Friday, 23 March 2018

Victorian Dad

As regular readers will be aware, my interpretation of my own rules is so fast and loose that I'm happy to jump from the premise that science fiction encompasses stories, any story, set in the future, to include any idea about how the present will transmute into the time yet to pass.

From there, it's a short jump to musing on how the past has become the present, as how else do we learn what direction we're heading in?  And this is all in the context of my rejection of the teleological approach to history, the idea that we're progressing towards something or someplace.  Rather, I firmly hold that we're running around in circles, repeating ourselves, learning from our mistakes and, to quote my fellow Torquinian, Peter Cook, repeating them exactly.

Such as the Pilgrim Fathers being proto-Taliban, too puritan to live in England, therefore they had to find a big empty (more or less) space to be narrow-minded and bigoted in.  Or Isis' destruction of Palmyra?  Henry VIII's Reformation of the Church just coming around again.  We just don't have much of a record of all the iconography and art that his soldiers burnt and broke, just a countryside littered with the broken remains of monasteries like bleached whale skeletons washed up on the beach.

If we're going anywhere, it's with a drunk's walk at best, stumbling on sights that look all too familiar because we've been here before.

So, today's sermon is about Victorian parenting.

When I had kids I imagined a house of footsteps, laughter, shouting, loud music.  Okay, with me in the background yelling for quiet, with the same hope Cnut must have felt standing on the shingle.  Instead, in the early stages of the twenty-first century, I have a house of silence.  Like a library or a monastery.  Except with less reading or illuminating of manuscripts.  Instead, pixelated footballers, racing drivers or gunmen are being manipulated, or videos of sharks are being watched.  All with headphones over teenage ears.

Children should be seen and not heard, the saying goes.  I don't think this is what was intended.

If they ever picked up a book and stumbled across a Victorian reference to children being sent to their rooms, they'd be mystified.  That's exactly where they gravitate to.  In a world of central heating and wifi, they can't compute the very idea that bedrooms were cold and lonely spaces, away from the hearth and welcome hubbub of family life.  We all die alone, the cliche goes; I seem to be watching a social experiment that suggests we all wish to live alone as well.

We went to visit my father-in-law in hospital yesterday; I noticed the occupant on the next bed and his visitor, young marrieds, whether literally or figuratively, lay and sat, respectively, in silence, staring at their screens.  That would have been dystopian sci-fi ten years ago; now it's just everyday.

And in fifty years?  Don't be surprised if we're all living in individual pods in tower blocks, a beehive writ large, in-eye VR technology giving us the illusion of space or a sea view, as well as all the information, entertainment and networking we demand.  Action-at-a-distance (A3D) technology will enable us to do any job from the comfort of own pod, a robotic avatar reproducing the movements of our hands exactly, whether polishing a diamond or signing a contract.  Drones will bring us food; 3D printers will provide our shoes and clothes.

Maybe the only hope for the planet is that we forget to come together to procreate.

page_images/2084-99.jpg


Friday, 9 March 2018

Bookends to a car journey

Yesterday, I spent seven and a half hours out of ten and a half driving, on a round trip that should have taken five.  On the outward leg, I listened to a podcast of Kermode and Mayo's Film Review covering Star Wars: The Last Jedi (yes, as usual, I'll get to the their Christmas special around Easter).  On the way back I caught, amongst many other things, the first half of the new Hitchhikers' Guide to the Galaxy: Hexagonal Phase.

I think the former may go some way to explain my views of the latter.

You see, I have history with Hitchhikers', having played Arthur Dent in a school drama production some 31 years ago this month.  My first writing - well, 'with additional material by' - credit, as well.  It was very much in the ether during my youth, the original fits playing incongruously on the kitchen radio whilst my mother cooked lunch.  I read the first books when I was eleven, twelve, something like that, around when the TV series aired.  Basically, I was at that impressionable age when fads become obsessions, and Hitchhikers' could have been custom made for my academic, wordy, somewhat gauche former self.

And, vitally, I had somebody's dressing-gown tails to hang on to.  Arthur Dent's.  It's not just that there's a facet on me that's very Arthur: confused and pompous middle management, writing complaining letters to local newspapers.  It's that he's the classic everyman character, giving us our way into the fictional world, our bridge.  All of Adams' bizarre flights of fancy can be packaged and sold to us because Arthur has to take them at face value.  And, for the purposes of story, we are Arthur.

That's why Harry Potter works so wonderfully, but Urusla LeGuinn is somewhat more obtuse - sorry, where's my way into Earthsea?  It's why the Doctor has companions, not just to have somebody to talk to but for us to relate to.  It's why, contrary to what I was originally taught, the most interesting character is not necessarily always the hero of your story.

But that was all then.  Now?  Perhaps I'm jaded with age, but I found the new Hitchhikers' a mess of smart-cum-silly ideas, ridiculousness and daft names without any kind of framework.  Yes, it's not fair judging on half an episode (if only pedestrians playing with the traffic had closed the Brynglas Tunnels in both directions I may have caught all of it), but god knows I know that editors reading my stuff won't turn the first digital page over unless I give them reason to do so.  But I couldn't tell whose story it was, and if story is journey, where they needed to go.

I think it may have been John Cleese (and, remember, Douglas Adams was in the Python's circle) who said British comedy is silly things done straight, American is straight things done silly.  The original Hitchhiker's fits that mould: there's a very intelligent story structure behind it, which grounds the space-Dada.  The new stuff: silly done silly.  A natural clown only in the sense that its nose is red and bulbous before it sits in front of the make-up mirror.

(There's a separate but related note, on stories being key journeys that characters take only once; resurrect a character for a sequel and there's a feeling of artificiality, that he's completed this before.  The clear exception is police procedurals: cops keep being thrown problems in the real world, hence a constant grind of story doesn't ring false).

And this is what Kermode had said earlier that day that rang so true about Hitchhikers' in his review of The Last Jedi.  That character is story.  That protagonists do things, make the decisions which decree the way the story arcs, dependent on their characters.  Put well-defined characters in a situation and story will play out as a natural consequence.  Put simply, no other narrative will be possible: the writer is simply reporting what occurs, without losing sight of his cast as they race ahead.

I'm not sure I fully sign up to The Last Jedi being a masterpiece or for it being a glowing example of story progressing within the tight constraints of characters' beliefs, abilities and preferences.  But I think it hits the nail on the head of why I won't be seeking out the second half of that first episode of the Hexagonal Phase.

page_images/2084-99.jpg

Monday, 19 February 2018

Stepping stones to happiness

page_images/2084-99.jpg

Happy birthday to us!  This blog is four this month.  We can stand up without messing ourselves, and we remember to put the lid back on when we've been thieving from the biscuit tin.  Ah, those happy few months between nappies and glue sniffing...

As a birthday gift from me to you, here are number of links for you to click on, dear reader, apart from the one above that takes you to my dystopian thriller, 2084, which you will already have bought, of course.  Think of them as stepping stones to happiness.

Firstly, Terraform have my story, A Second Opinion, live on their site.  All my own work, as it were.

Third Flatiron, via their newspage, have launched their Monstrosities anthology, which includes a modest contribution from me.  I think that link will move with the times; you may find this link to Amazon to (pre-)order it more stable.  Go on, you know you want to.

Martin Greening's Tales of Ruma's kickstarter campaign is up and running.  I have a slightly less modest story somewhere within.  Invest $50 and get yourself a limited edition hardcover.

And this, Images Across a Shattered Sea by Stewart C Baker, in which I have no hand at all, but stumbled across and really rather enjoyed.

Monday, 5 February 2018

A reader writes

A review!  Of 2084!  A real review on goodreads.com, a four star review to boot:

It was an interesting story but I totally did not understand the ending!!!??? What?? It was like I had changed books or something. I was with the story till then. Was I missing some pages that explained how the main character's life changed??

Thank you Millie.

I’m pleased with that.  One of the books that sticks most in my mind is The Getaway by Jim Thompson, a great read, but a story with an ending that smacks of being written in a panic and on so many drugs that the author was probably as surprised by the denouement as his readership.  And I’d argue the clues as to where my story goes are pretty clearly laid out - in fact, I wouldn’t even describe it as a twist ending.  But it’s good to know that I’ve wrong-footed a reader at the death, without leaving anybody with a twisted ankle.

I’ll gloss over the fact that Millie tends to give five star reviews - she’s that kind of girl (no, I mean glass half full, not lacking in critical faculties).  Four stars is a long way from shoddy, and even Thompson gets 3.98.

Of course, The Getaway was filmed, with a more run of the mill ending, with Steve McQueen and Ali McGraw.  Me?  I’d settle for Sanjiv Bhaskar and that girl from 3-Headed Shark Attack...

Thursday, 18 January 2018

Unknown unknowns

page_images/2084-99.jpg

I was recently reading an interview with the legendary sage Eric Cantona where he was asked what his favourite emoji is.

Favourite emoji?  Is that a thing?  Am I meant to have a favourite letter of the alphabet?*  Never having tweeted or Facebooked I had no idea that I was meant to build up an emotional connection with these twenty-first century morphemes for idiots.  What next: what's my favourite spoon?

In other, less ranty, news, Third Flatiron have taken my flash story 'New Shoes' for their Spring 2018 Monstrosities anthology ("such a good idea it could have been longer"); and Terraform one called "A Second Opinion" ("wonderful").  Half way through January and I'm two thirds of the way to my annual target of three stories sold.  Which is nice.  Pro rates too, even if together they add up to a mere 1500 words or so.

* Clearly "@"

Friday, 5 January 2018

End of term report

Last year I moved the recording of my story submissions onto the Submissions Grinder, so it's dead easy to tell you that in 2017 I:

  • made 214 submissions of
  • around 45 short stories and flash fiction,
  • including seven new stories,
  • to around 85 publishers and publications, garnering
  • five acceptances, and
  • 173 rejections.
And it doesn't take Professor Hawking to conclude that 37 pieces are still out there, elbowing their way up the slush piles.  Hopefully.

The five acceptances:

On the subject of stories yet to appear, the second outing for Litterpicking on the Moon in Indie Authors Press' Chronos Chronicles is now due in the next month or two.  Hope nobody's been holding their breath.

So that's a first 'best of', a first podcast sale, a second reprint sale, and repeat business with Daily Science Fiction.  Two sales at professional SFWA rates, albeit for flash fiction.  2017 also saw the first time I've decided that it would be better for me to decline an offer to publish.  A pretty good year - my standing target of three sales met - but I'm as determined as ever to write something that'll make it to the hallowed ground of Clarkesworld, F&SF or Asimov's.  This year, this year... 


Otherwise, I had the tantalising possibility of dressing like a penguin in the heat of Los Angeles dangled before me before being snatched away, as a losing finalist in Ron L Hubbard's Writers of the Future competition.  I also scored an honourable mention later in the year.  (And, yes, I have carefully read the entry criteria, and I'm still amateur enough to qualify).


Of course, the real victory was the publication of my first novel, 2084 by Double Dragon Publishing.  This was sold in 2016; I had hoped to follow it up with a second novel sale, and the drafting of a third novel, but neither happened in 2017, even though my YA sci-fi adventure remains 'selected out of the slush pile for closer examination' by a major and well-respected SF publisher.


And, naturally, I'm still awaiting that kill fee from Carrie Cuinn at Lakeside Circus.  'Nuff said.

Friday, 22 December 2017

Star Wars flavoured

page_images/2084-99.jpg

Contains spoilers

I'm still not sure what to make of Star Wars: The Last Jedi.  I'm left with a sense of something Star Wars flavoured, rather than real Star Wars.  Nothing wrong with being Stars Wars flavoured, of course.  It's just not quite the real thing.

This isn't my main problem, but I'm going to flag up the laws of physics as my first suspect.  When Rose's sister, Paige, bombs the First Order fleet, those bombs definitely drop.  Like out of a Flying Fortress over Berlin.  Not like something in deep space, which tend to bobble about amusingly.

I'm not even sure they drop towards the planet they're orbiting, which would be at least explicable.

But they're sufficiently in deep space to make going into warp drive (or is that Star Trek?) safe.  You would have thought all that gravity would have made the ships' computers fall over doing the calculations, given that Vice Admiral Holdo later has to remain on board a near-dead ship to... to do what, exactly?  Until she does have something to do, of course.  In which case, damn lucky she's there.

And, if it's so easy to take out a star destroyer or dreadnought, by flying through it at light speed, why haven't they developed drones, flying bombs, that just do that?  They clearly have the technology.

And that takes me to my real gripe.  Even more crucial than the laws of physics are the laws of story.  I get the impression that in the Harry Potter universe there are a strict set of do's and do-not-do's, and the characters act within those parameters.  Here?  Like children playing make-believe, rules and loopholes are created as and when needed.  Those flying bombs were only dreamt up when it became the most poignant direction for the story to go in.  Nobody said, if they could do that wouldn't they have done it before, and what would the world look like?

Leia as Superman?  Yeah, why not.  Luke projecting so he's solid enough to fight with a light sabre, but not enough to take a hit.  (Or is he using the Force to hold the light sabre at a distance, in which case how did it survive General Hux's onslaught?).  Explosions that kill all those wearing body armour, but not rebels in mufti.  

Maybe I should go more gently and just enjoy the ride.  After all, this has always been a children's playground game writ large.  Look at the supposedly cute animals that pop up jarringly in every episode (nadir: the funny as waking-up-to-find-you're-living-in-so-called-Islamic-State-and-you-have-terminal-cancer Jar Jar Binks).  And the aliens that are patently standard issue bipedals with rubber masks.  And the silly names.

And in children's games logic is fluid.  You're dead; no, I'm not.  Yes, I can, if I want to.  Goals always go in if you're the striker, those jumpers provide absolute ambiguity.

But, possibly, there's no bending of the logic at work here at all as Star Wars has always been a religious, rather than rational, experience.  To subject the Force to secular empiricism, to expect to work out its limits through some double blind experimental procedure, is completely missing the point.  Just as Louis Armstrong may or may not have said about love, or jazz, or maybe it was Fats Waller: if you need to ask, you ain't never gonna know.

So, I guess it comes down to belief.  Well, in that case, I'll stop trying to analyse, assess and justify.  I'll just stick with my belief that this is Star Wars flavoured...