I’m trying to get a few more book reviews in at the last second, so here is another one from Tor (and Kage Baker). Definitely a good read. You all should check it out!
There’s something boring about the concept of a reprint only anthology. I know that every year publishers release “best of” collections and the like, but I rarely buy any of them, not because I think the stories in them are bad, but because it has nothing new to offer me except an editor’s opinion about what constitutes “the best” of the year (an opinion I can get just by looking at the table of contents). I like opinions, but the only reason to buy one of these “best of” anthologies, to me, is for the chance to read a lot of fiction that I might not have seen before (maybe because I don’t subscribe to the original publishing venue). Often times, I’ve already seen the stuff. But reprint-only anthologies in the English market are, to me, a good-intentioned cashing in scheme. Yes, authors get paid again for a story they sold for a crappy price before (even if they sold to a big market), and a publisher gets a great chance to sell a lot of copies of a book filled with stories by previously published authors, folks who have some degree of quality to be inherited. But beyond that, there’s no incentive for me as a consumer to buy a reprint-only anthology, and as a writer I find them rather off putting. Why can’t most reprint anthologies have some new and some old work, like a lot of Strahan’s anthologies? That way as a consumer I get something new, and as a writer I get an opportunity be alongside writers I respect? Then again, I guess reprint-only anthologies aren’t meant for people like me. I’m the kind of consumer that generally isn’t targeted by such things precisely because I’ve probably already read most of the stuff being reprinted. But, even so, every time I see a call for submissions and realize it’s only for reprints I get a sick feeling in my stomach. Maybe that’s because I don’t have a previously published story to send them; regardless, I rarely buy reprint anthologies for the two reasons alluded to here: 1) it has nothing new to offer me as a reader; and 2) I can’t submit to them. Does that make me a bad person?
In response to some comments made over at SF Signal and elsewhere, I’d like to take this opportunity to clarify that just because I (and others) believe Avatar to be a steaming pile of garbage does not mean that I am not a science fiction fan. Questioning my dedication to the genre based on my dislike for one film is like questioning a Star Wars fan’s love of the franchise simply because he or she didn’t like Episode II (a fact that is true of most Star Wars fans, by the way). On the other side of things, being a fan of science fiction does not mean that one can’t be critical of the players of the genre. Science fiction is not about accepting everything as quality; it’s not some bizarre ultra-socialist experiment to give everything the same value. Get over yourself. There are a heck of a lot of science fiction fans who hate Star Wars or Star Trek; such is part of the dynamics of the SF fan community. So, no, I am not an anti-SF fan based on my daring attempt to call Avatar out for its shoddy storytelling; I am an actual science fiction fan, but with different expectations of the genre. I want science fiction that is capable of giving me something more than flashy CG, recycled plots, wooden characters, and inconsistent universes. Maybe Avatar will prove me wrong and be none of those things, but right now all the reviews are confirming everything I’ve said thus far: it’s a story I’ve already seen twenty-five times before, in film, and it will be so overwhelmed with computer graphics that people who have never been on acid might think they’ve been duped into taking an illegal substance. That’s not the kind of SF I want. Filmmakers need to learn from George Lucas: computer graphics do not make a film, and if you’re going to spend so much money making a movie pretty, you should spend an equal amount in dollars and hours on actors, directors, and writers to make sure that what you have is a good product, not just another flashy action movie. But, again, everyone is going to see Avatar anyway. It doesn’t matter what I think. It’s going to make millions, but in ten years it probably won’t be remembered as anything but a vague footnote. That is all.
2010 is shaping up to be a busy year for me. A few big things have happened, and with the next semester of school coming up I’m sure I’ll be a busy little bee. The sad thing (or cool thing, depending on how you look at it) is that I’ll be away from home for a little under two weeks between the months of February and July. So, what’s going on in 2010? First, I’ll be teaching at the University of Florida, again (I’ll be doing this for the next six years, most likely). January marks my second semester as a teacher, with a few changes to keep things spicy. I’ll be teaching an introductory course to college research papers and, for the second time, a technical writing class for engineers. While neither course is as interesting as an intro to science fiction course would be, I am still getting a lot of valuable experience that will help me get a good job when I graduate with a PhD (or an MA if I somehow get booted out of the academic circuit). Second, I’ll be taking two graduate-level courses. One is on African fiction and the other is a class on Lacan (the latter is a theory-intensive course on psychoanalysis and I am not exactly looking forward to that because I hate Freud). They didn’t have any science fiction courses this time around, or anything that seemed directly related to what I am working towards or studying, so much of my course preferences this semester were based on a “will I find that enjoyable or at least remotely useful” mentality. The African fiction course, however, does look promising and I expect I will learn a lot from it (well, I’ll probably learn a lot from both, to be fair). Lastly, I will be attending three conferences during 2010 to present papers on subjects of interest to anyone who is a fan of science fiction or fantasy. The first is the Southwest Texas Popular Culture and American Culture Association Conference to be held in Albuquerque, New Mexico (don’t ask me why it’s not held in Texas, because I have no idea). I will be presenting a paper on Battlestar Galactica and Philip K. Dick (I’ll be talking about all my upcoming papers in another post) and will be there from February 10th to the 13th. The second is the annual conference of the Popular Culture and American Culture Associations in St. Louis, Missouri. Battlestar Galactica will be a feature yet again, only I’ll be dealing with some different ideas. The PCA/ACA conference is held from March 31st to April 3rd. The last is What Happens Now: 21st Century Writing in English – the first decade, a conference held at the University of Lincoln in the United Kingdom. There will be no Battlestar Galactica in this one (or I don’t expect there to be). Instead, I’ll be talking about the Bizarro and New Weird movements and their influence on the wider world of science fiction and, to a lesser extent (because it’s already weird and bizarre anyway), fantasy. Thankfully, this conference is held towards the tail end of the academic school year (July 8-11), giving me plenty of time to fine tune the essay and do appropriate levels of additional research. And that about sums up the next six months of my life. I have a lot of work to do, since I will have to write three papers for conferences, and likely two more for my graduate courses. That’s five papers, fifteen pages or longer, in six months. I expect there to be much sweating. Any of you up to anything? Attending any conventions or conferences of your own? Let me know in the comments!
Another review up. Interzone is a curious magazine, for sure, and you can check out my review of the latest issue here. You can also see my review of #224 from a few months back here. Have any of you read anything interesting lately?
This will be brief, folks, because you should be reading this post and following the links to the incident rather than wasting time seeing what I have to say. I’m not even the first one to get to this, obviously. The short of it is this:Candace Sams, author of some book whose title sounds idiotic to me, developed a particularly nasty case of complete nutjobbery. Some Amazon person gave a negative review of her book, and she decided to comment, only not in the way anyone with a brain might. There are, as of this moment, twenty-seven pages, some of them hers and a lot of them from people trying to fan the flames. Around page 15 or 16 is where she starts claiming that she is getting the FBI involved, but really, the whole thread is a enjoyable foray into one author’s psychological downfall. There is, of course, nothing wrong with responding to a review, per se. Sometimes authors want to get a bit more information or clarify a point, or something. But Nutty Sams has done exactly what no author should do: gone off on a wild tear on the reviewer and anyone else that isn’t on her side. The good news is that Nutty Sams has received a lot of free press for this, the kind of press that most writers can only dream of getting (she’s apparently been Gaiman-ized). The bad news is that this may very well be the end of her career. At least she gave everyone a bit of fun on her way down. That is all. Update: The Guardian talks about this incident here.
