Draft Post Bingo Winners: What I’ll Be Finishing Next
A whole bunch of folks tossed out their nominations, so here’s the stuff I’m going to finish in the next, say, month: FIN A post about ideological rigidity from a teaching perspective (with a side of SF/F) FIN A post of my hopes for SF/F in 2013 (which I can just update to 2014) FIN A post about whether fiction can be too gritty (dragging up something from a long while ago) FIN A post about the weird “homo/bi-sexuality as deviance” narrative in The Following FIN A post about why self-published books frequently get snubbed by mainstream literary awards A post on the top 7 geek-related hobbies/jobs I’d love to do for a living A post about five SF/F books that deserve to be considered classics FIN A post about the possibility of a Worf TV Show A post involving a poll for writers (asking them if they played RPGs as a kid, if they still do, etc.). A love letter to Zach Snyder and Christopher Nolan (for Man of Steel) FIN A post about upcoming remakes (Blake’s 7, The Black Hole, etc.) A post about note-taking and citation software (a huge monstrosity of a thing…) A graphic novel review of The Coldest City A movie review of Cowboys & Aliens A book review of Harbor by John Ajvide Lindqvist A post about five SF/F books I can’t wait to read…soon… FIN A post about the top 10 SF/F anime movies I’ve put them in order from “received the most votes” to “received at least one vote” and thrown out all the ones you didn’t vote on (which I’ll save for later). Though I will try to finish them in the order in which they are presented here, I’m going to leave that open enough so I can skip around if I feel inclined to do so (or for those posts that should be finished first because they’re about fairly recent musings). Anywhoodles!
Draft Post Bingo: What should I finish? You Decide!
I’ve been sitting on over 50 draft posts for a while now. Some of these have been around for years, either because I couldn’t complete them (which explains why they are not listed below) or because I forgot about it. So here’s the deal: I’ve listed a whole bunch of these posts below, and you’re going to help me pick the ones that get finished next. All you need to do is a leave a comment with your favorites (you can list the numbers; pick no more than five or six, just to make it reasonably). You’re free to offer your reasons, though it’s not required. Here’s the list: A post about the weird “homo/bi-sexuality as deviance” narrative in The Following A post about the possibility of a Worf TV Show A post about why self-published books frequently get snubbed by mainstream literary awards A post involving a poll for writers (asking them if they played RPGs as a kid, if they still do, etc.). A movie review of Pacific Rim A love letter to Zach Snyder and Christopher Nolan (for Man of Steel) A movie review of _Olympus Has Fallen_ A post about upcoming remakes (Blake’s 7, The Black Hole, etc.) A post about ideological rigidity from a teaching perspective (with a side of SF/F) A post of my hopes for SF/F in 2013 (which I can just update to 2014) A post about why The Empire Strikes Back has gone from my least favorite of the originals to my almost favorite today. A post about note-taking and citation software (a huge monstrosity of a thing…) A post on the top 7 geek-related hobbies/jobs I’d love to do for a living A movie review of The Hunger Games A graphic novel review of The Coldest City A movie review of Cowboys & Aliens A post about whether fiction can be too gritty (dragging up something from a long while ago) A book review of Harbor by John Ajvide Lindqvist A book review of Dead or Alive by T.M. Hunter A post about five SF/F books that deserve to be considered classics A post about five SF/F books I can’t wait to read…soon… A post about the top 10 SF/F anime movies Have at it!
Literary Fiction Does Not Exist (or, Please Shut Up About Literary Fiction)
Last month, Storyville posted a definition of literary fiction. As with all definitions of a genre, it is functionally useless, in no small part because it offers utterly subjective criteria, most of which apply to such a wide range of literary forms that the attempt to define collapses under the weight of its own uselessness. For example: Often, literary fiction will be introspective, examining the thoughts and feelings of its main characters. There will be a deep study of a person or persons, showing us layers of experience, emotion, thought, and behavior. OK, but what exactly does “deep study” mean? Are James Patterson’s Alex Cross novels not “deep studies” of Alex Cross? If not, then how do you show or define a “deep study” in any useful way? They don’t say, so I have no idea. Based on this vague definition, anything James Patterson has written (or put his name on) would technically qualify, but I suspect that’s not what they meant when they came up with this definition. All of the criteria are as poorly explained as the example above, which presents a very real problem: What is literary fiction? If we can’t define it, then why are we talking about it? It makes sense to me why we define the popular genres (science fiction, fantasy, romance, western, crime, etc.), even if we cannot approach a viable definition. At the very least, science fiction is noticeably different from, say, an Alex Cross novel, most notably because of its settings, etc. Though such “differences” are not absolute (hence the existence of cross-genre work), we can at least acknowledge the literary traditions of genres like science fiction. Ultimately, the genres are useful only for the market: to help readers find something like that other thing they liked. Literary fiction, on the other hand, doesn’t seem to have any true separation. “Literary merit” doesn’t actually mean anything, as what receives “literary merit” can exist in any genre (see the Western Canon — there’s all kinds of fantasy and SF in there). And, of course, a science fiction novel can avoid what the folks at Storyville define as a “plot,” too. What makes it “not a science fiction novel” if it is, in fact, a science fiction novel? The literarinessessess? Over the years, definitions have become more and more meaningless to me. This might explain why I prefer to think about science fiction in Delany-an terms: as practice, not “thing.” His second collection of essays, Starboard Wine, for example, suggests that the best way to understand what science fiction is requires us to look at how science fiction works. We can sit around arguing definitions until we’re blue in the face, but if we look at how the narrative of SF functions, how the worlds are imagined and share common operations (in narrative terms), and so on, we might get just a little closer to understanding what science fiction is, even if we can never define it. If there is a Starboard Wine or Jewel-Hinged Jaw for literary fiction, I haven’t read it yet. All of these definitions of literary fiction, however, haven’t helped the “cause.” I don’t think literary fiction exists. It’s an artificial category; it is abstract; it is meaningless. When we define something as “literary fiction,” we say nothing. It is an unsolicited subjective opinion about the quality of a work, but not a definitive classification of that work. And the more we keep talking about this divide between genre and literary fiction, and the definitions therein, the more I’m convinced that the latter never existed at all. There is no such thing as literary fiction. And once we all acknowledge that, we can shut up and move on with our lives…
That Readers vs. Writers Thing on Strange Horizons (or, Some Disconnected Nonsense From Me)
I’m sure you’ve all heard about this Strange Horizons column already. If not, go read it, then come back and read what I have to say (or don’t…up to you). As I pointed out by way of a link-laden question the other day, I really don’t understand what the frak is going on in the SF/F community right now. It’s like a whole group of fans, writers, and bloggers decided they’d all take crazy pills as part of a New Year’s resolution, and unlike every other resolution (to lose weight, to drink less, to tell your significant other that you’ve fathered (or mothered) nine children with an alien from Mars), they seem to have actually gone through with it. And the crazy really hit the fan this month. So here are some random thoughts about everything, written as such to avoid treading too far onto ground so many others have already covered: Authors Commenting on Blogs Honestly, I’ve never had an issue with authors commenting on this blog, though I haven’t stated as such before. But I’ve also never had (at least, in recent memory) one of those experiences where an author shows up and has a hissy fit in my own space. If authors feel inclined to post here, they are free to do so (encouraged, even), but under the following caveats: You understand that you do not control interpretation; it is the domain of readers. You avoid being an asshole. (Note: this only applies to posts about the author or the author’s work, of course; outside of such posts, the only rule I have is “don’t be an asshole,” but that applies to everyone, not just authors.) Do I think there’s necessarily anything wrong with an author posting in spaces where his/her work is being discussed? No. I also don’t think it’s a terribly good idea, in most cases. It all comes down to how you engage, really, and I’m not the type of person to tell someone the proper method for engaging in such scenarios. I can only tell you what not to do (see one of the sections below). The Big Deal? Maybe it’s just me, but I never interpreted what Renay said as absolutist. Even if what she said was absolutist in form (there are some lines here or there in the comments that give that impression), it doesn’t follow that she’s necessarily right (obviously, she and I don’t agree on this point) and it doesn’t mean you’re somehow beholden to what she says authors should do. After all, Renay is just a reader and a fan (a great reader and fan, I might add); she’s not God. The idea that her words should be viewed as gospel seems anathema to the concept of a fan writer, or a semi-pro zine featuring articles by fans. So when the reaction to the whole scenario devolved into name-calling (yous bullies and idiotas!), misdirection, merry-go-round arguments, and, eventually, threats of sexual assault against Renay and others, I couldn’t help feeling a bit lost. What exactly did these folks say to justify such behavior (in the minds of people who think such behavior could be justified, of course)? In other words: WTF? The lesson writers and readers should have taken from the whole thing seemed obvious to me: some people are uncomfortable talking with authors about their work on their own blogs, and those that are comfortable are probably pretty obvious about it (see the above section). And, well, the point Renay tried to make (and what others also tried to point out in the comments sections at various places) got completely lost. It’s not about whether an author is allowed to comment somewhere, but whether doing so is a good idea. And there were a number of interesting reasons for why authors shouldn’t: Authors can stifle honest, open discussion (public blogs provide the illusion of this; our culture is so voyeuristic, that all one really needs is the appearance of privacy, since all of us know, on some level, that we’re always being watched…) Authors can sometimes impose their interpretation of their own work onto the reader, which can present a conflict between reader and writer (namely, a conflict about the appropriate interpretation). This can also stifle discussion. Authors can sometimes be assholes. Really big assholes. I’ll cover that last one in the next section. Basically, in the relationship between “reader” and “author,” the positions are not equal — at least, not in the minds of some folks (their perspectives are valid). While I understand Ben Aaronovitch’s contention that “he’s just some guy who writes books,” I think he (and I) sometimes forget that in the universe of books, authors are our celebrities. I’m sure a lot of movie stars would love to get ignored like the rest of us in their everyday lives, but we all know that won’t happen. They’ve reached a different plane of existence(?) that, however artificial, puts the movie star above the movie viewer. The same thing happens with authors. In fact, I still struggle with this myself. I’ve admitted before (here or on The Skiffy and Fanty Show) that I sometimes have a hard time talking to authors in person. This is mostly true for authors whose work I’ve been following for a while. I get nervous. Yes, they are all “just people” like me, but they are also the folks who have made things I love. They are Joss Whedons in a book world. While that’s changed a lot in the last few years (mostly by actually interacting with authors I admire), I still understand that there are sometimes unequal relationships. That’s not the way it has to be, of course, but it’s crucial to understand that for some readers, the hierarchy exists, even if only on a psychological level. Some of us will move beyond it, as I’ve worked to do over the past few years, but others may choose to keep the distance for their own reasons. Appearances Are Weird
Reviewers vs. Authors vs. Twitter vs. Strange Horizons: One Thought
WTF is wrong with you, SF/F community? I’ll have another post in the near future. . . . . . . . . . . . . P.S.: This post is not an opinion on the subject at hand (i.e. the content of the original Strange Horizons post). Rather, it’s all I have to say at the moment about threats of sexual violence in response to female bloggers talking about something as mundane as “authors commenting on reviewer/reader blogs.” I’m just flabbergasted about it all, to be honest…
Comment System Has Changed!
Quick note: I’m testing out a no-moderation, no-captcha commenting policy on the blog. I realize that captcha may be one of many reasons for low activity on blogs in general, so I wanted to see what would happen if I removed the barriers. So, consider yourselves my guinea pigs!