topic. She told a story of a friend who found her book on thepiratebay and was flat out ready to quit writing because of it. Frater did an experiment where she tracked downloads on the file, only to find that, even though it was available, it had somewhere around 5-10 downloads in nearly a year. So essentially meaningless.
  • Some worries about the new marketplace: ease of plagiarism (copying and publishing under a different name) and buying and reading a book, and then returning. Ms. Burton said there are continuing discussions with Amazon on this issue.
  • Mr. Crider pointed out that he made more money in on an eBook of an older title than he ever did when it was published in hardcopy. His electronic sales outpace his previous paper sales by a vast majority.
  • At least in Ms. Frater’s case, her agent and publisher (TOR) doesn’t mind her self-publishing work on the side, especially when it’s used to promote her traditionally published novels.
  • Big 6 is learning how to deal with all this, but it’s slow. They’re used to dealing with retailers, not direct customers.
  • E-ARC (Advanced Reader Copy), blog tours and cover reveals can be fairly useful to build buzz.

Writing a Strong Female Protagonist
Panelists: Rhiannon Frater, Chloe Neill, Patrice Sarath, Michael Bracken, Jaime Lee Moyer, Katharine Kimbriel 

As someone who writes a lot of female protagonists (that I hope are strong), this was one of the panels I was really interested in. Unfortunately, though the panelists were all eager and helpful, with a nice body of work, it wasn’t quite what I was looking for. Jim Reader pointed out that it should have just been a panel on strong female characters, and while I don’t necessarily agree (a panel focusing on female characters, and why there are so few of them compared to male characters, absolutely can and should be done), I do think that the panelists sort of went this way. There wasn’t a whole lot of advice about female characters specifically; instead, there were a lot of tips on strong characters in general. Again, great info. Just not what I was looking for.

  • The evolution of female characters in general has been from sidekicks/love interests -> belligerent, bitchy, lone wolf, “man in a skirt” types -> fully formed, well rounded female characters
  • To give you character likability, find their core strength
  • Avoid common tropes and caricatures
  • Motherhood is often thought of as weak; it’s interesting when this is inverted (I loved this, mostly because my novel has a strong motherhood component that I never try to play anything other than a strong and valid role)
  • Good leaders recognized people who can do things they can’t
  • One of the points I strongly disagreed with is the idea that sometimes weak female protagonists are fine because a woman juggling a job and a family, etc, might just want an escape. I, quite frankly, call bullshit. I think creating a weak, blank-slate character is a lazy way to attract readers. I mean, I’ll never bash a writer for writing what will sell (Shakespeare gots to get paid after all), but I believe you can write a strong, relatable character that people will like instead of a mindless puppet who exists to be rescued.

The World After Fossil Fuels
Panelists: Katy Stauber, Alan Porter, Jessica Reisman, Fred Stanton, Adrian Simmons

This one was more an interesting standalone discussion rather than one specifically about applying the ideas to fiction. But still, very enjoyable, with some very smart and experienced people on the panel.

  • Limits of Growth is a must-read for anyone interested in this topic
  • Our current energy use won’t change until we decide to make a change; even if there’s pressure (higher prices, etc) the infrastructure simply doesn’t support anything than fossil fuels.
  • High-speed transit would be nice in the US, but it’s more complicated than just building trains. Would require all new rails to support higher speeds.
  • Blimps, for all their danger, are actually highly efficient as a form of transportation, as hydrogen is one of the one forms of fuel more efficient than gasoline.
  • ITER fusion reactors, thorium fission and renewable diversification were all mentioned as places to research for those interested.

Alternate History
Panelists: Bob Mahoney, Jayme Lynn Blaschke, Josh Rountree, Penny Griffin, Howard Waldrop

  • Are alternate histories considered scifi or fantasy? In the end, “speculative fiction” is probably a better category.
  • Classic dilemma that almost all alternate histories need to choose between: are certain historical events and technological advances “inevitable,” or do strong people and circumstances create events? That is, would the printing press have been invented around the same time even without Gutenberg? Both views are valid, but it’s hard to write a story that does both.
  • The main appeal lies in the fact that hindsight is always 20/20, and it’s fun to say “What if?”
  • Writing from the point of view of a character inside the alternate world is usually (but not always) better than an outsider. Throwing an outsider in an alternate history can give the reader someone to relate to, but also creates infordumps.
  • Research till it hurts, leave out 99% of it.
  • Reading list: Man in the High Castle, Joan Aiken, Fatherland, Plot Against America, Celestial Empire, Gate of Worlds, Kingsley Amis “The Reformation”, The Difference Engine, Harry Turtledove, Scott Westerfield, Nabakov “Ada or Ardor”, “The Ugly Chickens” by Howard Waldrop, “Lest Darkness Fall”

Politics and Social Issues of the Future
Panelists: Gabrielle Faust, Adrian Simmons, Chris N. Brown

I loved this one! Another great discussion with some very sharp people about what to expect in the near future.

  • Corporatization of food and war. Ms. Faust had a great point about food giant Monsanto teaming up with Blackwater, the mercenary corporation. Mr. Brown brought up the idea of renegade farmers with urban farms trying to grow in secret, and the police (or hell, mercs) trying to catch them for patent infringement.
  • Disappearance of nation states — Europe already starting to trash the idea of highly separate nations. Look for borders to become more and more porous.
  • Possible end of capitalism, which sounds like the idealistic talk that has always been thrown around, but the panelists made some good inferences regarding this. Essentially, capitalism is addiction to growth, and it’s quickly becoming obvious (especially in a nonscarce economy, more on that below) that this is unsustainable.
  • The end of “race” as a concept. Now, Mr. Brown brought this up specifically talking about the U.S. become more and more of a mixed race country. I agree with him in general, but not on the timeline (he said 25 years; I think 250 years would be optimistic). Brought up the concept that systemic racism exists more because of incentives than human natures. As the incentives (or privileges) fade, so will racism.
  • All of this will lead to amazing instability in the next few decades.
  • 3D printing will become a huge issue, possibly leading to the end of scarcity as a concept (more on this in the “Social Impact” panel below).
  • Distribution is currently strangling production; that is, we can produce a lot, especially since we don’t need a lot people (or jobs) to do it any longer. It’s costlier and less efficient to distribute this. 3D printing might solve this (either a printer in every house, or one for every community).
  • That lack of scarcity might lead to a lack of required jobs for humanity. Pessimistically, it’ll make us bored and violent. Optimistically, it’ll allow us to focus on long term problems like the environment, or even cosmic problems like finding new worlds to inhabit.
  • Look for the blending of rural and urban communities as available land shrinks and people telecommute more. Things like urban farming will be one of the most obvious effects of this.

Social Impacts of New Technology
Panelists: Robert Jackson Brown, Chris N. Brown, Madeleine Dimond, Elizabeth Moon

I consider this a “companion” to the previous panel; it touched on and expanded on some of the same topics.

  • Secrets may become mostly a thing of the past. The power that revolves around keeping and telling secrets will cease to exist. This might lead to more accountability and more forgiveness; when everyone has black marks, no one’s little mistakes really matter all that much.
  • More talk of 3D printing. The ability to print guns could be mighty useful in a revolution. This requires a huge amount of power currently, however, meaning it’s still under the control of the Powers That Be.
  • Speaking of which, all of our technology that supposedly frees us (Internet, mobile web, etc.) is still at the behest of giant corporations, which is worrying.
  • Technology disrupts power structures, which is why governments dislike it. Mentioned was an “Internet Satellite Disruption Kit,” basically a quick-connection kit dropped by the West into unstable countries to document state behavior. Also brought up photographing police. Brought up social media in the Arab Spring, use of twitter/etc. to avoid cartel blockades in Mexico. Also brought up Anonymous’s hacktivisim against cartels to free a blogger.
  • 3D printing has already been prototyped to make biological materials, i.e., organs. Could we make animals? If so, would this be used to make extinct animals, or new, exotic ones?
  • Networks are becoming much more diverse (slowly), which is fantastic. Used to be only the highly privileged could afford Internet access. Is becoming less the case now.
  • The Internet has led to a culture of outrage. While Internet activism has empowered many and will be a huge outlet for direct democracy in the future, we have to be careful that it doesn’t convince us that doing nothing or simply screaming into the void enacts change.

Attracting and Building an Audience
Panelists: Elizabeth Moon, Chloe Neill, Kenneth Mark Hoover, Pauline Baird Jones

How does one build an audience. Well, by doing this: IF YOU ARE READING THIS RIGHT NOW, SEND THIS LINK TO TEN FRIENDS. Seriously, though, there were some decent tips and things to follow up on here. Nothing revelatory, but still interesting.

  • The concept of a “brand” — who are you and what are you selling? Most authors agreed that you are your brand, and you shouldn’t be afraid to be you in most cases. Ms. Neill made a good point, though, that one should know one’s audience. Ms. Moon can get away with talking about controversial topics like politics since she writes for an adult audience about socially aware topics and her readers expect this to a degree. Neill, as a young adult urban fiction writer, has not much to gain and a lot to lose from this, so she holds some opinions back.
  • A series-specific brand/website/blog might be a good idea. If so, start early. Moon, on the relaunch of her PaxWorld series, said she started her blog a year before the rerelease of the first book, and she wished she would have started it at least six months earlier. Building an audience is sloooow.
  • Don’t be afraid to write want you want, but once you’re done, market to people who are likely to like what you’ve written. Don’t market your Fantasy novel to Hard SF fans, even if you also love Hard SF.
  • Keep a positive focus as much as possible — again, depending on audience.
  • Be a nice person, hold off on the snark. This was highlighted as one of the most important things an author can do. You don’t need to be bland, but be friendly and kind to the people you interact with. This makes a difference with readers, but also to editors/agents.
  • Chloe Neill said she dedicates about 50% of her “writing time” (i.e., non dayjob, non-personal) to marketing. Note that this shouldn’t all be shilling your work; things like networking, talking to fans, talking to other writers, etc. are included.
  • Tangible items were highlighted as possible effective. Things like buttons, cafepress merchandising, contests, giveaways, etc. provide readers with a connection and constant reminder of your book.

Shew! There’s a lot of information here to digest, but hopefully, like me, you’ve either found something helpful for the business of selling books, or a spark of an idea for your next story. It was a great experience all around (I got my copy of Dark Tales of Lost Civilzations signed by my co-author Joe Lansdale!) and I absolutely plan to return next year.

Posted on

How Women Play The Game in “A Feast For Crows”: Part One of Five

I‘ve been wanting to put together a little exposé on the women of A Song of Ice and Fire for a while, and after reading and rereading and processing A Feast for Crows, I’ve got a few ideas that make sense. The fourth book in the series, AFfC is actually a wonderful entry for those, like me, who are drawn to women characters, as it’s nearly all about them. All the point of view characters except for Sam, Jaime and the one-offs (Jaime and the One-Offs, that’s a band name) are girls or women, all of them unique in their leveraging of power.

To that end, this blog series (which will run for five weeks, as I’m covering five characters) will explore the vastly different ways each character plays The Game of Thrones. It began as a single post, but I quickly discovered it was far longer than anyone would reasonably read in one setting. So I’ll do it as a serial, and maybe collect it all in one place afterward, for posterity.

I’ll repeat this for each entry, but this will contain SPOILERSOMG up through the end of A Feast For Crows. I think the spoilers for that book are fairly minor (though present), but if you haven’t read at least the third book, I’d stay away.

With that disclaimer, let’s get started.

Playing by the Rules ~ Cersei Lannister

I cannot let them see me cry. A woman may weep, but not a queen.

Illustration courtesy of arcticorset / M Pardo

Cersei Lannister. The woman everyone loves to hate — often unjustly, for many of the evil deeds ascribed to her (the crippling and attempted assassination of Bran, the execution of Ned Stark) actually had nothing to do with her. Still, no one can deny that Cersei is a, shall we say, enterprising woman. Lord’s daughter to ruling queen (regent, but don’t you dare add that modifier in her presence) in just a few years. Not bad.

The interesting thing about Cersei when set against the other women in the series is that her power derives completely and utterly from patriarchy. She marries King Robert at the behest of her father, serves as advisor for Joffrey, and then finally as guardian of the realm for young Tommen. An astute reader would expect this would make Cersei quite bitter, and the astute reader would be correct. Nearly all of Cersei’s major character flaws result from her living in — and being forced to wring the tiniest amount of power from — a male-dominated society. This is what tends to irk me about a lot of the hatred toward Cersei. Some of it is pointed — to be sure, Cersei is not all that likeable, and she’s not all that noble, and many of her actions, especially toward Tyrion, are inexcusable. But too much of the criticism is simple misogyny: “I hate that fuckin’ bitch!” without any recognition about why her mindset is so problematic.

At the best of times, she is thought of as a pawn by those around her, completely lacking control of her own destiny in even the most fundamental way. In A Feast For Crows, this changes drastically. Tyrion is gone, Joffrey (who truly is a little shit and deserves all the hate he gets), Robert and Tywin are all dead and can no longer lord their privilege over her. For once in her life, she is finally in control.

And Cersei just can’t deal.

Most of her life has been lived surrounded by enemies, even in her own family. This has led to a highly tuned and fairly ruthless survival instinct. That’s helpful during the times Cersei is actually threatened, but unfortunately, it’s also led to extreme paranoia and, well, short-sightedness. Let me expand on that.

When I first read A Feast For Crows, I was a bit disappointed in Cersei; specifically, in her decision to allow the Faith Militant (essentially Westeros’s version of the Templars) to reorganize. Up to this point, Cersei has been many things, but she has not been stupid. Allowing the Faith to create an entire army outside her control is stupid. I struggled with her characterization here for a long while, perhaps even thinking that Martin made something of a mistake when writing her. That’s when a fellow writer pointed out that the decision wasn’t purely idiotic, it was just myopic.

Ah, there we have it.

Cersei’s life of playing by the rules even when they’re stacked against her has made her intensely greedy. I do not mean greedy in the usual sense, that all she cares about is riches. No, Cersei is greedy in the game theory/algorithmic sense. A greedy player is one who strives to make the best play possible at any given moment without thinking ahead in the game. It’s a simple strategy, and often a losing one in most complex games. Think about chess; top players think three, four, perhaps ten moves ahead, and often the winning move is to play conservatively in the short term (even doing things like sacrificing pieces) for a long term gain.

This is something that’s beyond Cersei. Acquiescing to the Faith Militant squares her debt to the church, full-stop. Whatever happens tomorrow is tomorrow’s problem. This worldview makes Cersei the most inflexible of all the women I plan to cover, which is why, in the end, she’s the least likely to keep any real power. But this is the flaw that makes her very tragic (in modern parlance as well as classical), because for much of her life, that focus on surviving the here-and-now was a virtue, and it may have been the only thing that got her this far.

I could also go into Cersei’s use of sex as a resource, but I probably won’t, as that’s been dealt with enough. Suffice it to say that there’s nothing transgressive about her here. A woman using sex is conventional in this society, and Cersei uses what’s available to her. It is interesting that she uses her sexuality while condemning Margaery for the same thing, imagined or not, but oh now I’m off on a tangent, and I have more characters to deal with!

Next week, I’ll discuss Asha Greyjoy, the Daughter of the Kraken. I don’t want to give too much away, but consider that Cersei can be said to play by the rules of the Game, and Asha is almost her polar opposite in that regard.

Posted on

Release Day: 100 RPM

Today’s the day! My short (short! As in shorter than most of my blog posts!) story “Gold Digger” is included in the anthology 100 RPM, which is now for sale on Amazon for 99p (that’s ~$1.50 for us Yanks over in The Colonies).

I’m pretty proud of this, not only for the challenge of writing a story with so few words, or for appearing in print with Caroline Smailes and 80s idol Nik Kershaw. I’m also proud that the proceeds from the eBook go to One in Four, a charity aiding sexual abuse survivors.

So give it a go and let me know what you think. I’m only a few stories in and already loving it — so many imaginative examples of what can be done in a tiny amount of space.

Buy at Amazon!

Posted on

A Few Reasons ‘The Hunger Games’ Film Rocked

The Hunger Games is immensely popular. The book is flying off shelves, and the movie broke all sorts of records. And of course, when something is popular, it’s generally fashionable to hate it. Case in point, many of the critical reviews of the film.

One review in particular, sent to me by a friend, had me a bit worried about the movie before I saw it. Now, in retrospect, I think the review is actually comically petty. It’s MovieBob at The Escapist’s review. In it, he rakes the film over the coals for some pretty minor infractions, many of which are actually criticisms of the source material (for instance, he says the name ‘Katniss’ pulled him out of the story — seriously?).


MovieBob is probably being completely honest with his review. But it seems to me that popular things are often held to a much higher standard from certain critics. For instance, if The Hunger Games was some independent film no one had ever heard of, I would bet money that MovieBob wouldn’t have grasped at quite so many straws to tear it down.

Now, I’m not immune to this. I’ve launched my share of criticisms at popular media. Twilight comes to mind. But, in my opinion, the criticisms of Twilight are vastly more fundamental than “Their names are weird” and “The visuals are lacking.”

So what did I think of the movie? Actually, I’m going to make a pretty horrifying comment for bibliophiles. I think The Hunger Games film might actually have been better than the book. While the book had some interesting themes and characters, it was dragged down, in my opinion (and it’s just my opinion) by Collins’s simple and sometimes lazy writing. The film doesn’t have the same issues. Aside from some minor laziness in the visual effects department, all the components of the film were very well done. Here are a few of my highlights:

Katniss (and Jennifer Lawrence) kicks ass

When I first read The Hunger Games, I wasn’t immediately on board the Katniss bandwagon. Sure, she’s loads better than, say, Bella Swan – it’s not even close – but I still felt that she was far too passive. Things happened to her, but she didn’t affect a lot of change. I grew to like her more in the second book, but I still would have liked to see more from her in the first.

The movie, on the other hand, has no such problems. Katniss isn’t any more active as far as the plot is concerned, but Jennifer Lawrence (one of my favorite young actresses, as I elucidated in my 2011 Oscars roundup) imbues her with such quiet strength that one can’t help to root for her. The most fantastic scene in the movie, in my opinion, occurs during the countdown to the games. Cinna is trying his best to reassure Katniss, who seems almost in shock as the announcer marks each passing second. A lesser movie, with a lesser actress, would have done something like the following.

Katniss: “CINNA I’M SO SCARED.”
Cinna: “It’s okay. *Hug*”
Katniss: “OKAY I’M READY, LET’S DO THIS!”

But that’s not what happens. Instead, Katniss doesn’t say much of anything. Instead, she just shakes. It’s noticeable, but subtle. And it’s completely realistic. The look on her face as she rises into the arena is pure acting perfection. Katniss is capable, strong — but she’s also terrified out of her mind. It made me feel the same emotions, and I’d already read the book.

The film doesn’t shy away from brutality — but it’s not cartoony, either

In NPR’s David Edelstein’s review of the film, he comments that “If the film’s director, Gary Ross, has any qualms about kids killing kids, he keeps them to himself. The murders on screen are fast and largely pain-free — you can hardly see who’s killing who.”

I must respectfully disagree. I understand the worry that the PG-13 rating drove the lack of violence, but I’m not entirely sure that’s true. The film did a fine job of evoking horror at the brutality of the Games. At the end, we see Kato, the most villainous of the children, and it’s clear he’s been completely broken and stripped of his soul by the experience. And while it’s true we never linger long on gore, Katniss’s shock, the desperation of those around her, along with the fantastic mood-setting music work much better.

The problem with using violence as a way to elicit a horrified response is that it rarely works. No film portrays this concept better, in my opinion, than The Passion of the Christ. The entire point of the movie was to make the audience weep at Christ’s torture. But the violence is so over-the-top that it feels like a Looney Tunes cartoon. He might as well have dropped a piano on Jesus’s head.

I, for one, am very glad Ross didn’t go this direction with the film. I think it’s actually more relatable that way.

The music is perfect

Not a whole lot that needs to be said. While I’m not sure the score works as a standalone piece, it was fantastic in the movie itself.

 

 Backstory is handled cleverly

One issue movie adaptations often have is trying to fit in a bunch of past history and technical details. The Hunger Games deals with this two ways.

The first is via flashback, mainly to two important events: Peeta giving Katniss his old bread, and Katniss’s father’s death. Both of these could have been done hamfistedly, of course, but I think Ross handles them well. The bread flashback is done in spurts as Katniss gets to know Peeta — we get a little more of the scene each time, and finally, in the end, we see why it’s relevant. The flashback to Katniss’s father (and her mother and sister, incidentally) come while she’s hallucinating from the tracker-jacker stings. It’s sort of a convenient way to do it, but it also makes sense. It’s not too jarring, and it sets up the Rue-Prim equivalence without Katniss having to say “OMG RUE YOU REMIND ME OF MY SISTER.”

As for the details about the games, I think the film does a brilliant job of telling us exactly what we need to know, and no more. Yes, there are some unanswered questions. That’s going to be the case for any speculative fiction (well, any good speculative fiction). But I had a good grasp of what was going on, as did my fellow moviegoers, none of whom had read the book.

In MovieBob’s most boneheaded criticism, he says the whole concept of the arena was confusing. That comment is inept to the point where I’m wondering if he even saw the same movie I did. The film makes it clear the arena is artificial, subject to the Game Maker’s whims. I’m not sure what else Bob thought the audience needed — perhaps he wanted President Snow to come out and deliver a “HERE ARE THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS OF THE ARENA” speech. I dunno.

Is the movie perfect? Nope.

For all I liked about The Hunger Games, there were some missteps, and even some places where I agree with MovieBob’s critique. The lack of focus on the actual hunger part of The Hunger Games is really mystifying. I suspect we’ll see a lot of tummy-rumbling and cake-gobbling in the deleted scenes, but the fact that Ross really thought none of that was necessary really confuses me.

Also, as I previously mentioned, the visuals were a let down. The effects were blended poorly, and it’s incredibly obvious when the backgrounds switch from a set to a green screen. In a specific example, Katniss’s “Girl on Fire” outfit is incredibly underwhelming. In the book, I imagined her being encircled by flames, something truly otherwordly. In the film, it’s little more than a little fiery cape, and I probably wouldn’t be very impressed if such a thing made an appearance at the Olympics.

But all in all, I came away incredibly impressed by the effort. It’ll be interesting to see if they can keep it up for Catching Fire, given that I was fairly disappointed in the book.

Posted on

Anthologies available – Now in Paperback!

Quick update for you all. After getting some crap from some friends for not alerting people about the latest anthology I’m included in (which is simply because I haven’t gotten my hands on it yet!), I decided to check the previous one. Sure enough, that one’s out in paper for too. So, without further adieu:

Timeless

Timeless is an anthology celebrating eternal love … as well as some more complicated relationships. It includes my story, The Boy and the Nymph, a fairy tale about, well, a boy, and also a nymph. But, like, a fairy-tale nymph. Not the other meaning of that word.

It’s got some great and unexpected stories: “The Gate of Ethos,” about a newly-born demon and the human woman who messes with his head, and “The Trippet Stones,” where a time-traveling-spirit-sorta-it’s-hard-to-describe is forced to seduce the descendant of her former lover — as well as a bunch of others.

Ch-ch-check it out!

Amazon – Paperback
Amazon – Kindle
DRM-free from Cool Well Press

Dark Tales of Lost Civilizations

On the other side of the coin, Dark Tales of Lost Civilizations (or DaTaLoC, as I call it [I don’t actually call it that]) explores things that aren’t so eternal. My story for this one is entitled “We Are Not The Favored Children,” and it follows an Ancient Pueblo woman who sets out to find what might be the last hope for her people’s survival.

This one also includes a story by prolific and all-around awesome horror author Joe Lansdale, known for writing Bubba Ho-Tep as well as a ginormous list of shorts and novels. If you’re looking for something a little darker, definitely pick it up.

Amazon – Paper
Barnes & Noble – Paper

If you pick up either of the anthologies, I’d greatly appreciate dropping a review of it on Amazon, Barnes + Noble, Goodreads, or anywhere else. Good, bad, ugly — just so long as it’s honest!

Other Stuff


While the anthologies are definitely my biggest news, I do have other things a’brewing. My novel is, for all intents and purposes, finished. It will be off to beta readers by tomorrow, likely, so after I deal with another round of revisions from the feedback I get (mostly on the second half), I’ll be shooting it out to agents. Scary, but also exciting.

I also have some short stories in the works. There’s one I’m pretty proud of that I’m targeting for a specific market, but if that falls through, I might give it a go via self-publishing. I dunno. We’ll see. I’ve been wanting to jump into the Kindle market to at least give it a try.

Finally, I have a very short (100 words!) story that will be appearing in an upcoming flash fiction anthology entitled 100 RPM, edited by Caroline Smailes. It’s for charity y’all, so you know you have to check it out. I’ll let you know when that one hits (also a big shout out to my friend Teresa, who also made it into that one. Congrats!)

Posted on

The Best Films of 2011

Yes, I’m woefully late. In fact, if everything goes as plan, this will be posted mere hours before the Academy Awards. Oh well! That just means you won’t have to wait long to see how utterly crap my predictions are. Last year I did this as a two-parter, but since I’m already running late, we’re going to shove it into a single post. First up, the list of my favorite movies of 2011. Following that, my Oscar predictions. Without further ado, and in no particular order….

My Favorites

The Artist – Smart money’s on The Artist to win ALL OF THE THINGS! so let’s go ahead and start there. It’s great. It’s unique — a mostly-silent film about a silent film actor, the effortlessly charming George Valentin, who’s suddenly not as effortless when those new-fangled talkies start making waves in the film industry.

Jean Dujardin, a French actor who I’ve never seen in anything else, is friggin’ fantastic as Valentin. I don’t want to spoil anything for the prediction section … so I won’t. But Dujardin makes the film. The cinematography is similarly excellent — some really beautiful shots. The editing, directing — all top notch.

If I have one qualm, it’s that the story is somewhat simple. Not that there’s anything wrong with a simple story, but the film hints that it could have been somewhat more layered. Near the beginning of the film, Valentin has a dream that’s suddenly audible to us, the audience — and, to his terror, to him as well. I feel like director Michel Hazanavicius missed a chance to carry that metaphor through the rest of the film. But even so, The Artist is thoroughly enjoyable.

Midnight in Paris – I think I liked this movie more than I should — more than nonwriters would. Seeing Ernest Hemingway chatting with Gertrude Stein is almost as fantastically satisfying as seeing Thor smash a Frost Giant in the face with Mjollnir.

On the surface level, there’s not a huge amount of story here. Guy’s writing a book. Gets inspiration by imagining (or perhaps not?) writers of old giving him advice. Guy finishes book and learns a bit about life. But the sheer brilliance Woody Allen employs in the relationships between the various artists, and the intriguing (if not-too-subtle) grass-is-always-greener theme, make this a joy to watch, and Allen’s best film in years.

The Help – The Help got a lot of criticism for whitewashing (pun-intended) history, and that’s a fair point. But on some level, a good story is more important than getting every detail right. And The Help is a great story.

Yes, we get a little bit too close to “White angel” syndrome here, but I think the key difference between this and, say, The Blind Side, is that Emma Stone’s character in The Help is simply a mouthpiece — she just helps to make these women’s voices heard. And that’s generally the main thing privileged allies for underpriviliged people are expected to do.

The acting is the most important part, here. Viola Davis is fantastic, of course, but Octavia Spencer makes the movie for me. I think I laughed harder at her performance than at most of the comedies this year.

Super 8 – WHAT? Yes, like Tangled last year, Super 8 is my “dark horse.” While the wife wasn’t impressed, I found J.J. Abrams’s love song to Steven Spielberg entertaining as hell (and, ironically, infinitely more entertaining than Spielberg’s own War Horse, but then, what isn’t).

Super 8 has everything you could want — aliens, explosions, adorable children (who can actually act!). It’s E.T. on steroids — in fact, I have a suspicion that Elle Fanning is actually Drew Barrymore’s bastard child.

While Abrams still doesn’t seem to know how to handle giant monsters (Cloverfield wasn’t shown/explained enough, while Super 8’s creature is explained too much), it doesn’t hurt the movie enough for me to dislike it.

I’d like to again mention that War Horse was terrible.

I WISH

Moneyball – Rounding up my favorites is something rare for me — a sports movie. But it’s a sports movie where the sport is somewhat tangential. This isn’t about the kid with a heart of gold fighting adversity, though it is sort of an underdog story. Instead, it’s about statistics, and any story that can entertain while simultaneously showing that, guess what, math is real and has real power — well, that’s a good movie in my book.

Brad Pitt is fantastic as always, imbuing Billy Beane with a subtle humanity that’s interesting, but not overdone. Jonah Hill (excuse me, Academy Award nominee Jonah Hill) is great as the nerdy number cruncher, and I think he’s proved to everyone that he can do more than make dick jokes. Philip Seymour Hoffman did a great job as well, and I’m surprised he didn’t get more attention for this (in fact, he probably deserved the Supporting Actor role over Hill).

Honorable Mentions
The Descendants – Great acting all around — from Clooney, which is expected, but also from American Teenager Shailene Woodley. The fact that Woodley didn’t grab a Supporting Actress nomination is definitely on my snub list this year. That said, I thought the script was weak — the film spent way too much time on the tangential land grant plotline, and the resolution was both predictable and lacking in motivation.
Source Code – While not pure Science Fiction perfection like Moon, Duncan Jones’s followup is seriously underappreciated (I blame wonky marketing). It’s a classic Twilight Zone-esque time-travel story, but with a few interesting philosophical twists that elevate this movie above your normal Hollywood SciFi fodder. It’s not movie of the year, but it’s definitely worth checking out.
Contagion – The flaws with this movie are evident from the trailer: too much narrative distance, too many characters, Jude Law is super annoying. And yet, amidst the problems, Contagion manages to be entertaining, tense and occasionally thought-provoking.
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo – I’m including this because, in my opinion, it’s superior to the Swedish version in nearly every way. Now, of course, some of that is simply due to a higher budget. But Fincher’s eye and pacing also make it a far more interesting and frightening film.

Predictions

So after some thought, I’m going to switch this up. I’ll highlight what I think the Academy is going to choose — and if I disagree, I’ll note that in the text below. As before, any movie highlighted in red is one I haven’t seen.
Best Original Screenplay
The Artist
Bridesmaids
Margin Call
Midnight in Paris
A Separation

 I think Midnight in Paris clearly takes this, as it should. The writing, especially the dialogue, is exceptional. And while The Artist has several strengths, the screenplay isn’t really one of them, in my opinion.

Best Adapted Screenplay
The Descendants
Hugo

The Ides of March

Moneyball
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Given the buzz, I can’t see the Academy giving this to anything other than The Descendants. I disagree — personally, I thought Moneyball was far stronger.

Best Visual Effects
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II
Hugo
Real Steel
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Transformers: Dark of the Moon
I’m pretty sure Apes will get it, just to give at least a slight nod to Andy Serkis’s performance (which absolutely deserved a Supporting Actor nomination). Also, Dark of the Moon’s nomination is a travesty. The Transformers movies are a great example of how not to do visual effects. You can get the same performance by shaking a bag of metal and filming it.
Best Sound Mixing

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Hugo
Moneyball
Transformers: Dark of the Moon
War Horse

There’s not a whole lot to say about this category — The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo made excellent use of audio. And Transformers is a cacophony of pain.
Best Sound Editing

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Hugo
Drive
Transformers: Dark of the Moon
War Horse

I still find it funny when a movie gets a Sound Mixing nod, but not an Editing nod. Like, was Moneyball’s sound mixing appreciably better than its editing? I guess so. In any case, I’m giving this to Dragon Tattoo as well.
Best Original Song

“Man or Muppet,” from The Muppets

“Real in Rio,” from RIO
Seriously? Two songs? Just cut the fucking category if you’re not even going to try. Obviously The Muppets wins this — I can say that without even seeing RIO, because Bret McKenzie is a god.
Best Original Score

The Adventures of Tintin

The Artist
Hugo
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
War Horse
After all the drama with The Artist’s score, I doubt the Academy will touch that. John Williams is great, but War Horse is terrible, so it’s very possible that Tintin wins the award. But I’m going to guess Hugo, ’cause Howard Shore’s pretty great also.
Best Makeup

Albert Nobbs

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II
The Iron Lady

It’s possible they’ll throw a bone to Harry Potter to recognize the series, but I think Albert Nobbs did a better job, and I think it’ll win.

Best Film Editing

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Hugo
Moneyball

The Descendants

The Artist

Another interesting one … both The Artist and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo had great editing. But since they didn’t nominated Dragon Tattoo for Best Director (and since editing and directing are very closely connected), I’m going with The Artist.

Best Director

The Artist (Michel Hazanavicius)

Hugo (Martin Scorsese)
The Descendants (Alexander Payne)
Midnight in Paris (Woody Allen)
The Tree of Life (Terrence Malick)

Best Director goes hand-in-hand with Best Film. Spoiler! I think Hazanavicius deserves the win.
Best Cinematography

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Hugo
The Tree of Life
The Artist
War Horse

Tough choice, man. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo had some excellent shots. But in the end, I think The Artist went above and beyond.
Best Animated Film

Rango

Kung Fu Panda 2
A Cat in Paris
Puss in Boots
Chico & Rita

Sad. Kung Fu Panda 2? Really? Seriously, though, Rango was great. It will win.
 
Best Supporting Actress

Berenice Bejo, The Help

Jessica Chastain, The Help
Melissa McCarthy, Bridesmaids
Janet McTeer, Albert Nobbs
Octavia Spencer, The Help

Very competitive category this year. Bejo (who should be nominated in the Best Actress category, honestly), McTeer and Spencer all have very real chances to score here. My heart is with McTeer, as she blew her performance out of the water. But my gut’s going with Octavia Spencer, without whom The Help wouldn’t have been nearly as entertaining.
Best Supporting Actor

Kenneth Branagh, My Week with Marilyn

Jonah Hill, Moneyball
Nick Nolte, Warrior
Christopher Plummer, Beginners
Max von Sydow, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
On the flip side, I feel like the Supporting Actor category is not particularly competitive. None of these roles really stood out to me. I think Nolte takes it, though Plummer has a strong chance to win as well.
Best Actress

Meryl Streep, The Iron Lady

Glenn Close, Albert Nobbs
Rooney Mara, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Viola Davis, The Help

Michelle Williams, My Week with Marilyn
Great performances, all, but Rooney Mara really should win. She was brilliant. I think, though, that they’ll give it to Viola Davis — who is nearly equally as deserving.
Best Actor

Demian Bichir, A Better Life

George Clooney, The Descendants
Brad Pitt, Moneyball

Gary Oldman, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Jean Dujardin, The Artist 
Dujardin’s the clear winner. It’s almost unthinkable to me that anyone else could win, as great as the performances were.
Best Picture

The Artist

Hugo
Moneyball
The Descendants
War Horse
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
The Help
Midnight in Paris
The Tree of Life
The Artist takes it, as well it should. Good night, show’s over, tip your waitress. The Help was great, I enjoyed Midnight in Paris, The Descendants, Moneyball, Tree of Life was … interesting, War Horse was terrible (did I mention that?). But in the end, The Artist was something special. It wins the night.
Posted on

Work for Hire — Unfair, or Decent Opportunity?

Parafantasy dropped a pretty distressing bomb by covering the story that popular author L. J. Smith was fired from writing The Vampire Diaries, the story she (essentially) created.

“To put it briefly, I’ve been fired from writing the Vampire Diaries. And I’ve been fighting and fighting this since last fall, but there is absolutely no recourse. Midnight is the last L. J. Smith book in the Vampire Diaries series….”

Ouch. For fans of the series, I’m sure the news that their author is being switched up is a kick in the gut. Even for non-fans, it might be mystifying how something like this could happen. It’s got to be some stupid legalese loophole, right? Well … sort of.

The Vampire Diaries were created under what’s known as a “work-for-hire” agreement:

And both these series were written “for hire” which means that the book packager owns the books the author produces. Although I didn’t even understand what “for hire” meant back in 1990, when I agreed to write books for them, I found out eventually, to my horror and dismay. It means that even though I have written the entire series, I don’t own anything about The Vampire Diaries.

How true is what Smith says? Well, completely true. Writing something for-hire means it’s no longer yours — the characters, settings, words are owned by the parent company. The question, then, is whether or not this is fair. And the answer … yes and no.

For-hire writing is often seen in the context of shared universes. If you’re hired to write a Star Wars novel, for instance, you’re doing so for-hire. You don’t get to own the concept of lightsabers, the planet Tatooine, or even the original Jedi character you introduced. Those belong to Lucas, and it sort of makes sense in this context.

Now, The Vampire Diaries is a bit different. From what I can tell, HarperCollins hired Smith to create the series and characters from the ground up, and from Smith’s comments (“…I pleaded and promised to do Phantom as they required.”), it’s clear they had a strong presence not only in the editing, but in the overall design of the series. Thus, it’s not “I’ve written a book series, and HarperCollins is publishing it!” It’s “HarperCollins has an idea for a book series, and they want you to write it for them.”

So is it fair for HarperCollins to kick Smith out? At the very least, it sounds like they should have been far more up-front about what was going on here, if Smith is being honest when she said she didn’t know she was writing for-hire. If there was any deception going on, that’s incredibly shitty. But assuming there wasn’t any malfeasance, it’s hard to be too angry. HarperCollins will probably get a lot of justified anger over their douche move, but in the end, The Vampire Diaries as a concept was their project.

And furthermore, I don’t think Smith or Ezmirelda are quite correct to characterize Smith as being screwed by the fine print. Yes, it would have been better if Smith were aware of what she had signed to prevent this sort of blindsiding. But really, what would her options have been? It’s extraordinarily unlikely for a project like this that HarperCollins would have agreed to remove the for-hire stipulation; if Smith insisted, they likely would have just chosen another offer (remember, L.J. Smith was definitely not a well-known author at this point). And now, even though Smith has been removed, and that’s horrible, she’s gained a ton of publicity and a fanbase — I would think she could her pick of publishers for her next novel. Those are things she wouldn’t have necessarily gained before signing the work-for-hire contract.

Benefits aside, however, all decisions should be done with forethought. I had no idea what the “for-hire” phrase meant before a fellow author ran into it a few months back, so I absolutely know where Smith is coming from. If you’re not interested in an agent (and if Smith got this contract even with an agent, and was confused about the contents, something’s very wrong), then all writers should take the time to read over each contract in its entirety, and educate themselves about the meaning of the terms within.

And as much as I’m sure Smith is steaming over what happened, I’m sure her fans will follow her to whatever her future projects may be. I wish her the best of luck.