From a "dark" SF experiment, The Merciless Light of Tomorrow:
***
Efflen hated the surface, hated the light. The surface had taken all the people he ever loved, and the light had aided their killers.
He crouched in the rubble at the foot of the old concrete stairs and sniffed at the hot, dry air that wafted down the well. Every few seconds, he would pop out of the shadows to glance upward into the golden sunshine before jerking backward into the darkness.
"Damn, Flen," Abermay clucked at him. The brilliant sunshine had blinded Efflen's dark sight so that the hunt leader was all but invisible in the deeper darkness of the "front porch" where the scavenge team had gathered. "Give it a rest, would you? You're starting to make me nervous."
"Too much light," Efflen grumped back at her. "Night is best. Night hides us. The snufflers will be out."
"We're on a tight schedule," Abermay said as she stepped into the twilight between the burning day and comforting dark. Her battle rig was worn but in good repair. Long knives adorned both her calves and both her forearms and the barrel of her family rifle projected above her right shoulder. The tough, jet black fabric of her combat suit had faded a bit at the seams, but was otherwise in good condition. Most of all, however, her pale face and clear blue eyes fairly glowed in the light. She might as well walk onto the surface beating a drum and blowing a horn.
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
Tax Time and Regrets
Well, I am one of the "late filers" notorious in the American tax system. Yes, yes, I procrastinate until the very last minute of April 15th, which is really pointless since I always get a refund. I can file anytime in the next 3 years and the IRS wouldn't care.
However, this year, I'm thinking about America's place in the world economy and how our government spends our money. Now, I have a pretty simple view of economics which has been criticized as "too simplistic" by one of my friends. However, everything that friend has said reinforced to me that my "simplistic" notions are correct and all the other smoke and mirrors that Wall Street and the Fed throw around are just so much Vegas bling-bling.
Economics at any level is really very simple once you strip things down to the base level: if you take some raw materials, modify them, and then sell them for more than you invested in the process, you bring money in. If you buy only finished products, your money flows out. Ergo, the key to financial success in any venture, personal or business, is to produce more value than you buy. Pretty friggin' basic.
Frankly, from where I sit, a service based economy is a great way for a country to become mediocre and irrelevant. For a country's economy to really grow, it has to produce value. The USA simply doesn't do much of that anymore because the Feds, under the direction of the Corp Cronies in D.C., have removed all the roadblocks that kept the Corps from trafficking in international slave labor.
Remember my comments about balance? Here's a prime example. The fox may not actually have a key to the henhouse, but his lobbyist has convinced the farmer's son to open the door by stuffing wads of cash in his overalls.
Frankly, a company that has its headquarters in the USA is not necessarily US based. If a company imports most of its products from overseas, then that company is a foreign company as far as I'm concerned. They're not providing jobs to US citizens. Instead, they're pumping money out of the economy to foreign countries and into the Corp elite's pockets. As far as I'm concerned, we would be better off shutting the borders and turning back all those container ships from China.
What set this off? Well, some incredible geniuses were on NPR talking about the trade deficit yesterday. And what they were saying basically added up to "we get about ten more years before we're broke as a nation". Ta freaking da, you ivy league idiots. Any kid with a lemonade stand could've told you that, you pendantic pinheads. We've allowed our manufacturing base to implode as we "sub-contracted" all the manufacturing and engineering overseas (as well as increasing the immigration quotas for "Foreign Educated Engineers"). If we're not adding value to anything, how in the hell do you think we're going to make any money? Selling know-how that the world already has or has already surpassed? Oh, I know, we'll sell our financial know how. You know, the same know how that's ruined life for the American middle class? I'm sure the world financial market can't wait for that kind of leadership.
What really blows my mind are these idiots who are surprised that, although our employment rate is roughly 95%, people are earning less and thus generating less tax revenue. Duh. You sent all the jobs that made the American middle class viable overseas, you incredible weasels. All that's left is landscaping, fast food, and cleaning hotel rooms, and you're importing MEXICANS to do that!
The idiocy moves me to profanity.
So, forgive me if I'm not overjoyed to be doing taxes right now. I'd like to know that my tax money would be used to buy six foot section of road repair, or maybe some textbooks for an inner city school. My taxes might even stretch so far as to buy lunch for a day care center that helps out working mothers or a set of ceramic armor inserts for a soldier in Iraq.
Somehow, though, I expect Congress to fritter it away somehow, leaving us all poorer after the fact.
D
However, this year, I'm thinking about America's place in the world economy and how our government spends our money. Now, I have a pretty simple view of economics which has been criticized as "too simplistic" by one of my friends. However, everything that friend has said reinforced to me that my "simplistic" notions are correct and all the other smoke and mirrors that Wall Street and the Fed throw around are just so much Vegas bling-bling.
Economics at any level is really very simple once you strip things down to the base level: if you take some raw materials, modify them, and then sell them for more than you invested in the process, you bring money in. If you buy only finished products, your money flows out. Ergo, the key to financial success in any venture, personal or business, is to produce more value than you buy. Pretty friggin' basic.
Frankly, from where I sit, a service based economy is a great way for a country to become mediocre and irrelevant. For a country's economy to really grow, it has to produce value. The USA simply doesn't do much of that anymore because the Feds, under the direction of the Corp Cronies in D.C., have removed all the roadblocks that kept the Corps from trafficking in international slave labor.
Remember my comments about balance? Here's a prime example. The fox may not actually have a key to the henhouse, but his lobbyist has convinced the farmer's son to open the door by stuffing wads of cash in his overalls.
Frankly, a company that has its headquarters in the USA is not necessarily US based. If a company imports most of its products from overseas, then that company is a foreign company as far as I'm concerned. They're not providing jobs to US citizens. Instead, they're pumping money out of the economy to foreign countries and into the Corp elite's pockets. As far as I'm concerned, we would be better off shutting the borders and turning back all those container ships from China.
What set this off? Well, some incredible geniuses were on NPR talking about the trade deficit yesterday. And what they were saying basically added up to "we get about ten more years before we're broke as a nation". Ta freaking da, you ivy league idiots. Any kid with a lemonade stand could've told you that, you pendantic pinheads. We've allowed our manufacturing base to implode as we "sub-contracted" all the manufacturing and engineering overseas (as well as increasing the immigration quotas for "Foreign Educated Engineers"). If we're not adding value to anything, how in the hell do you think we're going to make any money? Selling know-how that the world already has or has already surpassed? Oh, I know, we'll sell our financial know how. You know, the same know how that's ruined life for the American middle class? I'm sure the world financial market can't wait for that kind of leadership.
What really blows my mind are these idiots who are surprised that, although our employment rate is roughly 95%, people are earning less and thus generating less tax revenue. Duh. You sent all the jobs that made the American middle class viable overseas, you incredible weasels. All that's left is landscaping, fast food, and cleaning hotel rooms, and you're importing MEXICANS to do that!
The idiocy moves me to profanity.
So, forgive me if I'm not overjoyed to be doing taxes right now. I'd like to know that my tax money would be used to buy six foot section of road repair, or maybe some textbooks for an inner city school. My taxes might even stretch so far as to buy lunch for a day care center that helps out working mothers or a set of ceramic armor inserts for a soldier in Iraq.
Somehow, though, I expect Congress to fritter it away somehow, leaving us all poorer after the fact.
D
Monday, April 11, 2005
This Odd Concept of "Balance"
My Dad once told me that the one true sin, the sin that begets all others in a way, is gluttony. Now, I don't want to start a theological discussion on the seven cardinal sins or anything, but the Old Man had a point. He was big on "everything in moderation", and I'm far enough along in the world to pretty much agree with him.
I'll be frank: there's a lot of things defining my reality right now that suck because someone doesn't have a clue about "enough". Corporations, for example, have gotten most of their shackles thrown off and their doing a pretty damned fine job of selling the USA down the river so that the bigwigs can get "more". Not to mention those fine hereditary "representatives" in the government that are helping the Corps get "more" while they get "more" as well. Frankly, I really, really respect my father nowadays.
But, what's this got to do with writing?
Just a little insight into how I want to live my life, is all. I do other things besides write. I like model airplanes, for one, and paintball, for another. Writing is my equivalent of painting: a form of creative expression.
I'm not in it for the money, per se, but I want to be recognized as notable in the field. That means I have to take my efforts seriously. However, there's this concept of balance that hovers about the back of my mind.
I tend to view life as a kind of scale with time being the pebbles you add to the pans. If I throw too much of my time into any one pan, then the whole system gets out of whack. Family is one pan that always gets its share of pebbles. What's left gets divided between all the things I do, writing being only one. So I've got this scale with about a dozen pans and trying to keep them all balanced becomes...interesting.
The core of it comes down to a couple of things, however: family and health. If you don't take care of those two little items, your existence on this plane of reality will be miserable and, in all likelihood, short. I plan on being a pain in the butt to my great-grandkids, so that means balance.
Just random thinking, signifying nothing...
D
I'll be frank: there's a lot of things defining my reality right now that suck because someone doesn't have a clue about "enough". Corporations, for example, have gotten most of their shackles thrown off and their doing a pretty damned fine job of selling the USA down the river so that the bigwigs can get "more". Not to mention those fine hereditary "representatives" in the government that are helping the Corps get "more" while they get "more" as well. Frankly, I really, really respect my father nowadays.
But, what's this got to do with writing?
Just a little insight into how I want to live my life, is all. I do other things besides write. I like model airplanes, for one, and paintball, for another. Writing is my equivalent of painting: a form of creative expression.
I'm not in it for the money, per se, but I want to be recognized as notable in the field. That means I have to take my efforts seriously. However, there's this concept of balance that hovers about the back of my mind.
I tend to view life as a kind of scale with time being the pebbles you add to the pans. If I throw too much of my time into any one pan, then the whole system gets out of whack. Family is one pan that always gets its share of pebbles. What's left gets divided between all the things I do, writing being only one. So I've got this scale with about a dozen pans and trying to keep them all balanced becomes...interesting.
The core of it comes down to a couple of things, however: family and health. If you don't take care of those two little items, your existence on this plane of reality will be miserable and, in all likelihood, short. I plan on being a pain in the butt to my great-grandkids, so that means balance.
Just random thinking, signifying nothing...
D
Tuesday, April 05, 2005
Blogs, Reviews, and other forms of Free Speech
Okay, I Blog so therefore I must be, right?
I'll admit to a certain level of ambivalence with regards to Blogs in general. Still, a Blog is a very interesting Internet innovation: a virtual soapbox with an attached means to continue discussion in the background. I won't say Blogs replace newsgroups, but they certainly can serve a purpose.
One of those purposes is to function as a springboard for independent reviews of publications or products.
Thing is, there can be good and bad in anything. Just as with Amazon reviews, there are lots of folks out there who love to sling anonymous electronic monkey dung. You have your fawning fen, your monkey dung slingers, your one-issue-Annies, and your right and left leaning loonies. Frankly, wading through reviews about a product can be just as mind numbing as wading through the web in general. However, just as with the web, the cream floats to the top.
Julie Czerneda's discussion group recently tripped over the whole subject of on-line reviews and the apparent lack of restraint from both the reviewer and author angles. As with many of the posts in her group, there was a lot more thought to be given to the subject than first appeared.
I'm still mulling what was said. Someday I might have things out there that will get reviewed and slammed. Thing is, I recognize human nature for what it is. I know that, as a species, we tend to crap in our own dens. It doesn't surprise me anymore when people are cruel and evil. I know to expect that and prefer to be pleasantly surprised when it doesn't happen.
Anyway, more meanderings later...
I'll admit to a certain level of ambivalence with regards to Blogs in general. Still, a Blog is a very interesting Internet innovation: a virtual soapbox with an attached means to continue discussion in the background. I won't say Blogs replace newsgroups, but they certainly can serve a purpose.
One of those purposes is to function as a springboard for independent reviews of publications or products.
Thing is, there can be good and bad in anything. Just as with Amazon reviews, there are lots of folks out there who love to sling anonymous electronic monkey dung. You have your fawning fen, your monkey dung slingers, your one-issue-Annies, and your right and left leaning loonies. Frankly, wading through reviews about a product can be just as mind numbing as wading through the web in general. However, just as with the web, the cream floats to the top.
Julie Czerneda's discussion group recently tripped over the whole subject of on-line reviews and the apparent lack of restraint from both the reviewer and author angles. As with many of the posts in her group, there was a lot more thought to be given to the subject than first appeared.
I'm still mulling what was said. Someday I might have things out there that will get reviewed and slammed. Thing is, I recognize human nature for what it is. I know that, as a species, we tend to crap in our own dens. It doesn't surprise me anymore when people are cruel and evil. I know to expect that and prefer to be pleasantly surprised when it doesn't happen.
Anyway, more meanderings later...
Friday, April 01, 2005
"Excellence" in writing
Lars Walker, a published author and someone I consider a friend, has been guest blogging over at Brandywine Books. I really enjoy reading his thoughts about writing because you get to see the awesome intellect and bedrock faith that he uses to create his alt-history and near-future Viking adventure fantasies.
One of the topics he broached was a post on Excellence in Writing. During that, I once again tripped over the concept of the "literary" novel versus the "commercial" novel. Frankly, I lost it and begged for a definition, which Lars was good enough to provide from his point of view. I quote his answer here:
"Good question, Darwin. My understanding is that a literary novel is one where the plot revolves around people's thinking, feelings and relationships, rather than physical danger and adventure (Romance novels excluded). Problems of society rate as literary subjects too. Also a literary novel emphasizes(theoretically) the evocative use of language, which is appreciated for its own sake, like poetry.
"I love Wodehouse's description of a Russian novel, which said (in paraphrase) that the main character did nothing for 300 pages, then shot himself. :-)"
Gah! Who'd want to read something like that? Actually, I suppose my question is, "Who'd want to be around someone who'd regularly read something like that?" Imagine enjoying what amounts to novel-length, obsessive whinging about the cruelty of life, the universe, and everything in artfully composed and ridiculously complicated prose. Just thinking about it makes me twitch.
I've heard rumours that the "Literary" intelligentsia look down their tenured noses at the kind of writing (SF&F). Haven't really experienced it yet, mind you, because those people not only bore me to tears but the bleeding heart, self-righteous, and inflexible politics of the universitat move me toward violence all too quickly, so I tend to avoid them when ever possible .
Ahem...
In any case, apparently having a compellling story-line with believable characters that the readers identify with doesn't fit into the "literary" definition. Yet, I can't accept any novel that doesn't take the reader into the story as "excellent", sorry. If I get bored, the book is finished and I hope it's the right thickness to prop up the short leg of my bandsaw. I don't care how insightful the friggin' author is about the plight of a Paraguayian chickadee, or how delicate his use of language in describing its habitat is. If I don't identify with the bird as a character, it's just a bird. Let's eat it.
Okay, okay. I'm abusing stereotype. Forgive me...not. I've got my paradigms just like anyone else. I don't buy literary novels because literary novels give me the yawns. I read for entertainment, to engage my imagination, and to play "what if?" If a literary work does that, then I'll read it. If it doesn't, it's just a small pile of processed dead tree held together by an egotistic elitist clique.
So, here's some check points for how I know when a book is excellent:
One of the topics he broached was a post on Excellence in Writing. During that, I once again tripped over the concept of the "literary" novel versus the "commercial" novel. Frankly, I lost it and begged for a definition, which Lars was good enough to provide from his point of view. I quote his answer here:
"Good question, Darwin. My understanding is that a literary novel is one where the plot revolves around people's thinking, feelings and relationships, rather than physical danger and adventure (Romance novels excluded). Problems of society rate as literary subjects too. Also a literary novel emphasizes(theoretically) the evocative use of language, which is appreciated for its own sake, like poetry.
"I love Wodehouse's description of a Russian novel, which said (in paraphrase) that the main character did nothing for 300 pages, then shot himself. :-)"
Gah! Who'd want to read something like that? Actually, I suppose my question is, "Who'd want to be around someone who'd regularly read something like that?" Imagine enjoying what amounts to novel-length, obsessive whinging about the cruelty of life, the universe, and everything in artfully composed and ridiculously complicated prose. Just thinking about it makes me twitch.
I've heard rumours that the "Literary" intelligentsia look down their tenured noses at the kind of writing (SF&F). Haven't really experienced it yet, mind you, because those people not only bore me to tears but the bleeding heart, self-righteous, and inflexible politics of the universitat move me toward violence all too quickly, so I tend to avoid them when ever possible .
Ahem...
In any case, apparently having a compellling story-line with believable characters that the readers identify with doesn't fit into the "literary" definition. Yet, I can't accept any novel that doesn't take the reader into the story as "excellent", sorry. If I get bored, the book is finished and I hope it's the right thickness to prop up the short leg of my bandsaw. I don't care how insightful the friggin' author is about the plight of a Paraguayian chickadee, or how delicate his use of language in describing its habitat is. If I don't identify with the bird as a character, it's just a bird. Let's eat it.
Okay, okay. I'm abusing stereotype. Forgive me...not. I've got my paradigms just like anyone else. I don't buy literary novels because literary novels give me the yawns. I read for entertainment, to engage my imagination, and to play "what if?" If a literary work does that, then I'll read it. If it doesn't, it's just a small pile of processed dead tree held together by an egotistic elitist clique.
So, here's some check points for how I know when a book is excellent:
- First and foremost, can I suspend my disbelief and care about what's going on?
- Is the prose clear and concise?
- Does the prose flow in such a manner that it requires little effort to read?
- Does the author have the skill to use a minimum of description to evoke imagery rather than bludgeoning me with adjectives?
- At the end, do I feel a wholeness in the story or do I just feel like there's something else that got forgotten?
- When all is said and done, do I feel like pressing charges against the author and publisher for fraud?
Yeah, I could get more technical, but that's not where I'm going with this.
An excellent writer will craft an engrossing story without coming across as obtuse, whiny, or wordy. Prose isn't poetry, but an excellent writer will create prose that frequently feels poetic. The kicker is that they do it with a minimum of descriptor, by using language to tie into the common experiences of their readers to evoke imagery from within, rather than invoke it by using some prose mantra.
An excellent writer grabs the reader from the first paragraph and doesn't let them go until the story is done, for which the reader is truly grateful. It has precious little to do with "literary" qualifications.
Darwin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)