The OF Blog

Friday, March 25, 2005

Scott Gall Interview

Editor note: Scott Gall is a translator who works for a Japanese company, currently working on localizing a MMORPG for American audiences. Unfortunately, due to a non-disclosure agreement, he was unable to tell what company, nor what game. The interview was carried out by our own lord-of-shadow on the Games Board, and it takes a look at the difficulties of translation from one culture to another, using games as the medium.

So, that being said, enjoy

Scott Gall is a localization project manager for a game publisher in Japan.

Max Nichols (lord-of-shadow): My first question was one that came up quite often while I was asking for input from the online gaming community. How much freedom do you have while translating? Are you given strict guidelines by your company and told to follow them carefully, or are you given some leeway in adopting things for different audiences and cultures? And a few were curious about whether you ever get to put in personal touches. Maybe you name an NPC after a friend, or put in an old family joke, or maybe even a reference that only you and some friends would understand?

Scott Gall: Different types of freedoms are awarded and withheld. The first one that comes to mind is the public relations freedom, which I don't have as a localization lead, to mention my project and company here. I'll do my best to avoid boring you to death with generalities though.

The poetic license type of freedom to liven up the dialog, stretch meanings, and ignore certain text elements is different from game project to game project. Some loc projects are set up to trust the translators, some are not. Two in-house translators working for the same company, but on different titles, could have different levels of freedom awarded. Even something like schedule problems, which often result in lighter or more haphazard editing, have sway over what the publisher intended to allow the translators to do.

I used to expect to see a more progressive or enlightened language lead or editor above a translator whose text takes liberties, but I haven't found that to be true. Schedule and budget and managerial oversight often end up playing a part in the amount of translation freedom. In business management terms, much of the game industry is still immature when it comes to localization.

Translation, however, will eventually offer the chance to leave one's personal touch. I suppose the difficulty of inserting a coded personal phrase depends on how big of a mark you try to leave. I don't know anyone who hasn't inserted a little footprint here or there, but these days it isn't as often or as big as players imagine. After a while I think as a translator you realize that there's no reason to sneakily insert esoteric meanings at every turn like a Free Mason. All you have to do is keep working month after month, year after year, and eventually you will have a hundred thousand words that are more or less an expression of you. A few "Look what I got away with!" stories are nice to recount at parties but it's a fleeting joy. I recommend shooting for volume of text as a footprint.

That covers footprints in text translation. Naming, on the other hand, is done separately from translation and is sometimes nothing but a collection of people's footprints. Many of the translators may be asked to participate in naming. They should. Naming is a hugely political task in both the original and overseas versions of every game, and it affects translation freedom indirectly. Before I got into the game industry I worked with marketing text and other entertainment industry writing. I saw very quickly that every human has a burning passion to name something. Especially in text-heavy games like fantasy RPGs, naming and its approval process take weeks. In-game content names are hotly contested within loc (localization) teams, and between dev (development) and loc teams. Usually the loc team is striving to keep the dev team from enforcing use of words with sounds that are too strange or lame in other languages. The dev team might see this as encroaching upon their intellectual property and simply refuse even good naming suggestions because they don't have the ability to differentiate between reasonable and unreasonable ideas for another language. Then you've got the UI command names, which might also need their own abbreviations for certain menus. Then the biggie: the game title. Naming might be the most accessible and visible part of every localization project but it can cripple a project's schedule from the beginning.

The preferred loc process is to create a glossary first. A glossary is what holds all the names decided for items, characters, locations, etc. It's a collection of the company's preferred terminology for that title. The style guide exists separately to help translators know how to notate the mechanics of their writing to achieve a look and feel of uniformity throughout the game. Style guidelines can be assembled quickly but glossary approval is like a first child: It just doesn't want to come out and labor is long and sometimes painful. A delayed glossary inhibits the freedom of translators when beginning work on the text. I mean, imagine you are asked to go through an entire day without using a name. You can use any word to describe a person or thing, but if it has a known proper name, you can't say it. Can't say Knife, can't say Robert, not even Sweater. Try to pass a couple hours like that. You'll know how uncomfortable a translator can feel when starting text without a finalized glossary. I call that lacking translation freedom because the power to envision the whole story in detail has been curtailed, at least for a while.


Max Nichols: Humor, especially humor containing cultural references, must be very hard to translate. When you come across a joke or something that, if translated normally, would simply not be understood by the new audience, what do you do?

Scott Gall: The first thing I ask myself is whether there's anything I can change in the preceding or subsequent text to better frame the material in a more humorous light. Then within the joke, I might shoot for a lesser laugh but at least stay within the flow of conversation or narration. The point of laughter is often context dependent and if you step too far outside the context flow to get a laugh at the same time as the source text, you also might end up introducing some needless confusion, all for what might not have been a very big gain anyway. Not to mention that translators are always on deadline and don't have the time to sit back, have a beer, and brainstorm over how to handle every single instance of humor.

Unless the joke is critical to depicting character or story at that precise moment, you might just sacrifice a difficult joke altogether and opt for plain phrasing, knowing that you can make up for lost ground in the laugh department in other spots where the source text is flat. That's easier to get away with if the acting on screen is not too specific.

If the timing in conversation or narration is truly critical and a laugh must be attained now, then I like to look back several lines for a place where I can introduce background explanation earlier. Try to get the imagination pointed toward where I know it needs to go for their joke, or replacement joke, to have some impact. The price paid is that for a few sentences before the joke, the translation might resemble the source text very little.

Then there are one-liners where there is no buildup at all in the source text. If there's no time to really fudge anything, you're stuck so you rack your brain for a while and do your best. On deadline, you might be able to skip to another file and come back when you have an idea, but humor in games is everywhere, almost in every batch of translation. Try explaining the situation to a friend or coworker and ask for a funny replacement punchline. I know a few hilarious but logical people who can sometimes imagine a replacement for me.

You'll notice a pattern of problems with humor as a translator. In Japanese-to-English work, a translator is repeatedly challenged by having to make a laugh out of content that is often too timid or subtle to amuse most North Americans, and I would guess Europeans too. Japanese translators, on the other hand, are tasked with trying to bring some semblance of meaning to English jokes, which often rely on knowledge or sensibility that is too spontaneous or ironic or violent or simply unimaginable to be even faintly realistic or relevant for a Japanese person in the situation at hand.

So you've got English game players who are hard to surprise and amuse with text that was interesting but not funny, and the translators are working hard to sharpen the jokes. And you've got Japanese game players who are easy to confuse or bore with text that is funny in extremity but not necessarily clever, and the translators work to boil it down to its core and just translate that, so that it is at least understandable. It's safer to bank on Japanese appreciating cleverness more than volume of humor, so if the joke has some layers to it that highlight the human condition, it will be easier for the translator to get some mileage out of it.

Here's a film example I would teach in translation class if I were a teacher. I saw Wayne's World in Japan when it was first released in theaters. The Grey Poupon TV commercial campaign of rich people interrupting each other to borrow mustard was known in the States, but it was totally unknown to Japanese people. Now, rather than fudge the lines leading up to "Might you have any Grey Poupon?" so that some attempt could be made at understanding the high society angle, the Japanese subtitles simply replaced "Grey Poupon" with "condom." I've asked over a dozen Japanese people through the years who saw the film if they thought that was funny and not one has answered yes. However, none of them were perplexed with the sudden abstractness of that sentence until I asked them to reexamine the scene. I used to think of that subtitle as a failure but years later I've decided it's genius. The translator used a word that does not make sense or generate laughs, and almost any single word there would fail to do so. But the word "condom" is apparently just within the scope of conceivable wackiness for the Japanese that they can subconsciously brush it off as "That silly guy, he's asking for that? What will he ask for next!" The moral is if you can't get a laugh, at least you can stay in character of the person speaking, and then you might be able to keep from drawing attention to the fact that it wasn't actually funny.


Max Nichols: Cultural differences are certainly not limited to humorous situations. What do you do about symbols such as a swastika, which I understand is considered a lucky symbol in some Asian countries, but would be instantly associated with Nazi Germany in America?

Scott Gall: What I would do is ask the dev team what they were smoking when they designed it in the first place!

There should be few surprises these days about what upsets people so much that sales are impeded and bad publicity results. At least, in the markets usually shipped to. Doing your homework during development can fish out a lot of problems. What you can't avoid is current events. What if an original symbol in a game halfway through development turned out to be similar to, I dunno, the signature of a murderer who gets arrested one month before the game's release? You're stuck and you say a prayer to the PR god of your choice and hope everything will be better in the morning.

A dev team should take some time in the beginning to decide what it will create for each market. If they determine that 90% - but only 90% - of their target audience can accept a middle finger or swastika or nudity, and therefore only one version of the game will be sold everywhere, then they really have no right to complain if their sales or rating in 10% of markets is bad. For any reason.

If a game was never intended for loc but somehow was picked up for international sales later, the publisher should review the game carefully before deciding where to sell it. In the case where something must be deleted or added to the game after it has been completed, I suppose a contingent of people from the dev team, quality assurance, and localization would come together and crank out whatever changes are needed. When a game asset unexpectedly upsets an overseas culture or ratings board, everyone in the industry learns from it and life goes on. Game content adjustments may be expensive but in the long run they pay off. If the swastika-looking symbol absolutely must be kept by the dev team for the notion of artistic integrity, then expect a higher age rating for the game or lots of little print from the legal department and even a ban here or there. That's how it works in just about every business I can think of that depends on exports.


Max Nichols: Censoring has always been a big deal among many people I know. Do you find yourself having to constantly alter things to make them more suitable for their new target audience? In my experience, things that might be considered taboo or unspeakable here in America (incest in the Fire Emblem games, for example) are less so in other cultures¡­ and vice versa.

Scott Gall: I've never worked on a project that pushed the envelope on sensibility. What I notice is that you constantly have to change the NPC dialog to make it interesting.

If I felt I ever wanted to recommend a game element, I would go to the dev team and producer and state my case.

North American culture has low tolerance for child exploitation, for example, but has high tolerance for violence and themes of lawlessness as self-defense. I think this goes back to your question on culturally sensitive symbols. Most of the time, a developer sees the hot water ahead before stepping into it. You can either try to change a society and its laws to accept your art, or you can change your game. I can't say which is better, but I think you can see which way is more profitable in the short term.


Max Nichols: I have known fans that are angry at the slightest change to the original meaning, people who would prefer to have the Japanese originals translated as literally as possible - cultural references, taboo subjects, and everything else. And that makes sense, to some extent - the original intent and meanings should never be lost in a translation. Yet it would not be in the best interests of the companies involved to make a game that is inaccessible to the general American public, due to a translation that is too literal. Obviously, a balance must be reached here. How do you go about achieving this balance? And what is your opinion on the subject of original intent and meaning versus localized intent and meaning?

Scott Gall: First a translation must be understandable and enjoyable or the publisher won't stay in business. Enjoyability is achieved with the highest success rate when the translator knows the culture of the people he is translating for and adjusts to their sensibilities while maintaining as much of the flavor as is permitted within the localized sensibility. This issue has been blown out of proportion past what is really happening in real-world translation. Have you ever seen a translation of second-generation Korean-Japanese gang members calling each other "Nigga"? I haven't. But I should be seeing that and other similar text, according to this argument that dialogue is being overly localized. There are words that Japanese street punks call each other that are slightly derogatory but which also show the closeness of brotherhood and which cannot be used by anyone outside that circle without inciting a fight. People who don't know any foreign languages well are more likely to mistake current translations as a sell-out, but in fact that's nowhere near the case.

Japan megafans who want the Japanese sound effects or extremely literal translation should go study Japanese and then buy the original game. The localized English version exists for people who have no intention of studying Japanese. Translating some of the English but keeping Japanese-isms sprinkled within is a whole different version and would require a separate localization project. I admire the energy of those fans who are willing to accept harder gameplay in exchange for cultural adventure, but look, just because a comic or game or animation is Japanese doesn't mean it's intrinsically more hardcore and accurate and cool than the same thing produced in Seattle.


Max Nichols: Many niche titles are already bought almost exclusively by fans of Japanese culture and language, or at least by those who have some appreciation of it. Seeing that this is the case, why don't we see more subtitled games, or at least games with the option to keep original Japanese voice-acting? I myself have set some games to Japanese voice acting with subtitles, rather than subject myself to the torture of poorly done English voices.

Scott Gall: I would go back to the reason of money again. If you, Max, establish a Paypal account and collect $50 from tens of thousands of people and then contact a game exec, I think you'd get a game with English UI and text, with the original Japanese voice acting. Unless you go that far, you're asking a company to take a gamble that the money they make from Japanophiles will cover the customers lost who only wanted English. I agree that's a short-sighted way of looking at it, because some of the titles people seem to want in Japanese are the same games that never sold well to begin with, so why not take a risk and fill that obvious niche market? And depending on how heavy the data is, maybe you could just toggle it on or off the way you do on a movie DVD. I don't have a definitive answer for you, but I'd remind you to take a look at the human mind. No one wants to be the first to fail at something new anyway, and Japanese companies are particularly terrified of this.

Another thing, a game company must adopt different licensing and payment for the original voice actors if that plan comes to pass. If an expensive voice actor was used in the country of origin, that person might actually ask for so much money for international release that it becomes much more attractive to use those "poorly done English voices."


Max Nichols: Connotations - I imagine they can be very, very annoying. Heck, even within a single language, these can cause communication issues. How carefully do you translate connotations? Do you just stick to the straight definition, or do you make an effort to incorporate other meanings and implications?

Scott Gall: I think you have to translate text with important connotations just as much as they need to be translated. No more, no less, best you can. With games and subtitling you're always working with text length restrictions, so you can't afford to get fancy at every turn. Reasons why you might find subtle meanings untranslated are space, time, translator ability, and editor ability. Or you're reading too much into the original text! Stop imagining connotations! No, seriously though, you can't judge the quality of a translation based on single lines here and there. In the end, most games are created to be lighter and faster than an essay or poem. If a player or a translator is obsessed with text containing layers of subtlety line after line, then I'd recommend literature over electronic entertainment. Not every game has a lot of subtlety to the text, and not every translation is able to capture it, for one reason or another.


Max Nichols: What's your approach to translating honorifics, such as chan, san, and sama? I've talked with non-professional translators before, and these usually present problems. It's hard to effectively communicate the same levels of respect, restraint, relationship, and everything else in English, without getting to wordy.

Scott Gall: It's hard to do without getting wordy, but not impossible by any means. Failure to do it repeatedly in proper brevity doesn't mean Japanese is a hard language. It means the translator was a mediocre English writer before he or she ever got into translation.

Not everyone realizes that, in daily translation business, translation is often done by people who are not bilingual. They might be hotshots but aren't necessarily bilingual. And that's ok. The "weakness" of a non-bilingual translator is covered by having him or her translate *to* his or her native language. Johnny translates J to E, Taro translates E to J. So nowadays you've got native English speakers, for the most part, responsible for translation, or at least for the editing. If the text is too long or clunky or just plain boring, blame Johnny for not honing his English writing craft. Taro is probably innocent.

Japanese honorifics are expressible in the five registers available to the average native English speaker. A linguist told me there were many more than five registers, but whatever, five is plenty for those without a graduate degree in linguistics. You, as a native English speaker, have the word choice and voice tone that you use for immediate family and best friends, and another for a professor or police officer, and yet another when you give a speech. Those are three easily recognizable registers. By mixing registers, one can achieve a mix of high and mid-level politeness found in many languages, including daily Japanese.

In Japanese, -chan and -kun and other name add-ons can be chosen to show affection and social proximity. Just because it's not -san doesn't mean the person is being spit on. I know at least two cases where a female is called -kun, though it's fairly uncommon, and then there's the sarcasm, or sometimes just the innocent teasing, of attaching -sama. So you can't bet on those words to be the best road signs for how much respect is present, and carrying them over into English, they're just dead weight. Unless you're trying to stress a Japanese presence in the text for some odd reason, just drop those words and call characters by their names in English. Everything will be ok. Trust me.

If someone wants to worry about names, I advise them to spend time on a practical issue, such as whether [Japanese text cut due to formatting problems] should be translated as Taro or Taroh or Tarou.

Max Nichols: How would you go about translating something with a standardized form, like haiku or certain types of poetry? Would you prefer to try to maintain the original form, or the original meaning?

Gall Scott: I'd choose to aim for the original meaning. I wouldn't take the job if someone told me to match the syllables. Or I'd take it but quadruple my price. Or I'd attach the condition that kanji could not be used, which would hopefully kill the deal right there. If you exclude abnormally long scientific words, the average word length in English is about six letters. That represents fewer syllables than the average Japanese word. Poetry, I'll pass. Unless it's my girlfriend's poetry.

With music lyrics translation you're up against a similar challenge. However, the canvas tends to be bigger and this can help you get by as a translator. With a bigger canvas, you're more likely to be able to get the meaning across, and even have some fun doing it.

Last year a Japanese guy at the pub I went to a lot at the time in Tokyo asked me to translate his song. He's an amateur musician. I showed my translation to an American friend of mine and he said "Oh, I didn't know you write songs." So I thought it was gonna be good enough. Then I handed the translation over to the Japanese guy and he said, "This is not what I imagined. You made it stick to a time structure. Don't worry about that. Just be cool." Yes, sir!


Max Nichols: In English, forms of onomatopoeia, such as "bang" or "pow," or just attempting to emulate a real sound, are usually regarded as childish or unsophisticated. That is not the case in Japanese, where it is considered a formal part of the language, and has its own nuances and the aforementioned connotations. How do you go about translating these?

Scott Gall: When X-men the movie was released, I taught my Japanese friend the famous SNIKT for the sound of Wolverine's claws. At the time she wasn't an accomplished English speaker, but she managed to remember that word and when we were at a pet store months later she was holding a cat's paw and repeating, "Snikt! Snikt!" I'm like, "No, um, that's not quite right, but nice try!" The point being, to a Japanese person, the sound of one set of cat claws could be the same as the sound for another set of cat claws. The biggest difference between Japanese giongo and English onomatopoeia is that where you and I will argue whether it should be SWAPT or SWAAP or SWIFF, Japanese people more or less agree which spelling of which word best represents a given sound. Japanese comedians get a lot of mileage out of throwing a slightly modified giongo word into a story. Everyone knows that the comedian knows that it's not the usual choice for that sound and so it becomes funny.

To me, translating giongo gets tricky only when it's part of the dialogue. The same character might use it several times, or several characters might use it once each to describe the same item. If it's in dialogue, I do believe it should be translated. Try to pick something that a reader wouldn't get annoyed by after three times. I think you have to accept as a writer that others will have their own way of envisioning a sound in English. All you can do is try to be neutral in spelling it. If you do decide not to translate it, that's fine too, but watch out if it's within dialogue. It probably should be translated. If it's in narration or straight sound effects, the service you do a native English reader by translating every instance is debatable.


Max Nichols: Have you ever found a passage or section of writing that is almost completely untranslatable? If so, what would you do to tackle this problem?

Scott Gall: I would send it back and ask the client, or the requestor, to reassess what kind of translation would be best. That's the voice of experience speaking. I was once lucky enough to get a freelance translation assignment for Japanese children's language public TV programming. They wanted one episode to be subtitled in English so the show could compete for an educational programming award in Europe. I struggled with the translation severely but after two days I'd finished no more than five lines. Feeling totally defeated, I went to see a Japanese friend who was an accredited teacher of Japanese as a foreign language. I said to her, "Take me out back and shoot me, I can't do this." The show featured classical Japanese, giongo, syllable-based songs, children's whiney pronunciation, and it was all to be subtitled. A subtitling nightmare.

My mistake was in trying to translate in a way that explained why certain key words and lyrics were being introduced. Kids who watch that show don't understand the Why of the phrases in the skits, they just learn the What. But I was determined to get the meaning across for the sake of the programming judges and I failed to see that the meaning was not the point. The point was to have fun with words, and it wasn't fair to the content to be boiled down to just an explanation. The client tried to edit my translation and I think then they finally realized what I'd been up against. In the end they decided to let a lot of things go untranslated with just a short explanatory title at the beginning of each skit. Unfortunately, the visuals made little or no sense that way. You needed a slight understanding of the words to appreciate the interplay with the visuals. Looking back, I think the best way would have been to provide playful subtitling and then provide a separate explanatory script translation. That would have been unfair to other children's programming entries in the competition but I don't know how else to do it. I imagined the German competition judge watching this and wondering whether the entire show was thought up by hippies on acid who'd come through a wormhole from Woodstock. Visually, the show was all over the map.

The moral is, the monolingual client isn't always right, and not every kind of text is "ready" for translation. When you are told to "Translate this!" it can pay to sit down and think about how much to translate, and how.


Max Nichols: How much story is lost in translation, would you say? Obviously this would depend on how literally you're translating it, but it must still be something you need to worry about. I certainly know some fans that worry about it, and even go so far as playing Japanese versions that they don't understand to avoid translations they consider poor (I don't get their logic at all, but hey¡­.

Scott Gall: Plot? Very little is lost. It's all there usually. Emotion and reason and motivation? It can vary. What a Japanese person considers ample motivation for an action is not always going to make sense to someone from another culture, and vice-versa. In those cases you have to find a way to make the emotions more believable. You have to jettison the source text. You have to cut the anchor loose or else the ship will just sit there and get hammered by the storm of confusion. Let the boat of words float away and go where it must to find safety. If that's not acceptable to a player, then again I say, with all due respect, that you can buy three language textbooks for the price of one new game.


Max Nichols: Have you ever found a translation that you would consider superior to the original? If so, what was it? Or is that even possible, in your mind? After all, for a translation to be better than an original, it would have to deviate from it a bit, and that may not be acceptable.

Scott Gall: Lots of things can be said more clearly in translation than in the original language. But that doesn't necessarily make for a superior text. I wouldn't want Myst to have a translation that leaves no margin for doubt, wonder or imagination.

In cases where I think a translation feels crisper and more inspiring, I expect to see a very finely crafted source text. Translators recognize inspired writing and can motivate themselves to do a better job when they're working from something that started on a higher level. When I spot those rare cases, naturally I applaud the translator, but I also have come to applaud the loc project manager for being able to get the right translators enough time to create such careful work.


Max Nichols: Living in Japan and working for a Japanese company is something very few of us will ever experience, in all likelihood. Naturally, we're very curious. Do you enjoy it?

Scott Gall: My emotional outlook on working for a Japanese employer is similar to what you hear parents say after many years of raising children. Parents say, "I wouldn't trade the experience for the world. But if I knew it was going to be this hard then I wouldn't have had a second one." That sounds about right.


Max Nichols: How long did it take you to learn the language? Was it a difficult language to learn?

Scott Gall: I am still learning but the answer you are looking for is "four years." I studied for two academic years in the States, one semester in Japan, then busted ass in self-study for a while after moving to Japan. In some areas I have an affinity for the language that others don't. I believe that comes from genuinely liking the sound and, more or less, the structure, and having respect for the people I meet. Reading and writing are a hassle. Speaking is a reasonable challenge. The U.S. military still ranks Japanese as one of the most difficult to train for but I disagree. How can you compare it to all the verb tenses in Spanish, the consonant-heavy pronunciation of Eastern European languages, or the pronunciation of Dutch for that matter, or the gender issues in Italian, or all the different rules for referring to people's names in Russian, or the four-thousand more kanji in play at any given time in any of the Chinese languages. There are languages easier to fail at than Japanese.

Where students of Japanese really suffer is the learning process. The variety of educational materials is weak and many teachers seem tragically incapable of coming up with effective approaches to explain the age-old sticky points of the grammar and usage.


Max Nichols: Do you see yourself as an outsider at your job and in the area you work in, or is it an easy place to adapt to, in a business setting?

Scott Gall: Localization teams are an outsider in software development, unfortunately. You're either making the program or selling it, and everyone else in the process seems to be thought of, at times, as expendable. Within localization I'm not even a native Japanese person. I'm the minority of the minority in my company, and it can feel that way sometimes. But you have to be careful in assessing whether you feel isolated because you're a foreigner or because you're in localization. I used to work at a loc vendor, which means that all we do is localize software 24 hours a day. Literally. There were times when our clients simply used us a punching bag and tried to blame us for all the bugs in their original programs. I felt isolated, powerless and wondered if I would live through it. If you let your respect for yourself slip away or if you let your health slip, things can get dark fast, and then it doesn't matter who's picking on you or why. As for working under most Japanese managers, it's not an environment that a lot of people will thrive in. There's little or no encouragement to tackle problems from new angles. Get used to being your own cheerleader and guru and critic. Your foreign coworkers are critical for staying sane.


Max Nichols: Finally, a question asked by someone who said they're actually interested in a career of this sort: How do you get a job like this? What sort of things did you need to do and learn, what do employers look for

Scott Gall: Foreign language ability, strong writing and speaking skills in one's native language, a positive attitude, an international outlook, extended time living abroad, and a history of consistently accepting and completing cross-cultural challenges. All of that together is 50% and the rest is timing and luck.

Monday, February 21, 2005

Jonathan Carroll Interview


Once again special thanks go to Lotesse for contacting Carroll (author of books such as The Land of Laughs and White Apples, which I've enjoyed greatly over the years) and conducting this short interview. Hopefully, many of you will enjoy reading what Carroll has to say here and maybe will consider reading his books in the future. And now, without further ado, the interview itself:

1. If you don't mind, could you give us a brief biographical sketch to give us a clearer image of the person behind the pen? What led you to choose a career as a writer and what effects, if any, has writing had on your personal life?

I'm not interested in who I am and neither should the reader. Read my books if you want to know who I am. There is no better autobiography. I'm an American who has lived in Vienna for 30 years. I used to be a teacher until I was lucky enough to make enough money from the writing to do that as a day job. I'm married, have a very handsome and talented 25 year old son, a very ugly but charming bullterrier named Jack the Idiot, and a new book due out in English in the Fall. That's enough about me.

2. How do you react to comments from readers and critics alike that tend to place your body of work into categories such as "fantasy" or "magic realism?"

Read the books again because you misunderstood them the first time. People are quick to call stories fantastic when they have talking dogs or flying children in them but that's too easy and dismissive. Do we call Kafka a fantastic writer because he wrote a famous novella about a man who woke up one morning and discovered he had turned into an insect? Do we call Günter Grass, the Nobel Prize winner, a fantasy writer because his most famous book is about a midget who has supernatural powers? Or Haruki Murakami, Paul Auster (who wrote a book about a man who could fly), Gabriel García Márquez? The list goes on and on. There are fantastical elements in my books too, but that is not what they are "about," any more than Kafka's "Metamorphosis" is about a man who turns into a bug.

3. One common theme I've noticed in many of your novels, from The Land of Laughs through White Apples is the talking dog. Is this just an incidental thing, or do you try to work it in like Jerry Seinfeld worked in images of Superman in his sitcom?

You write about what you know. I live with dogs and always have, so they are part of my living geography. All writing is organizing your personal chaos. I like dogs, beautiful smart women, fountain pens, coffee, thoughtful people... etcetera. All of these things occur again and again in my novels because they matter to me, not just dogs who talk... or don't.

4. How do you develop the scenes - do you start with an idea, or do the memorable scenes appear only after you're writing?

I feel that I can start a book when I find a first sentence or title of a piece. The beginning of my next novel, GLASS SOUP, came about because a magazine in the US asked me to write a short story for them. I waited and waited until finally a title rose out of my perpetual fog-- "SIMON'S HOUSE OF LIPSTICK." I had no idea what the story would be about, but I just started writing it. Halfway through, another title came to me-- GLASS SOUP. I had no idea what THAT meant either but I knew this short story I was writing was going to be part of that longer piece. And it was.

5. How soon can we expect a sequel to White Apples and will there be more tales starring Ettrich?

In September TOR in the US will publish the sequel to WHITE APPLES, which is called GLASS SOUP.

6. Reflecting back on White Apples, I can't help but feel as though there was something personal about this tale. What life experiences, if any, went into the writing of this tale?

Thinking about my parents' death, as well as the death of the person the book is dedicated to. Thinking about what might happen to all of us after we die. Creating a vision of an afterlife that is both positive and hopeful. The nicest thing about WHITE APPLES is the amount of mail I have received from people who say reading the book comforted them because they had just lost someone they loved. And twice from people who were dying who said that they only hoped what I said about the afterlife was true. If it did, then they wouldn't be scared.

7. How much do you write per day?

I like to write so I usually write every day but it is not necessarily the book I'm working on. I keep an almost a daily blog at my website www.jonathancarroll.com and sometimes that takes a surprising amount of time to do. Then there are book reviews, introductions to other people's books, stuff like that. And if I'm not in the mood, I don't write at all. Instead I go to a cafe instead or walk the dog. Vienna is a nice town to walk in.

8. If you were to own several monkeys and/or midgets, how many would you own, and what would you name them?

Donner, Blitzen, Rudolf, etcetera. Then I would harness them all to a sled and whip them into the sky, all along pretending I was Santa.

Tuesday, January 25, 2005

Gary Wassner Interview


As some of you might recall, I received three Advance Review Copies of books in a new series called Gemquest, written by Gary Wassner. I've known Gary for almost eight months now, based largely upon a series of discussions he, Scott Bakker, and I had at SFF World (and to a lesser extent, at Dead Cities) regarding ethics and how this is applied to fantasy, not to mention the appeal that this strand of writing has today. He's someone whose opinions I respect greatly and I believe this interview reveals quite a bit about the issues he addresses in his three novels: The Twins, The Awakening, and The Shards, which are due out the first of February and are available on Amazon, among other places.

So without further ado, the questions:

If you don't mind, could you give us a brief biographical sketch to give us a clearer image of the person behind the pen?

If you really want a clearer image of the person behind the pen, then you certainly do not want just some simple biographical facts. I will provide those briefly, but then I will tell you a little bit about ‘me’, if that is okay. I was born in New York where I still live and work. I have three sons and I have been married to the same woman for the past 29 years. I have a BA with a dual major in German and Philosophy, and I have a MA in Philosophy. I was about to complete my Phd in Philosophy as well at Bryn Mawr College in Pennsylvania, when my father was diagnosed with a very rare form of cancer, and I was compelled to leave school and move back to NY to assist him. I was never able to return to school. He died a number of years later, and by then I already had three children of my own.

Now you really want to know about me? Okay then. As a very young child, I knew I was different than the other kids around me. I thought before I acted, I was uncomfortable in groups, and I was extremely sensitive and self conscious. I also grew up during the Cold War when the threat of annihilation was forever present, and that terrified me. I felt unsafe and vulnerable all the time. Unfortunately, the adults in my family were in constant emotional turmoil themselves, and I was therefor left very much to fend for myself. Success for my father was measured by physical triumphs and for my mother by material acquisitions. I was an introverted, contemplative child, qualities which neither of my parents understood or related to, and they in fact mistook my meditative nature for frailty, a quality which my father despised. I had a vivid imagination which served both to terrify me when it drifted into monstrous directions, as well as to allow me to escape into a safer world of my own design when I was able to control it. The books I read and the games I played were as real and vivid to me as anything else. I was content to be alone and to dream and to imagine. At times I recall being jealous of many of the other boys in the neighborhood for their ability to act without thought. They were often cruel, and I was astounded when they seemed to have no consciences. I suffered endlessly from it, but I would also wonder what it might be like to never worry or be concerned with anyone but yourself, and to be carefree and so unmindful as well. I was mystified even then by the carelessness of evil. I was never envious of these kids; envy and jealousy are quite different emotions. I knew I could not be like that, nor did I desire to. I just believed that their lives must be so much more simple and so much more easy than mine was. There is a price to be paid for caring and feeling deeply, and it is exacted in your presentation of yourself to the world. Children often do not understand such propensities in their peers, and the feeling child becomes the odd one out. But despite the pain my perspective caused me, I remember even now hoping that as I grew older I would never forget to be compassionate, though that may sound silly to some. The fact is those differences that I was aware of early in my youth continued to guide my moral sense and therefor my actions throughout my entire life.

What was it, if "it" can be defined, that led you into reading and later writing fantasy?

My answer to your first question is the basis for my answer to your next one. I was an avaricious reader, at a much younger age than most other children. Each night I would read myself at least one story from either Grimm’s or Anderson’s fairy tales, and I would usually read until I fell asleep. I read everything I could get my hands on, and I always adored adventures that involved families with strong emotional bonds who struggled against odds that often seemed insurmountable, friendships that were loyal and true, and acts of unbridled heroism. The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, Swiss Family Robinson, The Last of the Mohicans, and even the Hardy Boys were inspirational for me as well as comforting in many cases. And I loved Marvel comic books as well. They always seemed much more intelligent and mysterious than people assumed them to be. I particularly loved Dr. Strange, a dark hero with enormous magical powers based upon an Oriental ideology. It was an easy and natural step to fantasy from there. I began with the Chronicles of Narnia which totally blew me away. It felt to me as if I had finally found what I was always looking to read. Then I read the Hobbit, and I never looked back. I had no choice but to write Epic Fantasy. I never sat down and asked myself what type of book I wanted to write. I did not outline or plan the first GemQuest book, The Twins. I simply sat down and began to write. The very first chapter has a particularly special meaning for me though, and part of the reason why I decided to reveal those somewhat personal aspects of my childhood earlier in this interview was because I believe that the seeds of my writing were planted very early in my life. As an introspective child and an extremely introspective adult, I have certain compelling needs to understand why people do what they do. I use my books as platforms to work out the issues that interest me or plague me. As an author, I bring my entire past to the table. I cannot separate who I am and how I feel from what I write. I have always thought ‘fantastically’. As I said, the opening chapter of Book I is a scene in which Mira, one of the twins adult protectors, is attempting to save the young boy from a fearsome threat. She creates the illusion of a large boulder around them in order to hide them. When I was young, I was deathly afraid of the dark, and as I stated, my imagination presented me with far too many possibilities of what might be threatening me. I used to pull the covers of my bed up over my head and imagine that I was inside of a rock shelter and that no one could see me. I dealt with my fears, even as a very young boy, in that manner; the power of my imagination empowered me as a child. So when you ask me why I choose to read and write fantasy, my answer is that I do not choose to do it at all. I have always been a child of the fantastic. Writing it is as natural to me as thinking.

Very moving answers you've given to my first two questions. I myself have experienced much of what you mention above, as have many of the readers here at wotmania. Do you believe that it is this sense of Otherness, this desire to take in, digest, and integrate what we see into comprehendible package, that makes Fantasy so appealing to us? Is it "just" escapism, as many claim, that makes fantasy, especially epic fantasy, so appealing, or is there something more to consider?

Also, what response would you make to those who claim that those who enjoy reading or writing fantasy stories are just living in a childish world?


I think that people read fantasy for many different reasons. Some certainly read to escape. Don’t most of us read to escape from the daily routine? That in itself is not a negative comment on fantasy, nor should people construe it as such. When you read a thriller or a mystery, most of the books on the best seller lists, aren’t you reading to enjoy yourself and escape into the story? Fantasy readers simply seem to have more developed imaginations, and they do not find that other worlds, worlds totally different than our own, are daunting to enter.

Honestly though, I am convinced that many read fantasy because it reintroduces us to and revitalizes many of the emotions that we encounter so infrequently in our everyday lives. Heroism, valor, sacrifice and courage are all uplifting and inspiring. The contemplation of ourselves performing under the same circumstances, of reacting to the situations that the characters we are reading face, can be an educational experience. Since I write emotionally as well as rationally, and since I seriously contemplate the temperament and personality of each character as he or she chooses what path to take in the world I have created, each decision is a test of character. I would hope as well that the readers of Epic Fantasy, mine or someone else’s, envision that test even if on a impalpable level, and that they read books of this type because they realize this consciously or subconsciously. Fantasy can be inspirational, and like philosophy, it can be contemplative and speculative, but unlike philosophy, it should always be entertaining.

The discussions we had this summer and fall over at SFF World were often of a philosophical nature. What background do you have in Philosophy and how much of an influence was your training on the characters and world you created?

Yes Larry, we had many interesting philosophical discussions. I mentioned that I have a MA in philosophy. My specialty was 19th century Continental philosophy, from Hegel to Nietzsche. I have to admit that again, as with fantasy, philosophy was as natural to me as anything could be. Now that does not mean that I am comfortable with all the disciplines of philosophy. I hate logic and I was not a fan of most analytical philosophy. I preferred speculative philosophy. When I was in High School, I found an old text at a friend’s house, and I was never the same afterward. It was the Basic Writings of Nietzsche, which included The Birth of Tragedy, Seventy-Five Aphorisms from Five Volumes, Beyond Good and Evil, On the Genealogy of Morals, The Case of Wagner and Ecce Homo. There were few other authors who captured me quite as completely as he did. I spent the next six years studying him and writing about him. He was so literate and so bold. He wrote aphorisms and fables, with poignant meanings. He loved metaphor and he loved language. But I think what I found most incredible about him was that so much of what he said made so much sense to me. He was a thinking person who did not hesitate to challenge custom and question everything. Nothing was sacred, nothing was taken for granted, and I admired his spirit and his perspective so much. He saw behind people’s actions and he understood people’s motives. I had never read anyone who was so sharp and so insightful before, and so acerbic. His tongue was a weapon, and he wielded it so precisely and with such devastating effects. Ethics became my specialty. I was fascinated by the discipline and with Nietzsche as a mentor, I approached Plato, Aristotle, Anselm, Aquinas, Hegel, Kant, Moore and all the others from an unusual point of view. I was combative and confrontational in my writings, and I absolutely loved to pen scathing critiques of commonly accepted value systems and beliefs. I found Nietzsche to be a breath of fresh air, and he provided me with a departure point from which I could study everyone else. When I read him, it was as if he put into words all of the disjointed and incoherent thoughts that I had been thinking most of my life.

Good and evil are so clearly depicted in so many works of Epic Fantasy. People assume that they know what the words mean, or rather that the words refer to real things in the world, that they are fundamentally not relative and that they are basic concepts around which we formulate our lives. Most people believe that actions can be altruistic and that there is a right and a wrong way to behave. Most people believe that we are in control of our own actions and that we are therefor responsible for them. Most people believe in God or some sort of superior force that guides us. But what if none of that were true? What if the lines between good and evil were not so clear? What if there were no real lines at all? How would we begin to make the choices we need to make in order to pursue our goals? What would choice itself even mean?

In many cases, these are ethical questions, or dilemmas if you will, that are often dealt with in a more technical manner in an Ethics seminar or a philosophy course. But they can be dealt with in fantasy as well. Concepts such as heroism and valor, friendship and sacrifice, courage and humility can be examined in a format that is inspiring, moving, exciting and interesting outside of a classroom. My background in philosophy influences everything I write, but I truly believe that it was my penchant for self-examination that predates even that. I became a student of philosophy because it felt so natural to me to study it. I aligned myself with Nietzsche because his style suited mine, and the things he questioned I had always questioned as well. I write fantasy because it gives me the opportunity to combine my interest in and predilection for ethics with a creative, imaginative means of problem solving, wherein I am not restricted by reason and rule. I do not pretend to have the answers, but I never was able to stop asking the questions.

This is certainly one of the strong suits of your books to date, this questioning of what constitutes good and evil. When you started to write the character of Colton, was he meant to represent this questioning of accepted value systems, or did his character's nihilistic bent develop around the story that came to you during the writing?

His rapacious appetite for the souls of my heroes surfaces in the very first chapter. I have always believed that evil people do not consider themselves to be evil. However they justify their actions in their own minds, they do not go to sleep at night and say to themselves that they did some wonderfully devilish deeds that day. Colton is the epitome of that mindset. He has no sense of evil. He suffers from many things that life presents him with, but choosing how to act based upon concepts of right and wrong that most of us abide by, are not among them. He has a goal and that goal takes precedence over all of his individual acts. His nihilism, his inability to see any intrinsic value in life or the living, allows him to be guiltlessly cruel. But again, in his mind, cruelty matters not at all. He does have human moments, small moments of remorse and instants of regret, but they pass quickly. He suffers so from his inability to find meaning in anything, that he cannot stand to live. His issues are clear. What fascinates me is how other characters are drawn to him; how his perspective can be so seductive, and how susceptible people can be to the prospect of relinquishing personal responsibility and moral judgment. When you take that step beyond good and evil, to that place where there is no distinction between pleasure and pain and joy and sorrow, where all value judgments are suspended, then truly anything is possible, however horrendous it may seem. Colton is the voice that lures us all toward total excess and pure selfishness, but not because of the enjoyment therein, but because of the lack of a justifiable alternative, a valid reason to act otherwise.

As an author that is also a moderator at another popular Fantasy/Sci-Fi site, what have you noticed most about what fantasy fans in general have said in regards to what they enjoy reading? Has it had any impact on how you've chosen to write your stories, or do you tend to keep the Author separate from the Moderator? Also, what is your reaction to Robert Salvatore's comment in a prior wotmania interview regarding authors and readers?

I have realized that fantasy readers run the gamut with regard to why they love the genre. But that in itself has taught me so much. Fantasy combines so many different elements and allows for so many different possibilities. In the countless discussions we have both participated in dealing with the appeal of Epic Fantasy, just about every reason imaginable has been posited by someone at one time or another. Some love the action and live for the excitement of the battle scenes. Some love to escape into a mythical, mystical world where anything can happen and they can totally forget about their everyday life. Some adore the ethical implications and view fantasy as a philosophical platform. I could go on and on, but you simply need only to review some of the threads on the various websites in order to read them all. What is most interesting is that the same question surfaces over and over again regarding why this genre is so appealing to so many, and why the fans of Epic Fantasy are so committed and so ardent.

As far as your question is concerned, as a moderator my role is to keep the threads on topic and of course to post my own thoughts whenever they are relevant. I do not look to people’s opinions in order to determine what or how to write. I am in a somewhat unique position as an author. I neither write for a living nor do I publish for a living, unlike Bob Salvatore, since you brought him up. He stated clearly that he also does not write for a living, but he does publish for that reason. The line between the two may be thinner than we might imagine, particularly for an author who does not have the clout that he has with his publishers. Naturally, I want to be read, but fortunately, my reasons are not mercenary. I can stand my ground with my editor and I can write what satisfies me. I will be disappointed if no one buys what I write, and I will be even more disappointed if they do buy it and they do not like it. But the consequences to me will be purely emotional, and that makes me a very lucky person. So I listen to what everyone says at SFFWorld and I avariciously read all the posts that mention my books or my characters. I feel elated when they are positive and I imagine I will cringe when they are negative, though there have not been any scathing comments yet. I have no illusions - those will come, but there just has not yet been enough awareness of my books to generate all that much conversation. When you first posted your review of my series, as I began to read it my heart rate accelerated. Naturally, I wanted to read that you thought it was the best new series to come along in a great while. Knowing a little bit about you and your perspective on things, I did not really expect that you would neglect to be critical, and though I totally respect that, and I can pretend that all that really matters is that you did in fact truly like the books, the fact is I was disappointed. It is so difficult to break out of the pack of authors today. I always wanted a mentor, someone who would adore what I was writing and would help me up that first, most difficult step. I am still waiting for that break out review that will validate my work. This again is an emotional need, and as I climb each step, unfortunately I forget so quickly what it felt like to be on the bottom rung. But it is the devil lurking inside of each author and singer and artist who wipes out the memories of the pleasures all too fast and makes you crave only the next step upward. Gratification is so short lived, and that wicked little voice is always whispering in my head, ‘So what’s next, Gary?’

I understand why some authors might avoid getting into discussions on the internet with readers. It can be such an impersonal platform at times, and people tend to be bolder when they are anonymous. Many people are not considerate and they enjoy the opportunity to strike out at others whom they may envy for one reason or another. Many have their own agenda at the onset, and they simply want to be combative. Regardless, there is so much more to gain from the interaction, I believe, than you might risk. You just need a hard shell around you and an easy going nature. Be prepared for the insults and be prepared for the criticism. That’s easy to say and not easy at all to do, but it is true. What I cannot understand is why some people would bother to spend their valuable time slaughtering another author. The sites and threads that are devoted to nothing but negative thoughts are depressing. Why would anyone want to spend so much time discussing the things that they hate? But apparently, there are many, many vindictive and angry people in this world who truly enjoy the hurtful criticisms of their anonymous posts. I will talk with anyone who wants to talk with me about my books. If they get nasty, I am sure I am adult enough to deal with the comments. That has not yet happened to me, as I stated earlier, but I believe that is simply a function of the visibility of an author. It’s ironic, but unless you are well known enough, you will most likely not be the target of internet-torment or diatribes against you. So I honestly believe that the Ann Rices and the George Martin’s of the world should be thankful that their books have reached into so many minds. It means that they are being read. Everything comes and goes so quickly in this world. I hope that I would be able to keep things in perspective and appreciate the positive side of all of this, though I have no illusions about it. Every time the knife is turned it hurts. Bob Salvatore may say that he really doesn’t care about the “Kirkus reviewers” etc., and on one level, I am sure he is being honest. But on another, it is almost impossible not to react subliminally to negative comments about something you put so much of yourself into creating. As an author in the spotlight, you are always subject to other’s unfavorable judgments. It is just part of life. All you can hope for is that the gratification exceeds the anguish.

I love being a writer. I do not find it to be a lonely job at all. Well, it is not a job for me, so perhaps that’s why. It is just a natural extension of the way I have always lived my life. I write the same way that I think. I do not need to put on my author’s hat. I wear it all the time. Every lyric I hear, every person who walks down the street, every smell and interesting sound, every experience gives me more material for my characters and my books. I cherish the times when I write, and I write everyday just about. I just do not get up in the morning and go to my desk with the sole purpose of spending the day writing. I limit my hours and my times to write, and I therefore crave them and I appreciate every opportunity to enter the world of my characters. Each time I complete a poem or a chapter, when the words have all fallen into place just as I wanted them to and the emotional level is where I hoped it would be, I am elated. So how could I not love this work? Writing for me is filled with hundreds of small triumphs as whatever I am working on builds toward the final chapters. The only real disappoint I experience is when I write the last chapter. I am almost frightened each time by even the prospect of it approaching. I love writing so much that I sense this void, this emptiness beyond the final line and it scares me. My books all build slowly toward their ends, and I put so much energy into the process that it is almost like running a marathon. As the finish line approaches, there is relief, but there is also an inexplicable dread of what will come after it’s over.

Yes, I remember our conversations after my initial review of The Twins and its two sequels. Sometime soon, I'll re-read them, probably with a keener eye toward what you have mentioned in this interview and elsewhere as being key parts of the books. But there is a deeper point you make in your response here. In talking about those who tend to be very vindictive and angry in the comforts of the anonymous web, would you say that this is just a deeper reflection of the turns our mass society has taken, or is something else also at work here? I ask this because I too have noticed the stark black/white praisings or denunciations of authors, often without much explication but instead with lots of vitriol thrown.

You know Larry, it is a dangerous world that we live in. We watch thousands die on our television screens as the bombs drop and we don’t shed a tear. Regardless of who may be right or wrong, we have become immune to the realities of our actions. It is not surprising that people have become more vitriolic when they are safely sitting in front of their computer screens and dealing with only strange names and avatars. They feel like immortals, and their words instantly empower them. There are no consequences and when there are no consequences it is astounding how quickly people’s consciences and senses of equity abandon them as well. Is it at all strange that many might find Colton to be so compelling?

Which authors have had the most influence on your decision to write fantasy?

This is the easiest question you have asked me. There is no doubt that it was Tolkien. Though he was not the first author of fantasy I read as a child, he was most definitely the one who showed me how vast the world can be when you leave behind the contemporary structures that define us and confine us. I was not a fan of horror and although I enjoyed science fiction to an extent, the world of Middle Earth was for me an imaginative paradise. It was both dangerous and beautiful, and it was populated with people who were passionate about their beliefs and compassionate toward each other. The authority figures were well defined and I responded to them. Gandalf and Galadriel were so strong and stable. They afforded me a sense of comfort and safety even in a world rife with turmoil and strife. I remember being confused briefly when I first read the Hobbit. I kept trying to identify the countryside, to try and figure out if every place he spoke of had a parallel location in the real world.. Up until then, I had read many fairy tales and fantasies that either took place in the very same world we all live in, if perhaps during a different age, or that began here and then magically the characters were transported elsewhere. But Tolkien’s world was entirely new, and it seemed to spring fully alive from his imagination. It was so easy for me to imagine, not painstaking or troublesome. The imagery was so clear and the words so well chosen that I could picture Middle Earth and those who populated it with virtually no effort. Sometimes I seriously struggle to picture the environments or the characters in a book, regardless of the world within which it might take place. And then there are some authors whose prose is so rich and whose ability to capture the essence of their characters and settings is just so potent that from the onset, their world has substance and credibility and their characters jump off of the pages. Now that might not necessarily make the book itself a masterpiece of literature. There is certainly more to literary genius than being able to write brilliant descriptive prose that is neither boring nor pedantic. But only a few times in my life have I read an author whose characters and world was indelibly etched upon my memory. I may be bringing affinities to the table that predispose me to identify with or to be able to visualize so completely some of these people and places, but regardless, something just clicked for me with Tolkien.

William Sytron’s Sophie’s Choice, Christopher Isherwood’s Berlin Stories, Hermann Hesse’s Narcissus and Goldmund, Thomas Mann’s Death in Venice, John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath and F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, to name just a few that come to mind immediately, all left indelible marks upon me, visually, intellectually and emotionally, but none of them left their marks quite as imaginatively as Tolkien.

It occurs to me however that although Tolkien had the greatest influence on me with regard to what manner of world type I chose to place my characters in and how creative I could be when it came to what potential they had and what they could accomplish within that world, he never influenced my style of writing itself. I am a passionate listener to music and a lover of poetry. I am constantly awed by the ability of some songwriters to evoke a mood so completely and so succinctly in only a short song. I consider many of them authors, whose characters come to life in merely a few verses of perfect prose and within whose short works, images of whole worlds are evoked. I am so moved by the melancholy that the subtle recognition of our mortality can elicit, and I find that recognition expressed often in the combination of lyrics and notes in the songs I love the most. When Leonard Cohen says, “It’s four in the morning, the end of December. I’m writing you now just to see if you’re better. New York is cold but I like where I’m living. There’s music on Clinton Street all through the evening. I hear that you’re building your little house deep in the desert. You’re living for nothing now. I hope you’re keeping some kind of record. And Jane came by with a lock of your hair. She said that you gave it to her that night that you tried to go clear. Did you ever go clear?” an entire world is born. And when Joni Mitchell sings in Hejira:


“I'm traveling in some vehicle
I'm sitting in some cafe
A defector from the petty wars
That shell shock love away
There's comfort in melancholy
When there's no need to explain
It's just as natural as the weather
In this moody sky today
In our possessive coupling
So much could not be expressed
So now I'm returning to myself
These things that you and I suppressed
I see something of myself in everyone
Just at this moment of the world
As snow gathers like bolts of lace
Waltzing on a ballroom girl

You know it never has been easy
Whether you do or you do not resign
Whether you travel the breadth of extremities
Or stick to some straighter line
Now here's a man and a woman sitting on a rock
They're either going to thaw out or freeze
Listen...
Strains of Benny Goodman
Coming thru' the snow and the pinewood trees
I'm porous with travel fever
But you know I'm so glad to be on my own
Still somehow the slightest touch of a stranger
Can set up trembling in my bones
I know - no one's going to show me everything
We all come and go unknown
Each so deep and superficial
Between the forceps and the stone

Well I looked at the granite markers
Those tribute to finality - to eternity
And then I looked at myself here
Chicken scratching for my immortality
In the church they light the candles
And the wax rolls down like tears
There's the hope and the hopelessness
I've witnessed thirty years
We're only particles of change I know, I know
Orbiting around the sun
But how can I have that point of view
When I'm always bound and tied to someone
White flags of winter chimneys
Waving truce against the moon
In the mirrors of a modern bank
From the window of a hotel room

I'm traveling in some vehicle
I'm sitting in some cafe
A defector from the petty wars
Until love sucks me back that way,”


the imagery and the emotion is so poignant. I try incredibly hard to find the perfect words that evince the moods I desire. I yearn for that one line, that one phrase, that captures the essence of my seemingly inexplicable emotions. I sometimes wish I had the benefit of a musical note to help me better express the temper, tone and pace of what I am saying. But I do think lyrically, and when I read my work over, I always hope that the words embody and express the rhythm that I long for.

While this may have been the easiest question for you to answer, it certainly has been the hardest for me to think of a follow-up question! But I do have one, seeing that the last half of your response goes in this direction: Besides Cohen and Mitchell (two singer/songwriters I enjoy greatly), what other musicians and styles of music do you enjoy listening to, whether just relaxing or while writing?

I listen to so much music that this is a really tough question. I can talk about music and musicians for hours. I run 7 miles a day and I spend a lot of time at the gym in addition. I am never without my ipod. My vision is not very good without my glasses, and when I work out, I can thus neither see nor hear, as I have my earphones plugged into my ears and my glasses in my locker. I retreat into the world of my books and my music. I also stream audio in my offices everyday. I log on to Rhapsody and create a daily play list. You see, I cannot be without music. Aside from the two extraordinary artists I mentioned, some of my favorites are Ani Difranco, Pearl Jam, Sublime, The White Stripes, Nelly, Stone Temple Pilots, Melissa Etheridge, Lucinda Williams, Beth Orton, Rickie Lee Jones, Damien Rice, Ron Sexsmith, Ryan Adams, Tim Hardin, Ellis Paul, Beck, Rufus Wainwright, Sinead O’Connor, Josh Rouse, Todd Rundgren, Patty Griffin, Blind Melon, Nirvana, Pavement, Natalie Merchant, Paul Westerberg, Tori Amos, Pete Yorn, Rancid, Rhett Miller to name just a few. I also love the music of the sixties and seventies, such as Joplin, Hendrix, The Band, Traffic, and The Grateful Dead. I have no taste for pop music written by others for singers to present on MTV. I am not fond of the multimedia sensation. I like music by musicians and I could do without the dancers and special effects. I like tough, hard rock and I love soft, poignant country and folk. If it’s labeled ‘alternative’ I usually go for it. I also much prefer songs with lyrics to instrumentals, so I have never really spent enough time listening to classical music or jazz to understand and fully appreciate either.

What other works have you written in addition to fantasy?

I really just started writing novels in 1999. Up until then, I was raising three sons and running a business, so I spent most of what little, quiet creative time I had writing poetry. I began GemQuest after I purchased my first light weight laptop. I work in New York City and I always read during my commute, which was about forty minutes twice a day. With a laptop, I was able to use that time to write instead, and once I did, I never stopped. I completed the fourth GemQuest novel, The Revenge of the Elves, last April, and I am now deeply into the fifth in the series, When Monsters Call Out The Names Of Men.

After I complete a book in this series, I always take a break for six weeks or so, during which time I usually read as many books as I possibly can. But, after The Shards, I decided to write a very young adventure story. After penning about sixty pages, an editor at Mondo Publishing in New York City, a children’s book publisher, read my manuscript and purchased it. We worked together for the next few months, and my young reader’s adventure turned into the first episode in a YA mystery series of approximately two hundred pages. That will be coming out in September of 2006. Subsequent to that, I wrote two other installments in the same series with the same two main characters. When I completed that, I still had this desire to write books for young readers as opposed to young adult readers, so I wrote three fantasies for that market. When I completed The Revenge of the Elves, I took a little time off from GemQuest and I wrote a contemporary high tech thriller, again for a young reader. Now that I have begun the fifth book, it will probably be another year or so before I can once again write for the children’s market.

This begs the question, which I seem to have forgotten to ask before: What is your normal writing routine, if such a thing exists?

I write every morning for about an hour on my way to the gym. I commute by train, so I have a set time each day that I open my laptop and write. When I am working out I am thinking about the chapter I am in the middle of or the next one. I never think too far ahead. Lines come to me and ideas flash through my mind all the time. Often, I run to the desk and ask for a pen and paper so that I can jot them down for later. When I get to my office, I again open my laptop and copy what I just wrote to my network, and I usually reread the last few paragraphs so that they are fresh in my mind. I repeat this on my commute on the way home, and I am always shocked, each and every day, when I reach my destination so quickly. Those days when the train is delayed with all of us on it and everyone is grumbling and pulling out their cell phones, I am ecstatic as long as I have enough battery power. I rarely write at home, but whenever I travel, whether to Europe or cross country, I so look forward to the uninterrupted hours in which I can write. I bring an extra battery for my laptop and the trip goes by faster than I can even imagine.

I usually write a chapter through, from beginning to end, before I go back and read it. Then I read the entire thing and do the first edit. I don’t like to move on until I am completely satisfied with the chapter that I have just completed, so I very rarely go back later and rewrite in any extensive way. I may add to a chapter to clarify some things or to correct some inconsistencies, but I have never yet scrapped a chapter that I have completed.

How many books are planned for the Gemquest series and when can we expect their publication dates?

As I said, the fourth book is already finished. I am hoping that it will be released sometime in 2006. I plan on completing Book V within the next ten months or so. I write quickly and passionately, and I write a little just about everyday. The beginning chapters always take a bit longer than the subsequent ones. But, once the story starts to come together, it is like a snowball rolling down a mountain; I cannot slow it down.

I honestly have no idea how long the series will ultimately be. I never planned it to be longer than one book when I began it. For me, it is alive and it will end when it ends. But what is interesting is that since I began the first book, I have always known what the very last chapter will be.

Speaking of the series, what led you and your publisher to decide to publish three books concurrently?

When I signed my contracts with Windstorm Creative, they originally wanted me to sign for five books. I had already completed three and I was in the middle of the fourth at that time. I do not write or publish for a living, as I mentioned previously. So, the prospect of creating deadlines for myself was not at all appealing. Though I was flattered that they believed in me and that they wanted five books, I was hesitant to commit to that. To answer your question more directly though, they feel that shelf presence is important with fantasy writers, and in that respect, I completely agree. One thing that I have learned by being a moderator for a very popular fantasy website is that readers like series, and they like long series. But, they also do not like to wait for the next book to be released. With three books side by side on the shelves, the series has more credibility and it makes more of a statement. It is so easy for books to get lost today in the scramble for shelf space and promotion. For me, it was a wonderful opportunity to present my world and my characters. Though the series has one overarching theme, each book stands alone in many ways. Yet together, the three paint a much more complete picture of what I am hoping to achieve.

Yes, that they do. As I said (or at least I hoped I did!), the sequels to The Twins not only built upon its foundation, but each seemed to have its own voice. So would it be fair to say that not only are these books parts of a series, but each is complete within themselves in terms of tone and action?

Yes, that is more than fair to say. I view each book as a stand alone story, though the saga itself may not be complete. The basic elements that make a story flow, are present in each book. There is a clear beginning, the ever present, overarching conflict, but many smaller conflicts as well which propel the characters forward. These smaller conflicts are resolved for the most part in each book, and they serve to bring the larger issues nearer to the surface. So, each story has a defined ending within the broader scope of the Quest. In a way, it is a dialectical process, though there is a clear denouement that will result in the very end, and I think anyone who reads the books will understand that, though they may not, of course, have any sense what that resolution will ultimately be.

Recently, Fantasy as a category has become more riven, with groups such as the New Weird forming that have criticized the dominating role Tolkien's Middle-Earth has come to take in the minds of readers when they hear the word "fantasy." What was your reaction to these criticisms?

Honestly? I pay no attention to them at all. I find it odd that anyone would criticize the creative choices that any other artist makes. It is such a waste of energy, and I would rather devote my time and effort to writing the best story that I can possibly write. There is certainly room now, and historically there always has been, for all types of writing. Publishers need fodder for the public beast to consume. Critics need something to criticize and something new to rave about. Many people have their own agendas, and frankly, I stay out of it all. I am content to write and to discuss what I write whenever the need arises. But other than having my personal opinion regarding the quality of any particular author, I am not a person who is fond of categorizing and pigeonholing. Tolkien had a tremendous influence on many authors. But so did Agatha Christie and Jacqueline Suzanne for that matter. Each of those authors helped to define their respective genres. That does not mean that those genres cannot evolve, even if the precedents that they set have helped to formulate the public perception of the genre. In all forms of art, influences are felt and have their effects. This has been the case since the beginning of time. And in the process, new and unique levels of creativity are attained. I write what I believe I can write the best and what suits my temperament and my affinities. How could anyone really do otherwise and still write with an honest and natural voice?

What other authors do you enjoy reading, both those writing today and those of the past?

I have been writing for the past six years now without taking any particularly long breaks between books. So, I have read fewer books recently than ever before in my life. I mentioned some of my favorite authors earlier in one of your other questions. To be honest, I enjoy almost anything that is well written. I like historical fiction from authors like Leon Uris, James Clavell and James Michner. I enjoy a good thriller such as Harris’ The Silence of the Lambs. I love the classics from Dickens and Dumas to Hardy and Stevenson. I loved Feist, Kurtz and Jordan years back, but I honestly read very little fantasy these days. In fact, I really read very little in general these days. I am though an unusually eclectic reader when I do pick up a book. If something seems terribly compelling, I will go to Barnes and Noble and pick it up, and I will find the time to read it. Recently I read Miéville’s Perdido Street Station and I will very shortly be reading Scott Bakker’s The Darkness That Comes Before.

And finally, we have this one really silly question we ask authors, just to gauge their sense of humor:

If you were to own several monkeys and/or midgets, how many would you own, and what would you name them?


By the way you phrase the question, you make it impossible for me to answer the way I am inclined to. Since I don’t really have a very good sense of humor, I will have to answer it more seriously than some others might. If I were to own anything living and intelligent, at least intelligent in a quasi-human manner, then it would most certainly be some monkeys. The thought of owning a person is quite repellant to me, even in jest. Two would most definitely be the number since I am not a lover of crowds. They could entertain each other, and all that I would have to do is mediate, although mediating a pair of monkeys might be an experience I have not really thought through to the end. As far as the names go, that’s much more difficult to answer. It took my wife and myself almost the duration of each of her pregnancies to name our three sons. But, as I think about it, and I mean this seriously and not sarcastically at all, I would name one after my grandfather who passed away many years ago. His name was Albert, and my reason for this choice is that as he aged, and as all people reach a certain age, his ears grew while the rest of his features began to whither somewhat. It is a fact of nature that cartilage does not shrink even as the body loses its tone and body fat. Since ears are made from cartilage, they tend to appear much bigger as you get older. He always resembled the comedian George Burns, and George Burns always looked very monkey-like to me. Naturally then, I would name the other one George.

Thursday, December 30, 2004

One Admin's Choices for the 2005 Awards

Jake and I decided months ago when we were planning for the 2005 OF Awards that we would do two broad categories, one for the readers and one for the two OF mods that have run the OF Book Club during 2004. We thought it would be better to utilize the OF Blog for this, so our comments do not detract from the votes of the readers, which will be revealed on January 3rd. So without further ado, here are my Top 3 for most of the categories involved in the reader's part of the 2005 OF Awards. Jake hopefully will add his later.

Best Book Released in 2004:

This was a particular tough category for me, having read dozens of wonderful books released in the United States or aboard this year. But after spending a lot of time debating my picks and their order, this final order emerged. And as you'll notice, there is a tie in the third position, because I just couldn't decide which of the two I preferred most.

1. R. Scott Bakker, The Warrior-Prophet. Oftentimes, the middle book in a trilogy tends to have little life independent of what comes before (pun intended) and the concluding volume. However, I found during my reading of this book that it had a life of its own. Chronicling the happenings of a march into Holy War in the land of Earwa, The Warrior-Prophet came alive for me due to Bakker's skillful blending of action and introspection. One gets the sense that they are reading not just an exciting chronicle of a past event, but also a vivid account of the players involved. If Bakker's upcoming book, The Thousandfold Thought (due out in October 2005 in Canada), can maintain the energy and pathos present in this book, then he will have written one of the finest epic fantasy stories in recent years.

2. Gene Wolfe, Innocents Aboard. Gene Wolfe is one of my favorite authors, regardless of genre classification. The year 2004 saw the release of two books of his, one a collection of stories, the other the second half of a high fantasy. While loving both, I chose the collection because it highlights Wolfe's range as a writer much more than did The Wizard. Of particular note is the opening story, "The Tree is My Hat," which is a story that wears many hats of its own, including an introspective reflection on the struggles of life. It illustrates well Wolfe's sometimes frustrating talent for writing multilayered, multifaceted tales that provoke and taunt us with the hint of something lurking ever further under the surface of the story.

3. Steven Erikson, Midnight Tides. Book five of the acclaimed Malazan Book of the Fallen series very well may be the book that reveals to the casual readers Erikson's abilities as a writer. Containing both comic and tragic, serious sides in near-equal measures, Midnight Tides is in turns a flashback to events before those of the first book, Gardens of the Moon, and a look forward toward plot developments that should come to fruition starting with the next book, The Bonehunters, due to be released in the UK and Canada in July 2005.

3. (tie) Carlos Fuentes, Inquieta Compañía. This new collection of stories by famed Mexican author Carlos Fuentes have such a style of presence to them. From vampires to ghosts to angels, Fuentes's stories are populated by creatures common to Western imaginative myth. Yet it is how Fuentes orders these elements, how he can bend them to fit a flowing style that is beautiful to read as well as thought-provoking for hours after the stories are first read.



Best Books Read in 2004 but Released in Prior Years:

Again, this was a difficult category for me to order the books I've enjoyed most. In fact, I've changed my mind yet once again as I'm writing this very sentence. So for the most current Top 3, read below:

1. Angélica Gorodischer, Kalpa Imperial. Some of the best speculative fiction is not being written in English-speaking countries, but instead in places such as Argentina, where that nation's rich cultural past has often clashed with the intermittent authoritarian regimes (Peron, the military junta of the mid-1970s). These shock waves seem to have spurred some excellent fiction, from Jorge Luis Borges and Adolfo Bioy Casares to Angélica Gorodischer.

In Kalpa Imperial (translated into English by none other than Ursula Le Guin herself), Gorodischer creates a fictitious empire and history. Throughout this beautifully written tale are subtle commentaries on how governments and citizens should interact, how people should govern their own lives. It is as if she wanted to turn a mirror (to steal a memorable description from Stendahl's The Red and the Black) on Argentine society (and by association, Western society) to reveal the beauties and warts of such a society. Whatever her intentions, Kalpa Imperial is a classic in the field, one that should be read by readers of all ages and nationalities.

1. (tie) Jorge Luis Borges, El Aleph. Borges not only is one of my favorite authors, he also has been very influential with other writers that I've enjoyed, such as Gene Wolfe and Jeff VanderMeer, just to name two. Although his earlier collection, Ficciónes, receives the lion's share of attention from literary critics, I decided to stick with books I read for the first time in 2004 here. As such, choosing El Aleph is not a bad second choice. In fact, in many of its stories, in particular "The Immortals," are the equal of, if not superior to, those from Ficciónes. This collection is full of thought-provoking, reflective stories whose very simplicity belies a deep and shrewd understanding of the world around.

3. Matt Stover, Blade of Tyshalle. Stover has written some of the bloodiest, most profane fantasy/SF-hybrid books I've ever read. But entwined with this is a story that is in turns simple in its clarity and execution and complex in its characterization. This second Caine/Overland novel improves upon its predecessor's shades of gray approach toward the main character, Hari/Caine. In this tale, even the good guys are bad and the bad guys are good, if such terms can even be applicable. As the story progressed, Stover had me questioning just why I was rooting for one side and not the other. That is a hallmark of a story well worth reading, again and again.



Worst Book Released in 2004:

In choosing these books, I must add a caveat here. The books chosen are not necessarily horribly-written works (although some were), but that in relation to the other books I read in 2004, these were the ones that appealed to me the least. With that in mind, here are my choices for the worst books published in 2004.

1. David Gemmell, Ironhand's Daughter. This book, which just had its US release earlier this month, just was not a book I could enjoy. Clichéd situations, cardboard characterizations, same-old tired plot developments - all this just combined to create a book that annoyed me to no end. Easy choice here.

2. China Miéville, Iron Council. Some might wonder how I, a fan of Miéville's other works, could include his latest offering here. It's not that I found this book to be the worst pile of literary shit ever written. But sometimes, when a reader expects to see continued authorial development and the overall structure of the novel seems to be Miéville's weakest of any of his Bas-Lag novels, there is no choice but to include the book here, if only for biggest disappointment. Sadly, there was so much promise in Iron Council, but the scenes just didn't connect well, which has been the downfall of many a gifted author over the years.

3. F. Brett Cox & Andy Duncan (ed.), Crossroads: Tales of the Southern Literary Fantastic. Again, this book is listed not because it was horribly written/told per se, but more because the supposed overall theme, that of a connection between the traditions and values of the South with those of the fantastic just failed to materialize in a cohesive fashion. So while many of the individual stories were great, the book as a whole just failed to deliver on its promise of uniquely Southern spins on the literary fantastic.



Worst Book Read in 2004 but Released in Prior Years:

As I stated above, I really did not read much in terms of speculative fiction that was outright bad, so many of my choices here will be based upon how my expectations were not met rather than upon the overall crappiness of the books listed below.

1. Kim Stanley Robinson, Blue Mars. Yuck. What a way to ruin a great start to a trilogy. Very off-focus, with uninteresting characters, and with developments that detract from what had transpired before rather than building upon and enhancing them. Easy choice for my worst read of 2004.

2. Guy Gavriel Kay, Sailing to Sarantium. As I said months ago when I read this book, I just found this book to be too transparent for my tastes. Too much like Justinian's reign as Eastern Roman Emperor and not enough departure from this theme. Just could not enjoy this story.

3. Kay, Lord of Emperors. Seeing that this sequel to Sailing to Sarantium did not improve upon the weak points of that earlier novel, I decided that I would just include it here in the third spot.




Best SF/F/H Movie of 2004:


I didn't watch any spec fic movies in 2004 (I tend to avoid watching movies and television as a general rule of thumb), so no nominees here.



Best New Author of 2004:

These are the authors who have published their first books within the past three years that I read for the first time in 2004.

1. R. Scott Bakker. I found Bakker's writing style to be very good and he showed improvement in his second book, The Warrior-Prophet. His intertwining of philosophical issues within a world riven to the point of a Holy War was done very well and made for a compelling read. Certainly one of my favorite authors now.

2. Susanna Clarke. Sometimes, despite the hype, a book and its author can produce an enjoyable work. This was certainly the case with Susanna Clarke's first novel, the well-publicized Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell. Combining elements from Jane Austen, Charles Dickens, and Anthony Trollope with modern sensibilities, this huge novel made for a very pleasant read.

3. Karin Lowachee. This young Canadian author has written in her first two novels, Warchild and Burndive, stories that will remind readers favorably of Orson Scott Card's Ender's Game for its subject material, although Lowachee adds much in the way of child psychological issues.



Most Underrated Book of 2004:

These are the books that I felt should have received more attention than what they did. High quality stuff from the smaller presses.

1. Sean Stewart, Perfect Circle. This offering by Small Beer Press deals with a man who sees dead people. He talks with them, yet is perfectly normal, or at least as normal as the situation can permit. It is a tale of a father wanting to spend time with his daughter after his divorce. It is a search for meaning and purpose in a life and town seemingly devoid of both. It is one of the best crossgenre books I've read in quite some time. A real shame that this book hasn't received the press that it so richly deserves.

2. Zoran Zivkovic, The Fourth Circle. This is the first English-language edition of Serbian author Zivkovic's works. It is also the finer of the two that I've read. In turns surrealistic, imaginative, and evocative of both Borges and Calvino, this "mystery" story is certainly worth greater readership. Available from Ministry of Whimsy Press, an imprint of Night Shade Books.

3. Jeff VanderMeer, Secret Life. VanderMeer's first collection of stories, some set in the Ambergris world of City of Saints and Madmen, others set in the Veniss Underground world, plumbs the depths of VanderMeer's imagination. This collection will serve as an excellent introduction to his style and to the imaginative worlds he's created. Secret Life is published by Golden Gryphon.


Most Fan Friendly Author:

Before partisans of other authors protest, this is based on what I've seen these authors do. I realize that there are a great many authors that interact daily with their fans and provide all sorts of useful bits of information gratis, but in the end, here are the three that I chose.

1. R. Scott Bakker. He's one of two authors that I met this year and his willingness to work with OF in providing me a review copy of The Warrior-Prophet, conducting an interview and later Q&A session, not to mention his personalized book contest held at OF, these all just underscored his desire to go the extra mile to get to know the people here.

2. Robert Salvatore. Amazing how a simple misunderstanding can turn a negative into a positive. Back in June, there was a comment in passing on another site about the Author Quickpoll Series that we had held, which I felt was unfair. This led to an open post and a response from Salvatore. From there, I gained a greater respect for the author as a person. His interview (conducted by Mike) was one of the lengthiest and most honest responses an author has given us. It is for these reasons and his overall interaction with his fans that Salvatore is included here.

3. Steven Erikson. He's done the Q&A/Interview bit with us in the past, he updates his fans regularly on the Malazan board, and he continues to write interesting books at a rapid clip. What else can one want from an author?

(tie) Neil Gaiman. Just reading his Blog is enough to put him on this list. Very devoted fanbase and his overall geniality helps matters greatly. Just seems like a guy one would want to have a drink with, whenever.



Best SFF Website (non-wotmania):

Not going to provide explanations for these choices, other than to say that I've enjoyed my time as a poster at these sites. Highly recommend others visit these sites and judge for yourselves.

1. Gaiman Board/World's End
2. Three Seas
3. SFF World
(tie) Dead Cities



Best New Series (established author):


I didn't read too many new series this year, but here are my two favorites:

1. Gene Wolfe, The Wizard-Knight. This duology, just completed, contains some of the most beautiful prose of any fantasy work released in the past two decades. Plus it contains some of Wolfe's characteristic authorial sleights-of-hand. A highly recommended book for lovers of high fantasy.

2. Dan Simmons, Ilium/Olympos. Ilium is the first of a projected duology that will end with Olympos in the summer of 2005. A tale based on interpretations of Homer's Iliad, Shakespeare's The Tempest, and Proust's writings, this duology has the potential to be even better than Simmons's Hyperion Cantos.



Best New Series (new author):


Because the series listed below are by the same authors included in Best New Author category, I'm just going to list them here, noting however that I switched the order of two based on the number of works presently available.

1. R. Scott Bakker, The Prince of Nothing
2. Karin Lowachee (series of novels starting with Warchild)
3. Susanna Clarke, (trilogy begun with Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell)



Most Improved Author:

These are the authors that I wasn't impressed with as much at the beginning, yet by the second book of theirs that I read, I enjoyed them much more. Not limited to books read in 2004.

1. Steven Erikson
2. Neal Stephenson
3. Stephen Donaldson




Best Genre Magazine:


These are the magazines that I enjoyed reading the most.

1. Postscripts (UK)
2. Locus
3. The Third Alternative (UK)




Best Genre Publisher:

These are the publishers that I believe put out the highest percentage of high-quality speculative fiction today:

1. Small Beer Press
2. Night Shade
3. Prime



Most Anticipated Release of 2005:

These are the books I want to buy the most. Once they are available on an Amazon service, to the Pre-order page they go!

1. Bakker, The Thousandfold Thought
2. Erikson, The Bonehunters
3. Umberto Eco, The Mysterious Flame of Queen Loana




Favorite Character:

Although I probably could devote a page or more each toward explaining why each of these three are in my Top 3 list, for brevity's sake, I'm just going to limit myself to just listing them in preferential order.

1. Cnaiür
2. Itkovian
(tie) Aldarion


I guess I should note here that I thought it would be best that I didn't try to chose among the community-oriented aspects of this awards group. Too many deserving people to choose a top three, much less a top person. Thanks again to all who've participated in this year's awards nominations and voting. Hopefully, the results, when posted at OF on January 3rd, will be interesting and maybe even pleasantly surprising to all.

Have a Happy New Year!

Tuesday, December 14, 2004

Zoran Živković Interview


Thanks again to her for doing this for me. Zoran Zivkovic is a Serbian author of books such as The Fourth Circle and the Book/the Writer that have recently been translated into English. I consider him to be one of the better writers out there today and hopefully this interview Lotesse conducted will help convince others here to read his works.

Q. Who would you say are some of the writers that influenced you the most? After reading the Book/the Writer, I couldn't help but think of Jorge Luis Borges and his Library, so I'm just curious.

A. I would say that Luis Borges' influence is more evident in another book of mine—The Library. Many authors contributed, one way or another, in forming me as a writer. Sometimes it's rather hard, even for myself, to identify various influences, although there are many intertextual references in my fiction. I believe my entire reading experience is contained in it. Everything I have ever read, although may seem partly forgotten on the conscious level, is always very vivid and active in my subconscious—and that's where all my fiction comes from. So, I am not going to pick out specific authors and say that they influenced me the most. All of them were equally important and I am equally grateful to all of them.

Q. I read where you used to be an academic that focused on science fiction. What would you say are some of the differences between being one who reviews what others have written and writing fiction yourself, in terms of focus and preparation?

A. Although reviewing is also a responsible and creative job (or it should be, ideally), it's less demanding and ambitious than the actual literary creation. It is one thing to interpret a world and another to create it...

Q. Why speculative fiction? What made you choose to focus on that rather than some other literary field?

A. Why do you think I am a speculative fiction writer? Besides, what is "speculative fiction," after all? No, I consider myself a writer without any prefixes, because they can be either limiting or misleading. I like to define myself as "a humble practitioner of the ancient and noble art of prose writing." Nothing more, nothing less.

Q. Your books have begun recently appearing in English translation. What are some of the differences you've noticed between American publishers and editors compared to ones in Serbia?

A. There are practically no differences. Since you have read my novel The Book, you had a chance to see how difficult their lives could be...

Q. Any chance of you revisiting the characters that appear in The Fourth Circle?

A. You mean to write a sequel? Something like The Daughter of the Fourth Circle? Or, maybe, The Fifth Circle? That isn't going to happen, most definitely. The covers of my novel are firmly closed, not to be opened again. Besides, what else could I say? That story is fully told.

Q. You've done some work with Fantastic Metropolis, among others. How important do you believe online magazines such as FM and other fansites will become on the speculative fiction publishing industry?

A. Independent fansites are tremendously important in reintroducing democracy in a world dominated by the publishing industry. They are here to show that there are other values in fantasy writing beside being just another way of making profit.

Q. How do you approach writing a story? Do you have a particular ending in mind, or do you begin with an idea and just write from there? Or is it a combination?

A. I suggest you read my afterword to the limited US edition of The Fourth Circle (Night Shade Books, 2004). I have extensively explained there how I write.

Q. The Fourth Circle and the Book/the Writer are already available in the United States. When can we expect more English translations of your stories?

A. My first book to appear in English translation was Time Gifts (2000). In 2005 two more books of mine will appear in English: Hidden Camera (Dalkey Archive Press) and Impossible Stories—a "mega" collection comprising my five story-suits: Time Gifts, Impossible Encounters, Seven Touches of Music, The Library and Steps through the Mist: a total of 29 stories. The new UK magazine "Postscripts" just brought out, in issue #2, my recent novelette Compartments, while my latest book, Four Stories till the End, will be serialized also in "Postscripts" (#4–#7). So, by the end of 2005 all my fiction will be available in English.

Q. What trends have you noticed developing in speculative fiction recently, both in Europe and the Americas?

A. There are currently many excellent young and relatively young authors who are forming the prevailing trend in the world speculative fiction (however you define it). Let me name just a few of them: Jeff VanderMeer, Jeffrey Ford, K.J. Bishop, Paul di Filippo, China Miéville. They are the future classics of the art of fantasy writing.

Q. What do you feel is the most powerful scene you have written? Why?

A. I have no right to answer that question. As an author, I have to be totally impartial.

Q. How would you entice people who haven't read you to do so?

A. I never entice people to read my fiction. That wouldn't be fair. I rather let them discover my humble self by chance.

Q. Did the work of translating fantasy/SF authors to Serbian language influence your writing?

A. Yes. My many years invested into translating eventually paid off as a time of learning from masters how to write.

Q. Are you somehow related to Dobroslav Bob Zivkovic?

A. No.

Q. Over the years, you were editing the SF section of 'Politikin Zabavnik'. Combined with the illustrations of Bob Zivkovic, those stories were responsible in developing my love towards fantasy. What did that work mean to you?

A. If the small seeds I planted through "Politikin Zabavnik" eventually bore some fruits, then I am the happiest man in the world.

Q. When can we expect your next book?

A. I just completed Four Stories till the End. I most definitely need some break. Remember, I am already 56...

Thursday, December 02, 2004

Time for the 2005 OF Awards process to begin

It's been too long since I last updated this, so apologies in advance to those who've been wondering if I had fallen off the face of the earth. Working 50-60+ hours a week at my job combined with an impending return to college on a part-time basis has left me with little free time to read speculative fiction, much less review and discuss it.

But now that the holiday season is here, it is time again to begin the process of selecting finalists for the 2005 OF Awards. Started in 2002 as a means of allowing the regulars and visitors to Other Fantasy to weigh in with the books, authors, movies, and characters that they have enjoyed most, the OF Awards expanded even more in 2003, this time including the Admins' Choices for the Best of 2002-2003. In January 2004, we decided to narrow the focus somewhat, as well as to move the Awards forward to the beginning of the year, so we could reflect as much on the year that was as much as anything else. We also added a Community section for the first time, because it's the activities and connections that members of our website (and this is undoubtedly true for other sites as well, at least for the ones where I've visited/posted at over the past two years) that have played the most important role in the dissemination of some really good speculative fiction over the past few years.

It is with that spirit of fellowship that we once again begin the process for selecting the Best of 2004. Now "best" in this situation refers to not just the books that the OF community enjoyed the most, but also to the moments of the past year that have been special. It is an unfortunate thing that the major awards today really don't have awards for those "little things" that authors have done for their fans, at least on a year-to-year basis (Lifetime Achievement being barely adequate to cover what these authors mean to their fans). Hopefully this site's nomination process at least will provide food for thought for those readers outside the immediate OF community to consider just what merits commendation (and the occasional condemnation) for what has transpired this past year in speculative fiction.
 
Add to Technorati Favorites