So my parents are getting into the true Christmas spirit, I see

 

Yes, they have come to realize that a Christmas tree just really isn't a Christmas tree unless it has a squirrel in it.  And if you don't believe me, watch this:

So the SF publisher Orbit made a decision that seems to have irritated "fans"...

The UK-based publisher Orbit made an announcement this morning that they were only providing "extended previews" of three novels in the Hugo Awards Best Novel category for the Hugo voters' packet.  Here is an excerpt from that announcement:

We appreciate that some Hugo voters might be disappointed that the entire novels will not be available in the packet, and we would like to offer a word of explanation.

We are of course very much in favour of initiatives that help readers to engage with important awards, and we are always looking for new ways to help readers discover new authors. However, in the case of the voter packets, authors and rights holders are increasingly feeling that if their work is not included in the packet it will be at a disadvantage in the awards. It’s difficult for anyone to know for certain whether this is the case, but either way we don’t feel that authors and rights holders should feel under pressure to make their work available for free. There are a lot of different attitudes to the idea of giving work away for free, but we hope most people would agree that writers and rights holders should be able to make their own choice, without feeling that their decision might have negative consequences.

We would like to make it clear that this was our decision, and not one requested by any of our authors. It is a complex issue, with many different perspectives and opinions, and we believe that we are acting in the best interests of our authors while continuing to support the voter packet.
Going forward, we very much hope that awards administrators give careful consideration to voter packets, particularly in those categories in which shortlisted works are already widely available, and that they continue to look for new ways to encourage participation in awards.

 Predictably, there was some fannish outrage (or one of two emoticons that these people express online, the other being squeeing, or so it seems to this jaded observer):

Please, please, PLEASE reconsider this ill-advised decision. The bad publicity this will generate will end up hurting far, far more authors, not to mention your company, than it will help.

I know I, for one, will always think poorly of Orbit from now on.

-Matt Phelps
Sustaining Member, Loncon3

Tor: “Sure, here are all fifteen Wheel of Time books.”
Orbit: “HAHAHAHA, no books for you.”
Doesn’t look great.

 Hmm, sounds like Orbit has ex-RIAA members on their board. “We can’t give it away. We’ll lose de moneys.” “It’s been shown that sales actually improve when copies are given away or even pirated.” “WE CAN’T GIVE IT AWAY. WE’LL LOSE DE MONIES!!!”

You’d be giving away what, 2000-3000 free copies of each book with the Hugo packet? You give away more than that between ARCs, free copies, requests for blurbs, and other promotional materials – often to people who won’t even read them. So this is not a matter of loss of sales or giving away things for free.

The point you’re missing is, Hugo voters are hard readers. This means they can’t read everything. Which means, having to read a ton of new material before the deadline for the Hugo votes, they will read the stuff in the voter packet before everything else – unless they were planning to read your books already. And personally, I can’t in all honesty vote any position for a book based only on hearsay or an extended preview.

Also, Hugo voters are also people who write reviews and gush about books and make ripples. They will talk about this, fairly, but honestly. And there’s really few positions from which this looks like good advertising for you and the books involved.

So no, the readers will not penalize your authors because of this decision. You penalized them and, apparently, without even consulting them.

And finally, one posted elsewhere that I see Nick Mamatas has quoted on FB:

 "As a supporting member of Loncon3, I feel a responsibility to the field of science fiction to encourage sensible ebook practices by publishers, so I feel compelled to rank all three of these novels below 'no award.'"

While part of me does think it'd be a nice gesture if Orbit were to include full works, they certainly are well within their rights not to do so, especially considering the attitudes present within this sampling of reader/fan comments.  Why should something done as a publicity matter, one always subject to changing conditions, be now considered a quasi "right?"  Sure, readers have the power of the purse to sway decisions, but considering the very low numbers of sales involved at this point (I seem to recall reading somewhere where one of the Best Novel finalists had sold less than 200 copies in all of 2014 for a work released in early-to-mid 2013), I imagine the threat of "lost sales" is not exactly a sound one to make, considering there is very little "bump" that might conceivably take place at this point in a book's "life cycle."  So for the commenter who cites the possibility of "2000-3000" free copies as being somehow less than ARCs, review copies, blurb requests, etc., I have to blink twice rapidly, rub my eyes, and wonder if that person has any firm grasp of business.  Yes, promo copies help drive interest, but only in rare cases are there 2-3K promo copies distributed, as that would make up over a quarter of total print runs in most cases.

But beyond this lies this odd expectation that because some pay hundreds to hole themselves up in second-rate convention centers to be around like-minded people, that they should get e-copies of everything nominated for free.  Sure, some publishers can afford to do this and do so for outreach efforts.  But it is their prerogative,  not that of the WorldCon organizers and their supporters.  Bemoan the decision all you want, but know that while you might feel aggrieved about not getting a "free perk," it is in the end a perk, something tossed in as a lagniappe, not something vital.  Those of us who do purchase books and who read various finalists by using the old-fashioned "I think I'll buy a copy of this, instead of checking it out at the library" can only shake our heads in wry amusement.

 

Reminding Hugo Awards voters that I am ineligible for consideration for Fan Writer

I see that Monday was some sort of mass silliness in some quarters, called by some a quasi-official day of reminding people of his/her eligibility for some category or another of the Hugo Awards.  In response, I thought I would let Hugo voters know, in case there were 1-2 who actually had heard of myself or this blog, that I am permanently ineligible for consideration for Fan Writer on the Hugo award ballot.

There are two reasons for this:  1) I loathe the very moniker of "fan" and I consider "fans" of anything to be akin to those blithering blowhards who constant berate the sources/leaders of their presumed "fan" interest.  I am the son of a former HS football head coach and let's just say my dislike of the term of "fans" goes back over 30 years.  2) Since there is no category anywhere on the ballot for squirrel-influenced fiction and that squirrels have been historically been ignored for less interesting species such as cats, dogs, parakeets, and Kardashians, as a sign of solidarity with my squirrel leaders, I have to reject any and all attempts to nominate me for something that does not recognize their important roles in life, society, and fiction.

So, does this post sound as bad as some of the other pleas out there earlier in the week?

The things people search for when they arrive at this blog

Truly amazing.  This is from the last month, according to Google.  Surprisingly, no squirrels this time.

porn	13
blog spot	8
thomas ligotti rar	4
blasphemy bible porn	3
content	3
english porn blogspot	3
héctor vázquez azpiri	3
jerusalem quartet whittemore review	3
of blog	3
a circle in the fire analysis o'connor	2

Because this blog needs occasional weirdness...

 Inspired or deranged? I leave it up to you to decide...

Ah, this brings back memories of Bush or Chimp....

There's just something about the squirrel to the right that makes me want to do this...

....tryin' to resist...

*does a funky Shatneresque dance*

...can't....

*contorts face*

KKKKKHHHHHHHAAAAAANNNNNNNN!!!! 

*sucks in air, quasi-sobbing*

Yes, squirrels make even Shatner better. 

How not to help out an author with his/her research

For the most part, I've refrained in recent months in bashing what I see posted at the site linked here.  But sometimes I am made aware of a gem of a post that deserves to be skewered.  Such is the case here, where an author (some on Twitter speculated that it might be Joe Abercrombie, but I'm uncertain.  Edit:  On Twitter, Abercrombie says it's not him and I believe him) apparently asks the blogger in question for a few suggestions regarding YA sites, lit, etc. that could be used as research/contact info for a planned YA novel.  What the blogger writes, however, is something that is a marvel to behold:

One of my favorite SFF authors is writing a YA novel in order to be more "accessible." Since that writer has been known for darker material for many years, along with the book's editor they are wondering what would be the most popular YA-related websites, blogs, message boards, and publications out there? Pitching this work to the right people will be quite important, and in this instance the adult SFF Blogosphere may not necessarily be the way to go.
As you know, I'm not too keen on YA stuff, so I can't really help them out. So I thought to ask you guys! =)
What say you!?!

 First we learn that the intent of the author is to write YA "in order to be more 'accessible.'  There is nothing about trying new ways of telling a story or anything approaching art for art's sake.  Nope, straight up cash grab seems to be the implication behind "accessible."  There is nothing wrong, I suppose, in writers taking on writing in a perceived more lucrative market, but generally these efforts do not pan out well if the writer in question is not at least familiar with the expectations of said genre (or genres, since "YA" is a catch-all term that encompasses many, many more strands than what most literary genres contain).  So I could see a writer wanting to do his/her research first before trying to write within a certain literary field/tradition.  After all, many SF/F readers excoriate writers from other lit genres who write SF/F without displaying any real awareness of the trends, arguments, or preferences of those particular genres.

But it is puzzling to see that a writer openly asks one particular blogger to talk about this.  It's been my experience in the past that generally such queries into what lit in the field should be read/consulted are generally private in nature.  Perhaps that was the case here and the blogger in question just chose to broadcast it because he has little knowledge and even less interest in YA?  Maybe so, but the wording is rather off-putting, to say the least.

"Pitching this work to the right people" sounds very commercial-oriented and again is something that I wouldn't typically expect to be presented in an open forum such as a blog post.  It changes the tenor of the request from a simple seeking of information that would aid the writer in gaining a better perspective of the readers for whom s/he is writing the work to a more cynical one in which the intended audience matters little outside of what those readers might be willing to purchase.  It's the difference between trying to understand the likes of an audience and attempting to sell a product to them.  One takes into consideration more than just elements will get readers to buy the work at hand while the other simply is a product pitch being prepared.

And of course, it wouldn't be an amusing post without the "as you know, I'm not too keen on YA stuff" to make this appeal for resource information to be a potential trainwreck.  Who in their right minds would want to suggest anything of value on a blog whose editor expresses his dislike for the form?  Poor form, to say the least.

But to quote the final sentence, which seems to beg for multiple interrobangs, "What say you!?!"

Lists related to the announcement of the Booker Prize longlist

Now that the Booker Prize longlist has been released (I've only read Ruth Ozeki's A Tale for the Time Being), there has already been some discussion regarding this list.  Here are some lists that could cover what someone might have derived from researching the longlist:

Lists of women on the longlist

Lists of nationalities within the Commonwealth

Lists of elderly people

Lists of new writers

Lists of those writers in the midst of a mid-life crisis

Lists of those who recently gave birth

Lists of those who wear scarves for their publicity photos

Lists of those who have snubbed "genre"

Lists of those who talk about writing a "genre" story

Lists of those who cite an online The Guardian article as their basis of judging the Booker longlist

Lists of the bald or balding

Lists of the hirsute

Lists of those whose recent familial loss spurred their writing

Lists of those whose drug habits fueled their creative energies

Lists of  Oxbridge graduates

Lists of monarchist writers

Lists of republican writers

Lists of cat owners

Lists of dog owners

Lists of the morbidly obese

Lists of the anorexic

Lists of those writers who overcome great odds, like being born into a bourgeois family

Lists of those writers most likely to have a hungover now after learning that their book was selected for consideration

Lists that summarize other lists

Lists that have nothing at all to do with the individual writers and everything to do with real and imagined enemies

Lists that speculate on which writers are secret Squirrelists


Hopefully these summaries of hypothetical (and real) lists might place the Booker Prize longlist in some perspective.  Pardon me while I try to purge my mind of any thought of lists, rankings, and sundry associations.

Shakespearian musings from a third of a lifetime (13 years) ago

I was scrolling through some old, old writings that I composed primarily for the amusement of myself and my best friend from college when I came across this piece from ~2000 where I riffed off of Hamlet.  It is not a serious piece, but perhaps it'll reveal a different mindset, as this was written before I moved to Florida, before I changed careers, before a lot of other sobering life events.  Sometimes, silliness should be celebrated, so here goes:

To be or not to be, that is a silly question, 
since you have to be before you can not be. 
Who cares if it is nobler in the mind to suffer 
the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, 
because they still hurt (sticks and stones may 
break my bones...).  If you do decide to take 
arms, that will leave many people without their 
upper limbs. And why would you take their arms 
to a sea of troubles and by opposing (what, 
BTW, are you opposing?) end them.  Isn't this a 
waste of arms.  To die, to sleep, no 
more...what kind of nonsense is this?  Of 
course if you die, you don't sleep anymore, 
since that is what live people do.  Besides, 
how can any sleep end heartache and a thousand 
natural shocks that flesh is heir to?  Pretty 
damn impossible for a few hours of nap time to 
me...And why in hell is that a consummation 
devoutly to be wished?  I like sleep as much as 
most people, but really it is overrated...Then 
Bill gets freaky and tries to get jiggy withit. 
"To die, to sleep; to sleep, perchance to 
dream.  Ay, there's the rub, for in that sleep 
of death what dreams may come, when we have 
shuffled off this mortal coil, must give us 
pause."  Damn right it must give us pause to 
ponder this crap.  When I dream, I most 
definitively am not thinking about mortal coils 
(whatever those damn things might be...) and no 
dream is going to shuffle me off anywhere 
anytime soon...And how in hell does all of 
Bill's blather led to the respect that makes 
calamity of so long life.  Bill's mind is a 
terrible thing to waste.  I think he needs to 
take a chill pill, as the next paranoiac passage 
indicates:  "For who would bear the whips and 
scorns of time (is time a sadist here?), th' 
oppressor's wrong (bitter man), the proud man's 
contumely (a proud man's what?!?!?!?), the 
pangs of despised love (guess Bill hasn't been 
getting any for a while...), the law's delay 
(while I might feel your pain here, stop your 
bitching...)the insolence of office (absolute 
power [not vodka] corrupts absolutely...), and 
the spurns that patient merit of th' unworthy 
takes, when he himself might his quietus make 
(to put it bluntly) with a bare bodkin (getting 
violent on your ass...)?"  Seems like Bill 
needs some therapy, pronto.  It gets worse: 
"Who would fardels (fardels, is that a type of 
flatulence?) bear, to grunt and sweat (like pigs 
in heat???) under a weary life (I suppose it 
would get boring after a while...), but that 
the dread of something after death (the 
afterlife, maybe?), the undiscovered country 
(Los Angeles) from whose bourn (bourn??? to 
whom was he/she bourn?) no traveler returns 
(guess that passageway is a wee bit too small), 
puzzles the will (some people just don't get 
it, do they?), and makes us rather bear those 
ills we have (I'm disease-free, thank you very 
much...) than fly (why not walk) to others that 
we know not of?"  Sick bastard isn't he. 
However, Bill saves the best (or worst) for 
last:  "Thus conscience makes cowards of us all 
(speak for yourself, you pansy, have at 
you!!!); and thus the native hue of resolution 
(600 x 400?) is sicklied o'er (with a computer 
virus of death, maybe?) with the pale cast of 
thought (I always thought that my thoughts were 
vibrant, since I used color-safe Cheer...), and 
enterprises (rent-a-car or the space ship) of 
great pitch (90 mph) and moment with this 
regard their currents turn awry (what direction 
is awry in?) and lose the name of action 
(action, Jackson, satisfaction, can't get no 
satisfaction...)"  Thus Bill's soliloquy makes 
my bowels weak with tepid commentary on the 
human condition.  For the clueless, this has 
been my de-re-construction of Hamlet's speech 
in Act 3, Scene 1 of Shakespeare's Hamlet. 
Thank you and drive through.

P.S. This was a satirical parody.  No 
Shakespearean actors or actresses were harmed 
in the writing of this bit.

Someone recently suggested that I consider doing a podcast

The things that arise during late night Twitter chat...

But it did lead me to think about it for a moment.  If I did have the proper equipment (whatever that might be) and the time/energy to do so, what sort of content could I possibly put into a 15, 20, 30, or even 60 minute weekly podcast?  I purposely don't cover just one literary genre, so there certainly wouldn't be a "theme" for such a thing, unless I called it something like "The Southern Squirrel Revival Show" and featured a regular segment called "Your Moment of Squirrel Zen."  Wouldn't reading aloud thoughts on books read be a slightly more frustrating version of an oral book report, minus the transcript for people to read?  Or would there be an expectation for "news," which other people might translate as "gossip concerning the filthy hygiene of Canadians"? 

What would constitute an interesting podcast that wouldn't have a theme (minus the above-mentioned squirrel possibility)?  What elements make these things popular in the first place?  Just curious, as I have little desire to start one anytime soon.

So people are arguing again about the validity of the Hugo Awards

I know I said my piece on the 2013 Best Novel shortlist the other day and had intended that to be my only real substantive comment on the issue, but I did see a comment on Twitter tonight wondering what my contribution might be to the rather large (over 180 comments when I just now checked) debate over at Justin Landon's Staffer's Book Review. 

To be honest, a few years ago, I might have been fired up about this issue (I probably was; too lazy to see what I blogged in 2007-2012 on the issue), but mostly I feel ennui over it now.  I've come to accept that WSFS/WorldCon/Hugo and I "just aren't that into each other."  I like more experimental fictions with diversity being more than just the color of one's skin, the gender and/or sex of the writer, or the locale from which they write; I want a wider range of narratives that challenge my senses as well as my thoughts.  Those type of fictions, even though many glide through the semi-permeable "walls" of various literary genres, just aren't going to be popular as an aggregate with mass audiences (or with 3-5K convention attendees).

So I've begun to feel as though I need to move away from it.  The Hugo Awards cater to a certain crowd.  Great.  Let them continue to please those who attend the convention circuits and who favor a particular style.  Doesn't mean I should endorse it as THE view on fictions that touch upon the science fictional and/or fantastical (or weird, horrific, etc.)  I don't, as I usually look forward to seeing what the World Fantasy Award or the Shirley Jackson Award jurists put out for their shortlists (oh, and the National Book Award, National Book Critics Circle Award, LA Times Book Prize, Orange/Women's Prize, Booker Prize, Asian Prize, and others that sometimes include works of the fantastical on their various lists).

The Hugos don't cut for me.  Neither do the Nebula lists, which I think are equally unappealing to me.  Notice how little I've said about the latter for the past couple of years; that's the level of disinterest I have.  I think I should start doing the same for the Hugos and not cover them at all here in the future, unless there is something that interests me in a positive way (for what it's worth, I'm about a quarter into Kim Stanley Robinson's 2312 and I'm reminded positively of his Red Mars, which was my favorite of his Mars trilogy, but it'll be a while before I write a review, if I bother to do so).  Yesterday I read an excellent article by Matthew Cheney on "Most Everything is Terrible" that I think is very applicable to this situation with people taking stances on the Hugo/WSFS issue.  Too readily we proclaim judgment on issues without stopping to question whether or not we are at fault.  I'm weary of voicing my disapproval of selections from an award that does not cater to me.  There are other options, such as promoting those alternatives and leaving the undesirable ones to receive less e-ink from myself (and perhaps others).  To keep proclaiming one's opinion on this issue (or other related ones) is beyond beating a dead horse:  it is a willful refusal to move on and discover what you personally like without worrying overmuch about how certain others think it is a steaming pile of crap.

That being said, give some consideration to reading Kate Atikinson's just released Life After Life.  There are elements that should appeal to SF, alt-history, literary, and perhaps fantasy readers.  Or maybe Ron Currie, Jr.'s Flimsy Little Plastic Miracles might be more to your liking.  Better to find out than to fret over things you cannot change. 

A list of what literary genres I will read/review

Saw via Cheryl Morgan earlier tonight a post made at Warpcore SF (where I'm not listed, but perhaps that's because I'm considered to be more of a "literary" reviewer than a "SF/F" one these days?) that listed various subgenres that various reviewers would read/review.  I thought it might be interesting to a few to list that I do read (and occasionally review), in order of preference:

1.  Translated literary fiction
2.  Spanish-language literary fiction
3.  Portuguese-language Steampunk/Dark Fantasy/Horror/Weird Fiction (some works straddle most of these divisions)
4.  Spanish-language SF/F/Steampunk
5.  Literary fiction
6.  Weird Fiction
7.  Italian-language fiction, all forms
8.  French-language fiction, all forms
9.  Short Fiction Collections/Anthologies
10. Squirrelpunk
11. Historical fictions
12. Horror
13. "Postmodernist" narratives
14. Anglo-American Steampunk
15. Non-Paranormal Romance Urban Fantasies of the pre-2000 version of it
16. William Shatner writings
17. Biographies
18. Non-epic fantasies
19. Science Fiction of the Le Guin variety
20. Danny Bonaduce memoirs
21. Graphic Novels
22.  Epic Fantasies
23.  Epic Fantasies involving llamas
24.  YA
25.  Graphic Novels
26.  Squirrel-penned philosophical works
27.  Histories (OK, this is really much higher, but I burned out back in 1997, so it's hard for me to admit still that I'll read them on occasion)
28.  Mysteries/Crime fiction
29.  Squirrel erotica

There, I hope that clears things up for anyone who might want to get in touch with me for review purposes...especially those purveyors of squirrel smut.

P.S.  As for "self-published" works, only in cases where I know the writer before s/he asks me to review their work.  I've done this on a few occasions, most recently reviewing K.J. Bishop's self-published story collection, but I don't plan on making a regular habit of this outside of the works being by authors with whom I'm at least somewhat familiar.

What if other writers had conceived/written the Wheel of Time series

Now that the final Robert Jordan/Brandon Sanderson Frankenbook, A Memory of Light (or as some might think, a memory of lighter books that didn't feel as though their fatness were about to cause a literary coronary) has passed, now comes the time on Sprockets where we danc...err, we'll skip that and move to the fun, imaginative exercise of imagining what disparate writers could have done with the basic premise if they had to write the story from scratch:

David Mitchell:

Mitchell would have taken not just the Age of Legends and Third Age eras, but all seven eras of the Wheel of Time, and he would have told within a single volume a complex, interwoven set of seven tales in which the Dragon, Moridin, the Dark One, Egwene, Perrin, Mat, the Creator, Bela, and that old man from Scene 24 who was last seen scratching himself vigorously outside a dilapidated inn in Lugard explore the issue of reincarnation and how choices made in their previous lives will come to affect them in the Ages to come.  There would be an emphasis on the language of fate and our pressing against it, minus several thousand repetitions of one's accoutrements.

Samuel Beckett:

WoT here would be recast as a play in which Ishamael and the Dark One would be sitting at Shayol Ghul with the other Forsaken, waiting for the Dragon Reborn.  Several scenes would be devoted to their attempts to come to an understanding of their predicaments and the hopes that they have for power and dominance once the effin' Dragon is Reborn.  It would encapsulate in barely 100 pages all of the Forsaken's motivations and would permit them to be complex, dynamic characters rather than the cookie-cutter bad guys of the Jordan/Sanderson series.

Brian Evenson:

Through a combination of short stories and slender novels, the inexplicable natures of the Dark One and the Creator would be explored through apocalyptic scenes in which the Dragon Reborn and his cohorts discover that the violence that they are perpetuating from Age to Age is but part of a larger struggle whereby the violence itself, like Ouroboros, is wrapped about itself, attempting to swallow itself whole.  There can be no beginning or end, as violence itself permeates all existence.

Samuel Delany:

The action would unfold through a fractured narrative in which the metanarrative aspects, namely the polarizing elements of love and violence would manifest itself in a misty environment in which the Dragon Reborn, Moridin, the Dark One, and Bela would attempt to find ways to define themselves while discovering themselves within each other...and each other's body cavities.  The language would be precise and gripping, but perhaps strike a bit too close to home at times for the more prudish readers.

Angela Carter:

WoT here would be retold as a series of fairy tales in which gender relations would receive a total makeover.  Instead of the quasi-bourgeois attitudes toward sex that both the male and female characters voiced (with the unmarried couples dying while the properly married survived), the women here would have not just the power that came from the men destroying civilization 3000 years before, but also would display a more modern and egalitarian sexual/social dynamic in which more than the "exotics" would have women soldiers and that there wouldn't have to be a constant mention of men and their amorous proclivities whenever two women or more are gathered together.

China Miéville:

MONSTERS.  Need I say more?  Oh, and the squirrel from Kraken would make a reappearance here to set up all sorts of plot devices.

Helen Oyeyemi:

All of the female characters who had been fridged by Rand and crew would burst out from Jordan/Sanderson's manuscript and proceed to explain to them why the story shouldn't reduce women to bourgeois stereotypes of feminine approaches to life (if such a thing as "feminine approaches" could ever be argued seriously).

Jeff VanderMeer:

There would be more fungi in the series and the Green Man would have a more important role.  The series would be reduced by 90%, as the Dragon Reborn would become a detective working grudgingly for the Forsaken, trying to figure out the world's past pre-Dark One conquest, before discovering his past self locked in a fungal embrace, which would provide a vital clue in how to defeat these mysterious, alien creatures.  All the while, the prose would be much less dependent upon repetitive descriptions and much more reliant upon weird imagery to forward the story toward a more memorable and worthwhile conclusion.

Terry Goodkind:

He would add an'greal that were analogues for vibrators and he would rename it The Sword of Truthiness, of course.

Ayn Rand:

"Who is Moridin?" would open the series and the greed and selfishness of the Forsaken would eventually triumph over the do-gooders and their attempts to inflict socialist attitudes on the WoT nations.  Oh, and Moridin would give a 567 page speech on the glories of laissez-faire capitalism while also denouncing altruism.  And Bela would be balefired to make this point clear.

 David Foster Wallace:

WoT would be a brilliant, but sometimes baffling work in which each individual volume would expand by 50% to include a complex, time-warping series of authorial intrusions in which early on Lews Therin and Elan's competitive tennis careers would come to play a major role in understanding the events of The Eye of the World.

William S. Burroughs:

WoT would be retold as a series of drug-induced dream sequences, in which the hash that the Two Rivers people grew for global consumption would spark a metaphorical rivulet of hallucinatory pseudo-memories in which the trials and travails of the Dragon Reborn to move from relationship to relationship while battling to protect his stash from the Dark One's minions would comprise the core of this fractured narrative.

Junot Díaz:

Shit would get real, muthafucker.   Oh, and the characterizations would be much better with copious usage of the Old Tongue as a means to show the biculturalism of several of the characters in a way that does not stereotype the Illianers, the Cairhieners, and the Sharans.

Stephanie Meyer:

It'd be just like Twilight, except Rand and Moridin would form "teams" to fight for Bela's affections, as the Last Battle would come to involve lots of CGI werewolves, sparkly channelers, and a seductive apple scene.



Doubtless there are more, worthier authors that could be imagined here, so feel free to add them, with descriptions of how they too would have rewritten WoT.

Edit:

J.R.R. Tolkien

Oh wait, he already (ghost)wrote The Eye of the World.

My responses to a poll of "book bloggers"

I saw this linked to on Twitter and I thought I'd fill it out, with a mixture of serious and silly answers.  Here's what I wrote, for those who want amusement.

How many times do you post each week?  

Almost daily (6-7/week)

What percentage of your blog posts are reviews? (2-part question)  

Almost 1/3

What percentage of your blog posts are promotional posts? (2-part question) promos = cover reveals, author interviews, memes, etc.  

Less than 5%

How many books did you review in 2012?  

104

How long does it take for you to read a book, on average? Actual # of hours, not days.  

1-2 hours

How long does it take you to compose a review, on average? Don't forget you have to format it for your blog, insert links, choose images, etc. as well.  

Around 1 hour

What percentage of your reviewed books were from books you purchased? (4-part question)  

75%

What percentage of your reviewed books were from books you borrowed or were gifted? (4-part question) from library, friend, etc. (NOT a galley)  

0%

What percentage of your reviewed books were from galleys? (4-part question) from publisher, Amazon Vine, etc.  

25%

What percentage of your reviewed books were from trades with other bloggers? (4-part question)  

0%.   It would be greater if they would send me Squirrelist fictions for review consideration.

How much time does it take you to promote a single blog post via Facebook, GoodReads, Twitter, visiting other blogs, etc.? Are there other places where you promote your reviews? This may be difficult to define since some of your social media is also for fun, so please use your best judgment in settling on a number.  

Less than one minute.  If it takes longer, then I am gabbing too much.

How much time do you spend on blog maintenance per month? Updating, editing, prettifying--anything that isn't writing an actual post.  

Barely any time.

How many giveaways did you host in 2012?  

None.  I have considered throwing crappy books at people, however.

How many of those giveaways were self-funded? Meaning, you paid for s&h. Did you also pay for the books themselves?  

None.   Again, I would be tempted to buy some brick-sized books to throw at the occasional moron.

How much money did you personally spend on giveaways this year? Please include book costs, shipping and handling costs, packaging, tape, etc.  

$0. 

How much money did you spend this year on finished copies? Do you also buy them if you already got a galley (for you, friends, etc.)?  

Hrmm….probably bought 200 new e-books/print books, so $3000?  And no, I don’t buy extra copies, unless it’s of a volume where a translation of mine appears and I want someone to read it.

If you have other people contributing to your blog, do you pay them? If so, what amount did you spend?  

Books, but I would consider sending them a rabid squirrel on occasion.

How much did you spend on site maintenance? web design, domain name registration, etc.  

$0.

Do you attend book conventions like BEA, ALA, etc? If so, please total/break down the costs for registration, hotel, travel for each one.  

Only the Southern Festival of Books in Nashville, TN.  I live nearby, so only cost is gas and $5-10 for parking each of the three days.

Do you have business cards or other promotional items? What did you spend on creating them, and why are they important to have?  

Not yet.  If I did, I’d have a snarling squirrel on them.

Are there other blogging costs that we haven't listed that you would like to add? Please explain and quantify as much as possible.  

None.

Do you receive any kind payment for your personal blogging efforts? ad revenue, paid promo posts, promo tour organization, etc.  

No.  I loathe capitalism.

If you do receive payment for your blogging, does it cover the cost of running your site? Please share the amount you earned in 2012 if possible, or put "decline to answer" or "N/A."  

N/A

Most book bloggers seem to agree that any ad revenue and finished copies don't come anywhere near offsetting the expense of maintaning a book blog. Which begs the question: why do you do it?  

I like to review books that those who slaver over ARCs are neglecting to review.

Have you had any unpleasant blogging experiences this last year? If so, how has it affected your blogging? author meltdowns, trolls, etc.  

I had to deal with Canadians.  It led me to having fun at their expense.

What are some of your frustrations, hopes, and dreams for your blog?  

Frustrations – Not enough squirrel-friendly books out there.

Hopes – To discover more squirrel-friendly books

Dreams – To unleash an army of rabid squirrels on the world.

How can your readers help you as a blogger?

•  Leaving a comment on a blog post.
•  Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, GoodReads, other social media.
•  "Like" my blog post on my Facebook page.
•  "Liking" my review on GoodReads, etc.
•  Retweet my blog post.
•  Pin my blog post on Pinterest.
•  Share my blog post via Facebook, Google Plus, Stumble Upon
•  Link to my blog or profile if they've won a contest, found out about a book through me, etc.
•  "Like" my Facebook page.
•  "Like" my Amazon review.
•  Other:  Worship rabid squirrels

What do you wish were different about the reader interaction on your blog? Frustrations, successes to share?  

Only wish more Squirrelists would respond regularly.

Aside from all the above reader things, how can your fellow bloggers help you?

•  Add me to their blog rolls.
•  Add my blog button to their side bars.
•  Acknowledge/link if they've received a book through me on tour, through a contest, etc.
•  Link to my reviews where appropriate.
•  Other:  Talk more about squirrels

What do you wish were different about your interaction with fellow bloggers or readers?  

Nothing.  I think most are bemused by my sarcasm, knowing that it’s rarely anything personal.

How can authors and publishers help you as a blogger?

•  Share my review of their books (or author feature) on Facebook or their websites.
•  Retweet my review or feature.
•  Make book information, contact information, ARC request information, bio, etc. easy to find on their websites.
•  Be available for guest posts and interviews.
•  Offer signed books or swag. (Elaborate in "other" if you like.)
•  Other:  Include more squirrel-positive scenes in their books.

What do you wish or publishers understood about the process of blogging? How has your experience been in interacting with industry people?  

I am not a shill.  I couldn’t care less about hosting giveaways.  While most people in the industry are nice and have demanding jobs, I just have to maintain some distance in order to be “independent.”

Which authors and pubishers have you found to be particularly responsive/helpful/enjoyable to work with? Why?  

There are many I could name.  I hope they know that I do understand and appreciate the work they do without gushing about it.

Do you find egalleys or physical ARCs easier to review from?  

I don’t receive egalleys and not many physical ARCs, so I really don’t care much on this issue.

What are your blog's monthly page views?  

Upwards of 25,000 page views/month.

How many subscribers do you have for your RSS feed/email sign up?  

Varies, but just under 800.

How many followers do you have through Google Friend Connect or Linky tools? Please list/quantify other sources if you use something similar.  

No effin’ clue.

How many Twitter followers do you have?  

Almost 500, but many of them are squirrels.

How many Facebook fans do you have?  

I refuse to set up a Facebook fan page.

How many GoodReads friends/followers do you have?  

I would rather be bitten by a rabid squirrel than join GoodReads.

What is your Amazon reviewer ranking?  

I never post anything under my name on Amazon.

Are there other facts & figures pertinent to your audience reach?  

I have dozens of squirrels following me on Twitter.

Would you like to share your name and blog? Please leave your URL and/or contact details if so.  

Sure, as long as you realize that I gave serious answers as well as silly ones:  The OF Blog.  http://ofblog.blogspot.com

Anything else you'd like to add? Last chance!  

Nothing really, other than I review mostly non-Anglophone fiction and lit fiction these days, with occasional SF/Fantasy pieces.

"A bunch of rats, in a gutter, fighting over some piss."

The titular quote, taken from a comment on Twitter by Jonathan McCalmont in response to a link I posted on Twitter this afternoon.  This link to a Westeros discussion on the final The Wheel of Time book, A Memory of Light, normally would have left me with a shrug and a click to another thread if it weren't for direct mentions of myself and a few others.  As it is, I was ready to just mention it briefly in Twitter and leave it at that, if it weren't for McCalmont's comment on some of the reader/blogger reactions crystallizing some of my own ambivalent thoughts on the subject.

It goes back two years to the release of the previous WoT book and the questions of "an embargo" on reviews and so forth.  I blogged about what transpired, including the flack that I caught for giving vague impressions (which probably sounded more laudatory than the decidedly mixed-to-negative opinion I had of the book as a whole), in a few posts back in October 2010.  Although not the sole determining factor in a shift in reviewing philosophy, that mini-tempest certainly accelerated my departure from the rat race of those who appeared to have come to view review copies/galley proofs as some sort of status symbol or some semi-sacred trust that had to be kept with the publishers.  If "reviewing" meant kow-towing to publicist requests/demands, then it would be better to walk away from a potentially incestuous relationship, one fraught with the possibility of feeble paeans to the marketing sheen of a book rather than a substantive look at whether or not the book in question would be remember five years hence. 

That is still my stance 26 months later, although I do on occasion agree to consider books from certain non-Anglophone presses because of my curiosity about what is being produced in Spanish and Portuguese and because there is nothing of the entitlement that seems to permeate Anglo-American presses and certain online venues.  So no, I never was going to receive a review copy of the latest WoT and why should I, seeing how I said in one of the linked posts above that I wouldn't accept it under any terms?  So it is with some bemusement that I learned of discussions where I would explicitly not receive the said book (which will be purchased for me to send soon afterward to someone dear to me overseas), as if this is some sort of punishment.

McCalmont's right.  If such things have to be discussed in terms of who gains access, then it really has become akin to "a bunch of rats, in a gutter, fighting over some piss."  Pardon me while I clean any rat sprayings off of my clothes and resume reading books that I either purchased with my own money or which were sent to me with only the hope that I would consider reviewing them.  The rats can fight for their "access" and "privileges" without me.