OK, so LJ seems to have changed all my settings again.  If anyone reads this on FB, please let me know that it's working!

In other news, I finally found the article I've been looking for: an author who has been successful (note the word succcessful) on both sides of the coin talks about traditional versus self-publising here.  It is one of those balanced articles (unlike my earlier rant!) that explain why people like Seth Godin are setting themselves up for a huge disappointment in their ill-advised move.

Plenty of snark there, but also a lot of knowledge from a writer who knows what he's talking about, much more than I do - and much more than any SP writer I've had contact with.  Definitely worth a read.  Actually, let me rephrase that: if you haven't read this article, you simply haven't been exposed to both sides of the argument, and anything you might say is pure wish-fulfillment.

In still other news, I finished an 8000 piece jigsaw puzzle (built it for a friend who had no room to do so), and it looks...  huge.

My old friends at Abandoned Towers Magazine, which has published a whole bunch of my stories online ("The Hyperspace Railroad" is currently up for reading) have accepted my story "One and the Other".  This is a story that I'm happy to have found a home for, since it's one of those stories written from the point of view of an alien creature (two in this case) that is very different from most fictional aliens (I wonder what the people responsible for racefail would have thought of my inter-species writing?).

Unlike "Tenth Orbit" (the story, not the collection), which had a similar alien, this one isn't written in first person, but it's an equally challenging (and, I feel, ultimately rewarding) read.  Sometimes the most difficult stories to write are the ones that leave us thinking, and I believe this one qualifies, and the editors here seem to have agreed.

So I'm pretty happy on that front, and I'll definitely let everyone know when the story comes up (and decide whether my love for this particular story is justified or not!).

I also managed to get a story finished and subbed (2600 words) since yesterday's post, so I'm happy with that, too.  Now, I need to get back to work on that novel!
 

Writing: put 500 extra words into The Malakiad on Friday.  Not ideal, but not bad.

I think all of you know what I feel about self-publishing. There's no need for me to talk about it any more (at least not this month).  But even though I'm against it, I still can't believe what Publisher's Weekly is doing.  If I were self-published, I'd be outraged.

You can read PW's announcement here, but I'll cut through the marketing-speak for you.  What it says is: we think self-published authors are dumb enough to fork over $149 in "processing fees" to go into the pool of self-published books that might be reviewed.  Note that there is no guarantee of review.  I don't really know why self-published authors would pay for something with no guarantees - avoiding the competition is one of the main reasons to self-publish after all.  Self-published writers pay so that they will have results, not so that they're work will be judged against other work and chosen on merit!

In addition to this, they think that there will be people dumb enough to believe that a review section entitled "Self-published work" is going to be read by anyone.  I'd love to hear what booksellers think, but I know agents and publishers aren't going to stop there for a single second. 

The saddest part?  Well, they are probably right.  While some self-published authors view the whole thing as a business (don't get me started), there are a great majority who believe that "De buk Ive ritten is grate, but the big Publishhers just wont take a risk with new stuf.  My God and bunnys book is the bestest!"  (for those of you who say that this is an exaggeration, I recommend you spend a few days reading slush or working as a reviewer and encouraging SP writiers to send you stuff).  These people will happily fork over their money to be ignored (if they are lucky) or given an honest review (if the PW reviewers are having a bad day and need to take it out on someone who deserves it).

I think PW is going to make a lot of money, and they'll finance the good work they do with this endeavor.  But it does sound a little too close to what vanity presses do to fleece the clueless for my liking.  It is a business model that feeds on misplaced dreams and the unrealistic belief that "my work is just as good as anything coming from the big houses".

Sigh.
 

BTW, thanks to aprilhenry  for pointing this out here and here, and for linking to this.

I've often written (here and elsewhere) about what SF means once you get outside the US and the English-speaking world, and I'm always interested in seeing what others think on this subject.  Aliette de Bodard's (aliettedb ) take on this subject in Asimov's this month is one oof the most balanced and complete pieces I've seen in... well, ever, actually.  It is definitely worth a read.



I did 1300 words into the alt history story, too!

I used to look down on scholars.  They were, in my opinion (and I was a corporate zombie, rapidly making my way up the ladder, so it was an authorized opinion), eternal adolescents who by staying in school forever were able to avoid any semblance of having to deal with the real word.  Yeah, I know all about university politics - and I'm here to tell you that they are a squabble among toddlers compared to the stuff I've seen in the corporate world.

I also used to be a reader.  I was mainly a genre reader, picking up whatever looked entertaining, and enjoying things.  I was a voracious reader, but just a reader, not a critic, certainly not a scholar.

Both of htese attitudes changed when I started writing.  I suddenly wanted to know what paths universal literature had taken to bring us to Harry Potter (in my opinion, HP will stand the test of time in much the same way as The Wizard of Oz).  So I began reading the classics and I subscribed to the the Masterpieces of Science Fiction series.  But it soon became apparent that even Dickens and Heinlein were building upon something, making reference to passages from the bible or Shakespeare that are universally known.  But even the bible and Shakespeare built upon earlier traditions (Mesopotamian mythology from Babylon and Assyria in the case of the bible, Beowulf and Chaucer and the bible itself in the case of Shakespeare).  And so on until the first semi-evolved simian managed to tell a story of something he couldn't understand back in the earliest dawn of human time. 

The old saw says that, as one learns more, one only finds out how much is yet too learn, but the corollary is that one also yearns to know more (those people who aren't fascinated with learning ever more have my pity).  So I currently have a book about those Mesopotamian tales in my TBR pile (you can't really analyze the bible as a work of literature unless you understand the fables and earlier legends which went into it), and I look for books on the history of literature and books of criticism every time I walk into a used bookstore.

See what I've become?

Yep, a scholar, even if my research isn't being guided by the strictures of a PhD, I'm still doing it, and learning more as I go.  And I'm enjoying the process enormously.




Writing update - about 1500 words into an alternate history tale.
 

I've spoken about my allergy to musicals, something that will not help me in the least as I muddle through the 1001 Movies you must see before you die.

But I've come to realize that I can take them under certain conditions.  Nudity is ideal of course (brownie points to anyone who can point me to a nice R-Rated musical other than Rocky Horror), but there are other things that make the time spent watching them worthwhile.

Love Me Tonight (1932) has a few of these characteristics.  In the first place, and despite the lack of nudity, it is clearly intended for mature audiences.  Sexual innuendo of a kind Hollywood would never see again until the sixties, created by intelligent writers for intelligent audiences.  A certain amount of deadpan comedy - "That's only thunderbolt" is a line that by context and delivery should be among the greatest in cinema.  The acting was also very good, with obvious links between the stage and the screen.

But, as a musical film, it can be forgiven for other things as well.  It was the first place in which the popular songs Isn't It Romantic (later covered and youtubed by Rod Stewart, included in the Great American Songbook) and Mimi appeared.  And the montage for Isn't It Romantic is simply stunning, creating a link between the two main characters through a series of cuts that were extremely innovative for their time in a single song.

The plot was ubelievably predictable, but that seems to be a staple of musicals everywhere.  Still enjoyable and educational, though.

But if you HAVE to watch a musical, I still state that the most important thing is to make sure you have the right company sitting next to you!

What makes musicals acceptable to you, then?  Comments section is OPEN!





Writing update: another binge saw me writing 3200 words and finished a ghost story.  Need to polish it now.