Knowing my role

Do you smell what the rock is cooking?
The Rock says, The Rock says, The Rock says, The Rock says
The Rock says, The Rock says know you damn role
Know your role
The Rock says
The Rock says
The Rock says
The Rock says
The Rock says know your damn role
The Rock says, The Rock says, The Rock says, The Rock says
The Rock says, The Rock Say know you damn role
Know your role
The Rock says
The Rock says
The Rock says
The Rock says
The Rock says
The Rock says know your damn role

I've been very busy the past four days getting acclimated to my new high school, meeting my new colleagues, and having a blast teasing my fellow social studies teachers (no English this year, only one preparation for the first time since the 2000-2001 school year! I'm beyond ecstatic about that). However, I've been mostly unable to find the time/energy to keep up with the constant teacup tempest brewings, so I guess the one interesting bit I read this afternoon might serve as a nice dovetail back into my personal/professional life.

Gabe Chouinard has a reaction to the reactions to last week's discussion regarding finding ways of paying bloggers. To be blunt, he's quite frustrated with the reaction that many had to his proposals of finding a way to generate revenue from getting publishers and others in the industry to buy ads on various SF/F blogs. Descriptors such as "placid" and "resistent to change" are peppered throughout his post, used to argue that those who are opposed to his ideas are being reluctant to engage the possibility of working with publishers to create content in exchange for money.

While it sounds nice, I naturally noticed a few flaws in this approach. First off, what sort of "advertising" are we talking about? If it's money, wouldn't advertisers like to see some bang for their buck? This blog probably is in upper tier of non-author/publishing firm SF/F blogs in regards to hits and between direct and feed views, I only average slightly more than 1,000 page views a day. While there are a few sites that I know of that get 2x or 3x that traffic, most "independent" SF/F blogs that have reliable tracking numbers (this is excluding Livejournal, unfortunately) that I know of receive less than half of mine.

One thousand daily page views might sound like a good number for many, but compared to the Boing-Boings or other such sites, it is miniscule. Add to that the fact that I likely share about 1/3 to 1/2 of my audience with similar blogs and it really doesn't make much sense to pay more than a pittance for advertising, even if I were so inclined.

In a time in which major newspapers such as the New York Times is losing quite a bit of its ad revenue due to the slumping economy, it seems rather odd to think that online spec fic advertising on sites that get maybe 50-500 page views a day would 1) be approved by advertising firms, and in the unlikely case of it happening, 2) would pay more than maybe $10-50/month.

I'm quite realistic where I stand in the hierarchy - just big enough for certain "higher ups" to have noticed me, but far from the gravy train of publicity/advertising revenue. I would imagine that I'd have to at least multiply my daily average by 10-20x to have any realistic expectations of getting advertising dollars. Besides, when I'm making over $40,000 a year as a teacher, I'm in no hurry to quit my day job to do what would amount to lower-paying freelance work on a more than full-time basis. I know my role, and that is to be a teacher first, a blogger somewhat further down the line.

That being said, tomorrow is my first day with the students. I expect to have some fun.

2008 World Fantasy Award finalists

As taken from Locus Online:

LIFE ACHIEVEMENT

Leo & Diane Dillon

Patricia McKillip

NOVEL

Fangland, John Marks (Penguin)

The Gospel of the Knife, Will Shetterly (Tor)

The Servants, Michael Marshall Smith (Earthling Publications)

Territory, Emma Bull (Tor)

Ysabel, Guy Gavriel Kay (Viking Canada; Roc)

NOVELLA

"Cold Snap", Kim Newman (The Secret Files of the Diogenes Club)

Illyria, Elizabeth Hand (PS Publishing)

"The Master Miller's Tale", Ian R. MacLeod (F&SF May 2007)

The Mermaids, Robert Edric (PS Publishing)

"Stars Seen through Stone", Lucius Shepard (F&SF Jul 2007)

SHORT STORY

"The Cambist and Lord Iron: A Fairy Tale of Economics", Daniel Abraham (Logorrhea)

"The Church on the Island", Simon Kurt Unsworth (At Ease with the Dead, Ash-Tree Press)

"Damned If You Don't", Robert Shearman (Tiny Deaths)

"The Evolution of Trickster Stories Among the Dogs of North Park After the Change", Kij Johnson (The Coyote Road)

"Singing of Mount Abora", Theodora Goss (Logorrhea)

ANTHOLOGY

The Coyote Road, Ellen Datlow & Terri Windling, eds. (Viking)

Five Strokes to Midnight, Gary A. Braunbeck & Hank Schwaeble, eds. (Haunted Pelican Press)

Inferno, Ellen Datlow, ed. (Tor)

Logorrhea, John Klima, ed. (Bantam Spectra)

Wizards, Jack Dann & Gardner Dozois, eds. (Berkley)

COLLECTION

Dagger Key and Other Stories, Lucius Shepard (PS Publishing)

Hart & Boot & Other Stories, Tim Pratt (Night Shade Books)

Plots and Misadventures, Stephen Gallagher (Subterranean Press)

Portable Childhoods, Ellen Klages (Tachyon Publications)

The Secret Files of the Diogenes Club, Kim Newman (MonkeyBrain Books)

Tiny Deaths, Robert Shearman (Comma Press)

ARTIST

Ruan Jia

Mikko Kinnunen

Stephan Martiniere

Edward Miller

John Picacio

SPECIAL AWARD, PROFESSIONAL

Allison Baker & Chris Roberson (for MonkeyBrain Books)

Alan Beatts & Jude Feldman (for Borderlands Books)

Peter Crowther (for PS Publishing)

Jeremy Lassen & Jason Williams (for Night Shade Books)

Shawna McCarthy (for Realms of Fantasy)

Gordon Van Gelder (for F&SF)

SPECIAL AWARD, NON-PROFESSIONAL

G. S. Evans & Alice Whittenburg (for Cafe Irreal, http://home.sprynet.com/~awhit/)

John Klima (for Electric Velocipede)

Rosalie Parker & Raymond Russell (for Tartarus Press)

Midori Snyder & Terri Windling (for Endicott Studios Website)

Stephen Jones (for Travellers in Darkness: The Souvenir Book of the World Horror Convention 2007)

Quick thoughts (still exhausted from beginning the school year - having the most fun during the in-service sessions that I've ever had, in case you're curious - so this will be brief, as I have one other post to make tonight before I crash): Interesting to see Emma Bull and her husband, Will Shetterly, each garner nominations for Best Novel. Don't know if this has ever happened before in a single year. Only have read Territory out of that group (have heard of the others, though) and I thought it was well-deserving of a nomination. Also read the Logorrhea and Wizards anthologies and Tim Pratt's Hart & Boot collection; thought the Pratt was strong, a bit more ambivalent about some of the stories in the two anthologies. More thoughts later, once I read the other finalists.

Gene Wolfe on some contemporary styles

From the recent Clarkesworld Magazine review:

Style and voice seem crucial to a short story but are easily turned into abstractions.

Style has become a bucket of worms, thanks to the deteriorating standards of the public schools. The chief style I see in student stories is American Illiterate. It shows up in published stories sometimes too. "Should an enemy warrior cross that line, kill them!" Well, that's okay if the order-giver is an illiterate. Unfortunately, the illiterate is just about always the author. Other than that, the style should suit the story. Imagine The Wings of the Dove as told by Huck Finn. It would be funny for ten pages, but...

If you're asking about the author's voice, or the narrator's, it's so closely linked to style that I see no point in discussing it separately. If you mean the voice in which each character speaks, each must be different. The butler mustn't sound like the footman, even though neither is an important character. This is one of those truths that students reject out of hand. They reject it because everybody sounds alike.

To them.

Come and think of this, this could also be tied in to the continuing discussion on reviewers' styles, not that I would ever do that, right?

Considering that I just finished my second day of in-service training today, funny how Wolfe's statements dovetail nicely with what high school English teachers have said for years about student writing and comprehension of literature. But I suppose some might disagree with this assessment and with Wolfe's comments. Perhaps someone reading this has something to say?

Fernando Pessoa on scenery

Amiel says that scenery is a mood, but his statement is merely the weak boutade of a weak dreamer. As soon as scenery is scenery it stops being a mood. To objectify is to create, and no one says that a finished poem is the state of thinking about finishing it. Seeing may well be dreaming, but if we all it seeing instead of dreaming, i's because we make a distinction between dreaming and seeing.

In any case, of what use are these speculations on verbal psychology? Independently of me, the grass grows, it rains on the grass that grows, and the sun gilds all the grass that grew or is going to grow; the mountains arose long, long ago, and the wind howls in the same way Homer heard it - even if he didn't exist. It might be more precise to say that a mood is a scenery; the statement would have the advantage of not containing the lie entailed in a theory, even if the only truth it does contain is that of a metaphor.

These random ideas were dictated to me by the grand panorama of the city, which I saw in the universal light of the sun form the top of São Pedro de Alcântara. Every time I contemplate a panorama like that, I forget the five feet seven and one hundred and twenty-four pounds that I am physically, I have a hugely metaphysical smile for those who dream that dreams are dreams, and I love the truth of things absolutely external with the noble virtue of my understanding.

***

I have no faith in scenery. That's right. I don't say it because I believe in Amiel's "scenery is a mood," one of the felicitous verbal moments of that most insufferable interiorizer. I say it because I don't believe it.

- Fernando Pessoa, The Book of Disquiet

Been reading bits and pieces of Pessoa's posthumous prose work recently. His observations, which rarely go more than a single page, are full of comments such as this that give me reasons to pause and to think about matters. While I suppose I could make some connections to the occasional discussions regarding that amped-up scenery called "worldbuilding," I won't. What I'll do is let this piece create its own images within those who read this, in hopes that perhaps they'll be willing to read this outstanding early 20th century Portuguese poet and writer.

Author Spotlight: Angélica Gorodischer

Stop me if you've heard this before: Talented female author mixes in gender role analysis and deep, introspective societal examination with prose that is evocative. But instead of being an Anglo-American writer such as Ursula Le Guin or Marion Zimmer Bradley, Argentinian author Angélica Gorodischer sadly is barely known here in the United States, despite a body of work in Spanish that rivals that of Le Guin or any other SF/fantasy author, male and female alike.

Gorodischer was born in Buenos Aires, Argentina in 1928, although she has lived most of her life in Rosario, Argentina. She has been active in writing all sorts of fiction, from SF to mysteries to feminist literature and criticism, with Kalpa Imperial (1983, 1984 in two parts; English translation done by Le Guin in 2003) being her most famous work outside of Latin America. Active from 1964 to the present, her stories depend heavily upon introspection and the presentation of rather ridiculous societal practices in a new setting to accentuate the asinine nature of things such as patriarchal attitudes and the over-reliance upon tradition to guide people. Currently, only Kalpa Imperial (which incidentally contains an oblique critique of the military junta that ruled there from 1976-1983) and the story "The Violet's Embryos" (published in the anthology Cosmos Latinos in 2003) are available in English translation.

This is a crying shame, as Gorodischer is one of those rare authors whose prose and themes resonate between generations and between cultures. Hopefully, some reading this will be encouraged to check out either one of the two English translations, or if they are able to read Spanish, will try reading her works in the original, such as the story collection Bajo las Jubeas en flor, which I'm currently reading.

Edit: For a very good interview with Gorodischer, here's a link to the Fantastic Metropolis interview that Gabriel Mesa conducted a few years ago.

Judging the Hugo Finalists Part I: Cover Art

Since 2008 is a Presidential Election year here in the U.S., I have decided that I'm going to examine the Hugo Award finalists for Best Novel according to some of the strict criteria that American voters apply to their Presidential candidates. So first, I shall look at it from the viewpoint of which finalist's cover art looks most "Hugo-like."

Ian McDonald, Brasyl.

McDonald's cover art has some good features - it is dark, with "cool" purples and other neon-like effects highlighting the "differentness" of his view of mid-21st century Brazil. There are vehicles moving around, which is always a plus, but he might take a hit for there not being any rocket ships or guns on display. While some might argue that the helicopter-like things gives a sense of air and perhaps even space transport, it isn't quite phallic enough in appearance to compensate for the lack of cone-like projectile transports. The overall appearance is pleasing to the eyes, but it might be downgraded in the eyes of some Hugo voters because of the lack of the aforementioned "Hugo accessories."



Charles Stross, Halting State.

At first glance, Stross's cover might appear to be too "simple" and blocklike. However, judging based on past Hugo covers, the cover art for Halting State does give a sense of distance and yearning that some Hugo voters might find appealing. If one stares at the image long enough, one can detact just the barest hint of a cone-like projectile arising, which ought to meet the phallic vision test. Furthermore, there is a block-like entity in the foreground above the title which might be a play on Arthur C. Clarke's famous monolith from 2001: A Space Odyssey. In a year in which SF fans are mourning the death of Sir Arthur, it might be a providential stroke of luck that could prove to be the difference.



John Scalzi, The Last Colony.

Scalzi has long been a favorite of the WorldCon crowd, having won the Campbell Award for Best New Writer a few years ago. But with the cover art for The Last Colony, Scalzi might have found the recipe for insuring himself of a high finish in the Hugo voting. There are spaceships! Spaceships, I tell ya! All in this image! Plus there is more than just the requisite phallic imagery rising prominently, but there looks to be some sort of battle going on! What Hugo voter steeped in the genre's past couldn't look at Scalzi's cover art and think how favorably it looks compared to the previous great Hugo winners? This perhaps might be the most "Hugo-like" of all of the covers displayed here, but only time shall tell, no?



Robert J. Sawyer, Rollback.

Canadian author Robert J. Sawyer has won multiple Hugo and Nebula Awards before for his work, but some voters might be divided based on this cover art. Sure, the huge gear-laden watch-like thing in the background looks cool, especially with the black backdrop, and perhaps the fuzzy humanoid in the foreground is intriguing in his/her/its vagueness, but where are the rockets? Where are the other hints of gadgetry that might make the reader stare at the cover for a long length of time and perhaps influence his/her vote? This is a rather bland cover and for those voters who are swayed by the images in their head, Sawyer's cover art might prove to be too bland to make a lasting impression on the Hugo voters.



Michael Chabon, The Yiddish Policemen's Union.

Sure, sure. We all know that Chabon has won a crapload of awards for his writing over the past few years and that he won the Nebula and Sidewise Award for this particular book. So while those who hold stock in things such as prosery and actual storytelling talent might be enamored with Chabon, those Hugo voters who take the time to judge the book carefully by its cover are going to take one glance at this and go, "Missile Command? In 2008?" But a further glance will show even a lack of any real cone-like projectiles that could serve to offset the first impressions of this cover. For those astute Hugo voters voting on the basis of the cover art, Chabon's likely would finish around the bottom, with even "No Award" giving it a run for its money.



And there you go, possible ways of judging this year's finalists based on the cover art alone. Later in the week, there'll be at least one more judging of the finalists based on other criteria. Hope this gave you food for thought.

Reviewing Epistemology, or a Struggle to Self-Define Relevance

Seems that in the past few days on a couple of the blogs that I have listed in my Blogroll, there has been a bit of a chatter about what constitutes a review and if there ought to be some sort of "standards" involved for blog reviews. Since my name has been evoked in passing, I shall endeavor to weigh in with the appropriate gravitas that this deserves.

....

....


....


....


Yep, that pretty much covers all that needs to be said. But to elaborate a bit, here goes:

1. Having "standards" does not equate to "communism" (frankly, that was a ridiculous comment and should have been thought out before being posted). A set of "standards," "codes," or whatever-the-hell-you-want-to-call-it is nothing more than a framework from which the writer can then develop his/her approach. The "standards" would be nothing else but a minimal set of criteria that the audience can use to judge the worthiness of a writer's review (or other things).

2. If you half-ass it, you half-assed it, so don't argue about it. Tired of some using excuses such as "it wasn't meant to be a real review" or "I'm not wanting to be a critic." If you don't want others to rip into you (or at least rip into you with some justification), then just stop half-assing it and put effort into what you're doing.

3. For a great many people, a "review" involves much more than giving one's personal reaction to something. Sure, on certain levels it'll work as a personal recommendation, but don't be dismayed if others reading such posts end up concluding that you couldn't write a "proper review" if your life depended upon it. For many, a "review" is a much more narrowly-defined entity, one that involves a lot of thought and awareness of a writing's themes, structure, and how its basic elements play out and how such elements compare to other works. If the reviewer doesn't come to "own" the review and to demonstrate some sense of "authority" in what he/she is talking about, then why in the world would that review be a decent one?

4. As for the "can you call it a 'review' if you don't finish the book" question, see point #3. If you don't meet at least some of those criteria, then how would someone like myself gain any real insight into the work, other than you don't like it?

5. I really could care less what you do with your personal blogs. If you want the respect accorded to a "professional," then browse through their writings and see what works best and incorporate elements of that while maintaining something of "you" in the writing process. For example, take this The New Republic book review. There are things in here, for example, that I could use to help me get over a stumbling block I've had whenever I've wanted to review multiple works. Doesn't mean I have to ape the style completely; but noting how it flows and how the reviewer has come to "own" the review provides a valuable perspective for me.

And that's about it for this edition of keeping the teacup waters oscillating.