What I’ve Learned About Writing in 2012

How long do I have to do this before it becomes a tradition? I think the definition of a tradition is something everyone does but doesn’t really know why, other than ‘it’s tradition’. So, maybe a few more years yet.

First up, stats!

2012 saw 15 submissions of 7 new stories. Only one of them has found a home. That’s down on the last two years. I’m okay with that.

Why? Read on…

So, what have I learned?

1) Write active
Don’t say what your characters are doing. Say how it feels. Character’s falling down a muddy bank and into a river? Well, they’re not going to know what’s going on until they stop falling and pull themselves back into the fresh air. What are they experiencing? The world tumbling around them? Shoulders hurting as they tumble, legs being bent in weird directions? Even if they’re just walking down the road. What are they noticing? How does the air taste?

This ties into the whole passive voice thing. I actually think I’ve got some kind of grip on that now. Verbs should not be the subject of your sentence! The subject of the sentence should be the thing holding the reader’s interest. The reason they’re reading the story. It should be the character, or the artefact, or the wibbly portal that’s opening up over Yorkshire.

In a scene from Jurassic Park, Jeff Goldblum holds a flair and runs from the t-rex

But what’s really interesting is that Jeff Goldblum is running. Huh? ‘Running from what?’ Oh, nothing special. Just, you know, a boring old… thing.

2) I have a problem with homophones and look-alike words
I’ve never been diagnosed with dyslexia, or any other kind of disorder like that. However, after over a dozen readings I still missed a point where I’d written ‘diaphragm’ instead of ‘diagram’. I just read over it. Every single time.

And the difference between ‘steel’ and ‘steal’ just won’t stick in my head. I mean, I can see they’re two different words but when they’re in a story, they might as well be the same.

A Guiness poster, showing a working man carrying a steel girder with one hand and merrily trotting along.  It's captioned, 'Guiness, for Strength'.

And for stealing steel! … Steeling steal? Ah, crap.

And then there’s the times I miss out words and don’t notice. No matter how many times I read it, the gap doesn’t present itself to me. Or the superfluous words, they don’t register either. And then they I did something. See that? If that was in the middle of a story, it wouldn’t register.

There are programs out there designed to help with these problems. Things like Read and Write, and Ginger. However, none of the ones I’ve found work with Ubuntu. No, not even through WINE. However, I have started to use Orca Screen Reader. It, erm, reads out what’s on the screen. And it’s really helped with those missing words and those look-alikes. Stared vs. starred is one I can never get. But Orca gets it for me.

It’s quite possible that this selective blindness accounts, at least in some part, for my less than stellar publishing record. It’s also possible that I’m just crap.

3) Getting published is less important than getting people.
This is that ‘why’ I was talking about earlier.

This isn’t about networking. This is about having other people to share the world with.

Take movies and TV shows, for example. I’ve realised I’m an horrific voyeur. I enjoy someone else enjoying something on TV as much–maybe more–than I enjoy what we’re watching.

And I need to have that in my life. I need to have something other than the whims of the slush reader to dictate my happiness. And I need to share my happiness with people who want to share it.

This is the sort of thing you’re supposed to learn sometime around puberty. It’s the sort of thing you’re supposed to learn how to do before you leave school. Who says you’re supposed to? You know. People. By the time you leave university you’re supposed be a fully-rounded human being, who can make friends by themselves, who can take pleasure in other people’s company, who doesn’t see other people as a drain on their time that could be better spent elsewhere. I feel as if I’m a good twenty years behind where I should be, socially. Why did it take me until I’m 32 to realise this?

Of course, all that is a lie. All this ‘supposed to’ malarky. Whenever that train of thought leaves the tracks, I force myself to take a breath and be thankful it didn’t take me until I was 33. Or 40. Or eighty. Because damn, on that score, I’m lucky.

Anyway, back to people and writing. I’m not going to stop writing any more than I’m going to stop breathing. I’m just going to take some time away from it and give it to… well, other people. And if I think a story is great and no one wants to publish it, I’ll publish it. It won’t get me any closer to Interzone or Asimov’s but it’ll be doing more than if it just sat on my hard drive.

So, where are these ‘people’ going to come from? Well, two places.

A man stands, covered head-to-toe in bees

Gah! People! They’re all over me! Get ‘em off! Getemoff– Wait, this actually feels quite good… Ho! Hold it! You going to crawl in there, you need to buy me a drink first…

The first is the big, scary, unpleasant world. I joined Reddit a few weeks ago. I made my first post without sitting on the sidelines for months as I learned the rules. Couldn’t have done that a few years ago. And I’ve started archery. Hobbies are good, right? Especially hobbies that’ll come in useful after society collapses.

The second is the people already in my life. People like Allegra, and Jo, and my family. No more discounting! No more telling myself that the people who care enough about me to make time in their lives for me don’t count because, seriously, what kind of idiot would make time for me?

All I need now is some of that new-fangled confidence stuff I’ve heard people talk about.

And yes, this is an important lesson about writing. A very important one. If I’m part of the world around me, if I can let other people into my world, then I’ll be able to create far more enticing and rich imaginary worlds and far more nuanced and believable characters. If the thought of someone valuing me doesn’t make me run screaming from whatever room I’m in, then when opportunities come along I’ll be able to grab them with both hands and if I crash and burn then, hey, not the end of the world. Where’s the next one coming from?

So. That was 2012. What does 2013 hold? Come on, motherfucker, let’s see what you’ve got.

(Now, if you’ll excuse me, this sudden outburst of floatation has run out and I need to find a corner to whimper in…)

Jurassic Park picture from here. Guinness ad from here. Man covered in bees from here.

The Next Big Thing: The Last Stand of Edward O’Malley

Jo Thomas was kind enough to nominate me in her own, ‘Next Big Thing’ post.  If you’ve not heard of it before, it’s basically a chance for writers to talk about a project they have in the works, nominate others and keep the whole thing rolling.

So, here’s some questions, and some answers!

1. What is the working title of your next book?

It’s not a book, I’m afraid. I have four book manuscripts in first draft on my computer, and that’s where they’re staying. They’re sprawling messes that, I’ve come to believe, aren’t worth the investment of time to go back and edit. I mean, they’re over 200,00 words and come from before a time when I had learned my lessons about writing.

So instead, I’m going to talk about ‘The Last Stand of Edward O’Malley’, my contribution to a linked short story collection called, ‘Journeys in the Winterlands‘. The other contributors are Allegra Hawksmoor and John Reppion.

2. Where did the idea come from for the book?

The initial idea for the collection came from Allegra. She gathered Katy Casey, Leah Dearborn, Margaret Killjoy, The Catastrophone Orchestra, John Reppion and myself. Allegra wrote the first story, ‘The Web of the North’, and let the other writers run with it where ever they wanted to in their own stories.

The Nothern Lights dwarf two tiny human figures beneath them

The Northern Lights permanently flare over the skies of Earth, and the sun never brings anything more than twilight

3. What genre does your book fall under?

SteamPunk, I guess. But the cool kind. The kind with interesting political and social questions, not the kind with cookie-cutter a world stuffed full of ‘Steampunk’ gadgets.

4. What actors would you choose to play the part of your characters in a movie rendition?

Oh, gee. Erm. I don’t know a huge amount of actors or actresses. Maybe that’s why I don’t really see my characters as actors or actresses. The only casting decision I can really make is Ned Alleyn as Edward O’Malley. Ned Alleyn’s been dead since 1626, but that’s not important, is it?

5. What is the one-sentence synopsis of your book?

Fucking awesome.

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

It will be coming out through Vagrants Among Ruins.

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

Created on 28/02/2010, 18:09:46, last modified on 02/03/2010, 07:38:28.

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

Well, Margaret and the Orchestra published their stories, with some new work, in ‘White is the Colour of Death‘.

I’d like to think it also has flavours of Ursula K. LeQuin’s ‘The Left Hand of Darkness’, a bit of John Wyndham, a dash of James Joyce’s ‘Dubliners’, some Mumford and Sons and Bright Eyes, and any time you’ve been really, really fucking cold.

Hey, it’s SteamPunk. Everything is in it’s genre.

9. Who or what inspired you to write this book?

Allegra, mainly. I wanted to do justice to the world she created, to the story she started telling.

The first notes in my notebook are about how technology and science can, and often is, used to calcify societies. Instead of pushing us forwards into unknown territory, it obsesses about maintaining the status quo and encourages behaviours that are destructive to ourselves and the world around us.

As an example in the real world, lets take wind farms. The problem is simply that we’re using too much power, living far beyond our means. Rather than attempting to solve that problem, technology is working its nuts off to enable it. We never sit down to look at what we’re doing wrong and solve it, and technology is used to help us ignore the problem.

As the idea developed, the focus shifted around a lot. It shifted to the relationship between O’Malley and his protégée, Callista. Then onto his relationship with his son, and onto his father. The wider society, the social changes brought about by the apocalypse, the society of the Affected, storytelling and history…

It’s picked up pieces from every story the focus shifted onto. I’d like to think that it’s made it a story set in an interesting world with complete, rounded characters.

A lone figure pulls a sled of supplies across an Arctic landscape

It’s a cold, blank landscape and the only warmth comes from other human beings

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

The city of Birmingham rising out of an ice sheet, a massive fungus-like growth of smoke-stacks and slums that tops a huge city carved into the ice, swarming with the once-human Affected. O’Malley and Callista walking the ice-covered British Isle, each for their own reasons but knowing the other is, and always will be, there for them. The first green shoots of a new society, the first hopes of a better future. And, okay, a few gizmos.

~ * ~

Right!  I hope that’s whetted your appetite.  If it has, then rest assured that I’ll be making a big song and dance when it comes out.

Now, for my part, I hereby tag Allegra Hawksmoor and Alistair Sims.  There’s no getting out of it now, folks!

And I would also like to point you to entries by Jo Thomas (in case you didn’t catch the link at the top), Bob Lock, Aliette de Bodard (whose one line summary made me despair of writing anything better) and Fran Terminiello.

 

Picture of the Northern Lights from here, and the lone Arctic adventurer from here.

Outlaw Bodies Anthology Now Available: Transhumanism For The Rest of Us

Outlaw Bodies, a new anthology from The Future Fire, is now available in both dead-tree and ebook!

“An anthology of short stories on the theme of outlaw bodies: how will bodies be controlled in the future? What kinds of bodies, modifications, choices will be repressed (or compulsory)? How does transgressing the norms of body-identity make us who we are? Nine authors explore these themes through speculative stories that touch on gender, sexuality, sexual identity, disability, self-image, prosthetics and robotics.”

The front cover of the Outlaw Bodies anthology.  It shows a human figure, head in hands and wires plugged into its skull.  The background is a multicultured silhoutte city.

Coming from TFF, the stories are politically and ethically challenging and, instead of simply cheering ‘w00t! Transhumanism!’ raise the kind of problems that arise when people who haven’t heard of transhumanism are forced to deal with the ground shifting under what it means to be human.

After all, it’s not the early adopters and enthusiasts who define how humanity interacts with a new technology.  It’s all of us.  It’s those of us who bump into these things one day without realising they ever existed as ideas.  We take the new technology and work it into our existing lives, into our existing problems and hopes and daily grind.  The technology doesn’t define our world-view or self-image.  It’s just something we use.  When you have people outside that perceived ‘early adopter technophile’ mindset interacting with technology that potentially changes what it means to be human, the results are going to be interesting in ways fiction doesn’t normally explore.

It’s already had a very positive review from Strange Horizons.

And the best bit? The anthology is opened by a story from the the awesome Jo Thomas. She has a post about it here. There’s also a series of guest posts on the Future Fire blog, and a blog carnival.

Words We Don’t Mean: Small Talk and Small Steps

I’ve come across people in my life who don’t like to talk about the weather. I came across one the other week who said something along the lines of, ‘what’s the point? It’s bloody obvious what the weather is.’

A lot of small talk is like that: discussing the obvious. It’s taken me over twenty years to discover why.

(And now, a disclaimer! I think what I’m talking about is small talk. I’ve never met anyone who can define and explain what small talk exactly is to me. All the stuff I’m about to talk about I’ve pieced together through careful observation and trail and error over the last decade.)

See, a lot of people will probably think this whole post is silly and not worth saying. But I was never properly socialised as a child. I never learnt the unwritten rules of society, how to interact with people, what should be said, when and how. I was in my early twenties before I realised that when someone you kind of know passes you on the street or where ever and says, ‘Alright?’ the correct response is simply, ‘yeah, alright?’ They’re not asking how you are, if everything is all right with you. It’s simply a way of saying, ‘I recognise you and acknowledge your existence’.

It’s only now, at the age of 32, I’m beginning to understand the purpose and rules of small talk. At least I think I am.

As far as I can tell, it has two purposes:

  1. To find common ground with a stranger;
  2. To create a relaxed and friendly atmosphere.

The second one is easier to explain: thought follows action. If you’re sharing a space with someone–a lift, a meeting room, a kitchen–then you don’t want to be stuck in a horrible and awkward silence. In order for the conversation to work, you both have to put on the face of someone who’s relaxed and cheerful and because that’s the way you’re acting, you both walk away feeling relaxed and cheerful. It makes for a more pleasant atmosphere, and the atmosphere affects all those who breathe it in. That’s why it’s important in spaces you spend a lot of time in, with people you may not have anything in common with–places like work.  (It’s also an entirely socially-constructed necessity, but that doesn’t mean we can escape it.)

Now, back to number one: common ground with a stranger. When you meet someone for the very first time and you don’t even know what their name is, the weather is fucking fantastic. It’s the one thing you can pretty much guarantee you both have in common!

A bleak landscape, covered in yellow clouds with a fork of lightning striking

No matter how bad the weather is, it’s better than no weather at all. Or the weather on Venus. That’s a planet where the phrase ‘acid rain’ means something.

More than that, it’s something that opens up huge numbers of potential gateways. After all, the weather is always with us and affects pretty much every part of our lives. So, it’s potentially an opportunity to talk about any part of our lives.

For example:

Person A: “It’s really coming down out there.”
Translation: Do you want to have a conversation?
Person B: “Yeah. Not much fun for us but I guess the garden’s grateful.”
Translation: Okay. I have a garden. Do you have any interest in anything garden related? You know, plants or growing things or dirt or weeding? Any garden-related anecdotes? How about something to do with having fun in the rain?

Or:

Person A: “It’s really coming down out there.”
Translation: Do you want to have a conversation?
Person B: “Yeah, but you know there’ll still be a hosepipe ban.”
Translation: Okay. Water companies suck, amiright? Well, big companies in general. Do you agree? What about the government? Any big organisation? And, you know, isn’t it annoying how all this arbitrary rules seem to govern our lives? Do you have any anecdotes about water or arbitrary rules?

Conversations like these are a game. The idea is to open up as many potential gateways in your answers, and spot the potential gateways in your partner’s.

For example, Person B offers three gateways in the first example: Fun; Gardens; and Being Grateful. Person A can respond on any of the offered topics, getting extra points for keeping it relevant to what’s passed so far in the conversation.

So, in the first example, Person A might say:
“Yeah, my parent’s garden was looking pretty tired when I went round there the other day. My dad’ll be grateful he doesn’t have to water the flowers.”

Now, Person A’s done something interesting here. Why talk about his parent’s garden, and not his own? And why was he round there the other day? And he opens more gateways: Parents; Visiting Parents and/or Relatives; Garden Care; Flowers; Division of Labour Between Parents.

Person B can now pick up on one of the questions, or follow another gateway. This where Person A and Person B start to find out a little more about each other. For example, Person B might enquire why Person A mentioned his parent’s garden and not his own, and Person A might tell him that he’s just moved into a new flat and it doesn’t have a garden. Or Person A might say he was helping his dad to fix his car. Maybe Person B also does a bit of car maintenance and voilà! Common ground!

Someone skilled in the art of conversation will have the ability to open gateways in their half of the conversation and pick up in the gateways in the other person’s without even thinking about it. It’ll be instinctual.

Me? Well, I feel the need to make an entire blog post out of it. I can’t do this kind of thing on the fly any more than I could juggle flaming torches riding a alligator-powered unicycle.

And I don’t like it. Playing this game makes me uncomfortable and want to retreat somewhere deep, deep inside myself where the outside world is little more than a badly-rendered special effect. I have absolutely no natural talent for it and, as a child, was forced to play it again and again and again. Anyone with no natural talent for sport who had to endure weekly P.E. lessons and sports days every year knows how I feel. It is any fun to play rugby when your overwhelming memories of it are being ten years old, not knowing the rules and having people beat the crap out of your at, as far as you can tell, entirely random points? And lets also imagine it was cold and raining and muddy and the P.E. teacher was a sadist who’d stand and watch you in the showers, because it’s my analogy and if you’re going to do something you might as well go all the way.

A screen capture from the film Predator, showing Arnold Schwarzenegger covered in mud and waiting to battle the alien Predator

And there he is, the fullback.  Look at his face.  Look at it.  He wants you to tackle him.  He needs it. Driving your face into the mud is the only time he feels alive.

The sod of it is that the game’s even harder than I’ve made it sound. As Jo recently pointed out, the words are only a part of it. You’ve got to judge tone of voice, body language, facial expressions. You’ve got to know what’s appropriate to say under what circumstances. And these aren’t things you can learn by route, because every individual and every circumstance is different. And that sucks, because the two ways I learn best are route learning and writing things out, both of which are of very limited use here.

Still, regardless of how I feel about myself I’m in a human body and in human society, and so this game is one I have to learn. And I have to want to learn, and want to be good at it.

One step at at time, Foxie. I know the game has rules now and I want to want to be good at it. I mean, social contact is awesome and other people are awesome. I want to want to let them into my life and increase the amount of awesome in it. It’s just going to take a little time to break the habits of a lifetime.

So I guess this post has two purposes: for those who find the whole idea of small talk bewildering and pointless, don’t give up! There is a set of rules under the chaos and so there is hope! And for those who’ve tried to have a conversation with me only to find it dying quicker than Stormtrooper against named cast members, it’s probably my fault and it’s not because I don’t like you, it’s because I’m crap at this game. But I’ve not given up and, maybe, I’m even making some progress.

So… how about this weather, huh?


Images:
Venetian weather taken from the Astrium internet site, and copyright to the ESA, which I think in this case stands for the European Space Agency.
The scary fullback is Arnold Schwarzenegger in the 1987 film Predator.  But you knew that.

Depression’s Upside? Smells Like Bullshit to Me

Not so long ago, Jo posted a link to a blog post which linked to Jonah Lehrer’s New York Times article on why depression is a great thing. I read both and had what I later described as an allergic reaction. PychCentral have published an article by Ronald Pies M.D. called ‘The Myth of Depression’s Upside‘ which quite neatly points out the flaws in Lehrer’s piece. I don’t want to point out the flaws, so much as poke Lehrer in the eye. With a stick. (I know he’s a regular reader here at Looking up at the Sky.)

See, regular readers like Lehrer–and those who have read the side-bar–will know that I suffer from depression, and have done for a long time. Lehrer goes to great lengths to link depression and creativity, especially writing. I have something of a vested interest in this topic.

The ‘madness = genius’ narrative is incredibly strong in Western culture. Lehrer’s article is another drop on its prayer wheel, and I lost an awful lot of my life to it. I spent years and years convinced that my ‘great darkness’ was the source of my creative power and if you took my darkness away, you would destroy me. Well guess what, Lehrer: since learning to manage my darkness, I have become a far, far better artist. The only way I can describe it is like being able to breathe after a lifetime of drowning. And that’s why you made me so angry.

A photograph of my left forearm, with a few white scars.

Pfft. Look at those scars. Derivative and cliché. They’re not even straight.

There’s more to Lehrer’s piece then bad science (although we’ll get to that). Lehrer’s article is a little over five thousand words long and makes a compelling narrative. NYT is a site with a huge readership, and the majority of them aren’t going to read past the article. They’re just going to get to the end, think, ‘hey, science has proved that genius does equal madness!’ and go on repeating that bullshit, just like Anne R. Allen did. But the narrative hides the fact that the proof is shaky indeed, seducing us with a well-told story.

Read the rest of this entry »

Women in Fantasy: Dulle Griet

My very good friend Jo has been doing a series of posts about women’s role in psuedo-Medieval Anglo-centric fantasy (here after refered to as heroic fantasy… it’s kind of lazy, but it’s Friday afternoon and I’m feeling kind of lazy). Women in these stories seem to fall into three basic moulds: virginal damsel in distress; mother; or vagina-weilding, Lady McBeth-esque harpy. The normal excuse given is that those were the only things women could be in the times of castles and princesses. Jo’s quite conclusively showing that’s horsecrap.

So, in that vein, here’s Dulle Griet:

It was painted by Flemish painter Pieter Bruegel the Elder, and dated to 1562. Details of the legend which inspired the painting mostly seem to be in Dutch, and I don’t speak Dutch. However, here’s what I’ve got:

The painting isn’t a flattering one. Dulle Griet is a woman usurping the man’s position as fearless warrior–she’s wearing a man’s breastplate and helmet. She’s storming the gates of Hell because her greed knows no bounds–her apron is already over-flowing with gold cups and she’s going into Satan’s kingdom to get more. Behind her, her followers loot a house and beat back the male warriors. Griet is aggressive, foul-mouthed and brings bloodshed where ever she goes.  (The archetype lives on with Flemish folklore singer Wannes Van de  Velde using it in his anti-war song Dulle Griet.  Google did a readable translation for me.)

So, what’s this got to do with psuedo-Mediv– heroic fantasy?

Well, firstly, you’ve got someone storming into Hell itself to loot the fuck out of the place. If that doesn’t kick arse you and I are on very, very different wavelengths.

But what’s interesting is that it’s a woman, leading an army of women.

Let’s remember, first of all, that looting was the normal way armies funded themselves at the time the painting was finished. So, those women looting in the background? Not nearly as bad as it looks at first. An army’s got to eat, right?

And let’s also remember that every characterture starts with a truth. In 1562, women were sitting on the thrones of England (Elizabeth I), Scotland (Mary I), the Netherlands (Margaret, Duchess of Parma) and France (Catherine de’ Medici, acting as Regent for Charles IX). This painting is no mild assassination of the feminine. It’s not a curt reminder of a woman’s place. It’s a call to arms, a battlecry to rouse men to fight the impossible fight. Men, if we don’t fight, there will be no place for us.

Would such a cry need to have been made if women had no power? If they were consigned to the kitchen, the nursery or the shadows? Of course not.

And if you’re looking for inspiration, Dante was guided through Hell, Lucifer was cast into it, Orpheus snuck in… Griet picked up her sword and stormed in there to kick the shit out of it.

Fuck you Dante! I've got a chainsaw!