Archive for the ‘Speculative Fiction’ Category

Two New SF/​F Client Projects Live

Posted on:

Two projects have gone live to the pub­lic this week.  Let’s break them down shall we?

Rocket Kapre

Rocket Kapre is a web­site ded­i­cated to  fan­tas­tic Filipino fic­tion.  I was approached by the client Paolo Chikiamco a cou­ple of months ago with a tight time­line.  We started with a pre-​​built theme and worked our way from there, cus­tomiz­ing as nec­es­sary (and cus­tomize we did).  I mod­i­fied the slider and many other lay­out aspects sig­nif­i­cantly.  I also rolled out quite a bit of cus­tom tem­plate work using the Flutter CMS tool.  Any place where I wanted to add new con­tent areas to be filled out, cus­tom images, etc, I used Flutter to do that.  We have cus­tom write pan­els for the Books and the Authors entries for exam­ple.  I learned a lot about build­ing a theme set­ting page by work­ing with this theme as well.  Also, I really became a fan of the AZIndex plu­gin based on the work on this site, and have used it twice since on other sites.   I owe those guys a donation.

Fantasy Magazine

Recently, I was brought on board as the reg­u­lar web guy to imple­ment a bunch of changes over at Fantasy.   I look for­ward to work­ing with edi­tor Cat Rambo on improv­ing things through­out the year.  Our imme­di­ate goal was to redesign the exist­ing theme in a way that unclut­tered the home page con­sid­er­ably and added room for some adver­tis­ing.  I devel­oped the fea­tured con­tent slider and I built on the tabbed inter­face from the last site design by adding some accor­dion work as well.  Anywhere I could open up con­tent to the edi­tors, I did so using cus­tom page calls and the like.  For instance, the mast­head infor­ma­tion on the About tab is a page that can be edited and mod­i­fied on the back end now.   In gen­eral, I did a lot of code base clean­ing up for my own under­stand­ing.  There are a cou­ple of cus­tom plu­g­ins at work on the site thanks to Matt Kressel that proved very use­ful.    Coming up will be a much more com­plex user sys­tem allow­ing user pro­files with all kinds of fun cus­tom fields. I just need to get the box upgraded to PHP 5 for that work.  Some cool fea­tures com­ing down the pipe there.

So those are just a cou­ple of the projects I’ve been putting the fin­ish­ing touches on lately.  I’ve mostly fin­ished up at least one other site that won’t launch for quite a while.  And I’ve got a cou­ple new ones to get to work on, and some sub­con­tract­ing work lin­ing up as well.

Clockpunk Studios is doing pretty good these days!  Turns out that mas­ter­ing the WordPress tem­plate sys­tem has been a good career move.

Case Study: The Five Worlds Website

Posted on:

…the Academy was founded to detail the story of how Fremont’s Children directed the out­come of the Making War. This is the incred­i­ble and unlikely story of how a brother and a sis­ter, and other young heroes, cre­ated the bal­anced forces that drive us today. Although this is a tale of our past, it is still a story in the mak­ing. We uncover new bits of infor­ma­tion reg­u­larly. We invite you to drop in from time to time to see it.

Brenda Cooper, co-​​author of Harlequin’s Moon with Larry Niven, con­tacted me a cou­ple of months back, inter­ested in how I might help pub­li­cize the release of the third book in her series, The Wings of Creation. I jumped at the chance to get involved.

nwlogo.png

The first thing I did was tackle the books. In this series, Brenda has built a strong cast of young char­ac­ters and an inter­est­ing set­ting that is both rec­og­niz­able and alien at the same time. They’re good “all ages” sci­ence fic­tion, and I really enjoyed them.

From read­ing the books, I sug­gested devel­op­ing a web­site for the series as if the site was the dig­i­tal pres­ence of an actual insti­tu­tion in the world. The web­site would pro­vide sam­ples of the books for read­ing, and an ency­clo­pe­dia of information–a kind of reader’s guide, if you will.

The Academy of New World Historians is the orga­ni­za­tion respon­si­ble for assem­bling the his­tor­i­cal texts that make up Brenda’s series. Each book opens with excerpts of inter­views con­ducted by these his­to­ri­ans. The goal of the web­site is to share their pub­li­ca­tions with the rest of the Five Worlds.

The site is built on a WordPress frame­work, using a cus­tom theme. It’s fairly straight­for­ward in design and con­struc­tion to reflect a cul­ture that val­ues sim­plic­ity and usabil­ity in inter­faces. The design uses some jQuery effects here and there for some pizazz–I was really inter­ested in try­ing out the “expanded nav­i­ga­tion” method that I’ve imple­mented on the home page. You can hover over the sec­tion titles and see addi­tional infor­ma­tion for the sec­tion, such as links to spe­cific topics.

Overall, Brenda has been a joy to work with. I hope you will all check out the site and her books. They’re good stuff, and I would rec­om­mend them even if Brenda were not a client.

Recommended Viewing: The Sleep Dealer

Posted on:

I have often thought that the future of sci­ence fic­tion isn’t in tales of first world nations like the United States. The future sto­ries we should be explor­ing and con­tem­plat­ing more are the ones involv­ing (and told by res­i­dents of) life on the fringes, in the fave­las and the bor­der towns, in the devel­op­ing world, where raw human­ity bumps up against the shiny and anti­sep­tic American cap­i­tal­ist way.

Most do not live the lives of rel­a­tive lux­ury we do, but one of the promises of glob­al­ism has been said to be an ele­va­tion of those who are in poverty. Will those liv­ing in Brazil, Mexico, Kenya, or China one day know lives with bet­ter amenities,health care, and basic nutri­tion? Or will the same web of post-​​colonialism, transna­tional bank­ing deal­ing from decks stacked against the poor, and cor­rupt gov­ern­ment regimes keep third world coun­tries rooted in poverty?

The Sleep Dealer is an exam­i­na­tion of American glob­al­iza­tion as it impacts our lives today, where resent­ment to ille­gal immi­gra­tion in America is as high as it ever has been, but where there are still jobs to be had for those who brave the cross­ing (at least, prior to our eco­nomic woes). The world of the Sleep Dealer is not so dif­fer­ent from our own, except in a few very impor­tant ways.

The United States of the sleep dealer is mostly seen indi­rectly, through the lenses of telep­res­ence drones, or in the cramped con­fines of vir­tual oper­a­tor sta­tions where sol­diers pilot drones to pro­tect cor­po­ra­tized water in places like Mexico. America appears to be sealed off com­pletely to immi­gra­tion, at least from Mexico. A wall has been built, and it’s guarded by remote-​​controlled cam­eras with heavy machine guns. A future that seemed much less implau­si­ble 2 years ago when the anti-​​immigration sen­ti­ment seemed to reach its peak.

The U.S. of this future still requires cheap labor, even if it can­not abide the phys­i­cal pres­ence of immi­grants, legal or oth­er­wise. In this near future, vir­tual real­ity tech­nol­ogy, por­trayed in a way that would fit in with any cyber­punk novel (a series of plugs along the arms and shoul­ders that allow a kind of neural inter­face), allows the poor to work within the States. It’s best not to think too hard about the por­trayal of the equip­ment here, which seems more tai­lored toward a par­tic­u­lar visual aes­thetic than mak­ing log­i­cal sense. What was with the gas masks pip­ing in oxy­gen? Nevertheless–

The back­drop of the world in the Sleep Dealer feels lived in, well worn, and not implau­si­ble. Our pro­tag­o­nist is an intel­li­gent young man with an inter­est in escap­ing his tiny, water-​​impoverished farm­stead. He tin­kers with hack­ing telecom­mu­ni­ca­tions satel­lites as a means of escape, but soon he over­hears some­thing that he should not, and the events of the story are set into motion.

In the after­math of a tragedy, Memo (a very Gibsonian name, I thought) trav­els to Tijuana to receive the implants that will allow him to work in the vir­tual labor fac­to­ries. He meets a woman, a writer who sells her mem­o­ries uploaded to the net­work, who takes an inter­est in his painful past and whose sto­ries about Memo are funded by a mys­te­ri­ous buyer.

I’ll say no more about the plot, except to say that while this is a sci­ence fic­tion film, it is also an inde­pen­dent film in that sense that it is not the tightly shot, leave-​​nothing-​​unanswered big stu­dio style of sto­ry­telling. The cin­e­matog­ra­phy is often dream­like, and the story’s gen­tle nar­ra­tion rein­force this. The story in some ways feels like a character’s lucid dream.

It’s a con­tem­pla­tive film in its pac­ing as well. Those expect­ing a tightly plot­ted thriller or action film should look else­where. This is a film that is more inter­ested in let­ting the audi­ence come to its own con­clu­sions than lec­tur­ing morally (or otherwise).

This was some­thing dif­fer­ent than what we are used to see­ing. While some of its ideas may not seem so fresh to long-​​time read­ers of sci­ence fic­tion, I don’t think this is some­thing we’ve ever seen por­trayed this way on the sil­ver screen. It’s worth pick­ing up on DVD or rent­ing at the very least.

Be a Positive Force in Fandom, Not an Asshole

Posted on:

If there was one thing that drew me in par­tic­u­lar to genre fan­dom as a whole, it was the bound­less and unashamed enthu­si­asm that genre fans had.  Fans loved things, and their pas­sion was worn on their sleeves.  They weren’t ashamed to like sci­ence fic­tion in gen­eral, or, say, Star Trek in par­tic­u­lar, despite there con­sid­er­able soci­etal dis­aproval of such things.  My nerdy ways got me made fun of as much as my big ears, grow­ing up.

Today, with Generation X and Y in full force, there’s been a bit of a shift, I think.  Sarcasm is some­thing our gen­er­a­tions prize, as well as a well-​​cultured sense of irony.  But what’s worse, when com­bined with those things, is a cer­tain odd form of self-​​awareness that leads to what I’d like to talk about:

It’s cooler to dis­like some­thing than it is to like some­thing today.  It’s more cul­tur­ally accept­able in my peer groups, par­tic­u­larly online, to express dis­ap­proval of some­thing than it is to express enthusiasm.

I’m not against crit­i­cism.  It’s only by being crit­i­cal of art forms that we under­stand them and learn to improve them.  Thoughtful crit­i­cism is a great thing.  So let’s take that off the table of what I’m talk­ing about.  I’m going to talk about how we express our dis­like of things, why, and when we do it.

First of all, I think it’s an unde­ni­able trend that being enthu­si­as­tic for some­thing is much less of a draw of atten­tion than being highly crit­i­cal of some­thing, par­tic­u­larly online.  If I write a blog post that is crit­i­cal of a pop­u­lar movie, it receives at least twice as many views as if I wrote a glow­ing rec­om­men­da­tion.  It’ll receive twice as many com­ments too, and often, what com­ments the glow­ing rec­om­men­da­tion receives are argu­ments against the opin­ion.  There are a lot of rea­sons for this, but in gen­eral, I’d like to see us change it in our cor­ner of the web.

I used to be a reg­u­lar on the blog Metafilter.  We called a cer­tain phe­nom­e­non  “your favorite band sucks.”  Whenever any­one expressed an appre­ci­a­tion or an author or a band, five peo­ple came along to crit­i­cize the author or band.  Here’s where we come to my first rule of the pos­i­tive fan.

Every expres­sion of appre­ci­a­tion online is not an oppor­tu­nity for you to voice your disapproval.

It’s fine for you not to like some­thing.  But every time some­one else says they like some­thing that you don’t is not the best time for you to piss in the corn­flakes of inter­net com­ment­ing.  Every dis­cus­sion is not a debate on the mer­its and demer­its of some­thing.  In fact, let’s put this out there in plain terms: every dis­cus­sion online does not have to be and should not be “fair and bal­anced.”  Know your audi­ence, and know the scene you’re in–will they appre­ci­ate your per­spec­tive, or will they think you’re just being an asshole?

Which brings me to my next point:

Don’t be an ass­hole. Remember: every­thing you crit­i­cize is the hard work of a human being with feelings.

Don’t assume that the cre­ator of what you are trash­ing won’t read it.  It’s the inter­net.  We’re all super­nat­ural beings that can be sum­moned by the use of our name thanks to Google.  Don’t be an ass­hole, and don’t resort to ad hominem attacks.  Be crit­i­cal of the work, and not the cre­ator.  Every cre­ative act should be encour­aged, even if you con­sider it a fail­ure.  All art is a learn­ing process.

If you must be crit­i­cal, be specific.

So you have a burn­ing desire to share your dis­ap­proval of some­thing and you just can’t be stopped.  Fine.  Leave your crit­i­cal remark, but here are crit­cial remarks that do noth­ing but hurt people:

It sucked.”

Don’t quit your day job”

I want my [PERIOD OF TIME SPENT] back.”

Who likes this shit?”

Do you see the trend here?  We’ve all seen these com­ments.  Most of us have prob­a­bly left them at some point.    What’s miss­ing here is sub­stance.

You owe your fel­low humans to be spe­cific in your crit­i­cism. It’s in everyone’s best inter­ests for a cre­ator to improve, and they can’t use your feed­back to do that if it doesn’t have any substance.

I assume part of the point of the urge to share our strong dis­like of some­thing online, besides the weird Gen-​​Y/​X need to feel cool via dis­parag­ing things, is that we can’t stand the idea that some­one does like it, and we want to explain to them why their enthu­si­asm is mis­placed.  We’re not going to do that with vague gen­er­al­i­ties. Be spe­cific, and be polite. Consider shar­ing our enthu­si­asm for some­thing else as a coun­ter­point so oth­ers know we’re not just being an ass­hole for the sake of it.  Is it some­thing we would say to the creator’s face, in per­son, while they ball their fists and start to turn red?  No?  Dial down the venom, and remember:

All opin­ions are not equal.  But if you think yours really mat­ters most, you’re prob­a­bly wrong.

Most peo­ple just aren’t going to really care what your opin­ion of some­thing is, unless they know you.  If you’re a ran­dom stranger leav­ing feed­back on a blog, don’t expect your com­ment to hold any spe­cial weight with the other read­ers or the com­menters.  Don’t get increas­ingly angry when peo­ple aren’t swayed to your antag­o­nis­tic point of view.  Silently mark these peo­ple off as morons like you do to every human being you dis­ap­prove of, and move on.

Moving on to the Positive Part

Thus far, I’ve really focused on the neg­a­tive, because I know that’s what is going to get the most atten­tion.  Now that I have it, let’s talk about how we can reverse the trend a lit­tle.  As a group, work­ing together with a com­mon goal, I think we can lighten the tone a bit.

If you like some­thing, say so.

Positive, sup­port­ive com­ments are always far out­num­bered by the neg­a­tive ones.  We need to change this, or at least tips the scales back the other way a bit.  If you take noth­ing else away from this sanc­ti­mo­nious blog post, just lis­ten to  this part.  When you like some­thing, whether that some­thing be a story, a book, a web­site, a blog post, a pod­cast, a paint­ing, whatever–when you like some­thing, tell some­one.  You can broad­cast it on your blog or your twit­ter. That is awe­some.  Or you can go nar­row­band and leave a com­ment for the cre­ator or write an email.  Hell, you want to really make someone’s day, send them a snail mail letter.

We as an inter­net pop­u­lace have a ten­dency to be quiet when we’re approv­ing, and save our key­strokes for when we’re angry.  This is wrong, and I think we can change this.  Let’s put the enthu­si­as­tic fan back into the mix.  We can’t all hate every­thing.  Let’s see if we can aim for bring­ing the positive/​negative com­ment ratio up to 1:1.  And hey–the only thing worse than a bunch of nasty com­ments and feed­back is no feed­back at all.  Don’t assume some­one else will say some­thing.  Take the ini­tia­tive and say some­thing yourself.

For a lit­tle over a year now, I’ve been mak­ing a point of writ­ing authors and let­ting them know when I’ve really liked some­thing they’ve writ­ten.  I write peo­ple I know and writ­ers I have never met.  I’m going to start expand­ing this to other forms.  There’s no rea­son I have to save my fan­nish enthu­si­asm for the printed word.

Now, you may be a major con­sumer of media, and you might be won­der­ing, how can I pos­si­bly send notes to the cre­ators of every­thing I con­sume? When it’s some­thing you’ve paid for, I think your money is often appre­ci­a­tion enough.  However, if it’s some­thing you’ve read online for free, and you enjoyed it, I think we should feel oblig­ated to share our pos­i­tive feed­back.  If you want peo­ple to keep doing what they’re doing, you need to say so.  Again–don’t assume some­one else will do it for you.  We should be as ener­gized to share our enthu­si­asm as our outrage.

I hope you’ll join me in this-​​I don’t want to say “move­ment,” but let’s call it a pseudo-​​philosophy.   I prob­a­bly won’t con­vince the die-​​hard ass­holes to stop being ass­holes, but hope­fully I can con­vince we quiet approvers to speak up more often. I know I’m not per­fect, that I’ve been the ass­hole, but I’m mak­ing a con­certed effort not to be in the future.

I’m sure there are a lot of crit­i­cisms of this post you can make, and you’re wel­come to do so in the com­ments.  Please fol­low the rules above.  Consider this my new com­ment mod­er­a­tion pol­icy on my blog.  I hope I don’t have to enforce it.

To Rewrite or Not to Rewrite? That is the Flowchart.

Posted on:

I recently received a rewrite request for a story I had sub­mit­ted.  Over my time as a writer, I’ve received rewrite requests that I’ve accepted, and rewrite requests I have turned down–for a lot of dif­fer­ent rea­sons.  I real­ized that my think­ing that goes into the deci­sion of whether or not to do so is some­what com­plex, and I got to won­der­ing if it was some­thing that a flow­chart could describe.  After a lit­tle bit of play­ing around this morn­ing, I have cre­ated just such a flowchart.

rewriteflowchart

Click on the thumb­nail image to view the full size chart.  Did I miss any steps that you would have con­sid­ered?  Do you think I am insane for draw­ing up a flow­chart for some­thing like this?  Share your thoughts in the comments.


10 Ways to Have a More “Interesting” Convention Experience

Posted on:

I am not attend­ing WorldCon (AKA Anticipation)  this year.  Last year was great, and I met a lot of really inter­est­ing new peo­ple, and got to meet some peo­ple in the flesh for the first time like John Joseph Adams (whose col­lec­tion The Living Dead was nom­i­nated for a World Fantasy Award this week!  Congratulations are in order).   Why am I not going?  Well, there’s the finan­cial rea­sons of course, but there’s also a lit­tle dis­pute I had with the Canadian Border Control back in 1986 involv­ing the ille­gal impor­ta­tion of furry porn.  I’m not allowed to talk about it, but suf­fice to say, I can only travel to Canada under pseu­do­nyms such as Harrison T. Merriweather.  And now I can’t use that one.  Canada’s agents are everywhere.

It’s rather  too easy for the sea­soned con vet­eran to end up in a bit of a rut when it comes to cons.  “Find a seat in the bar and leave only for your pan­els” seems to be the writer/editor/publisher’s way.  I think they some­times actu­ally take in food in a solid form over the course of the con­ven­tion, but I have no evi­dence of this.

I’ve decided, as a ser­vice to the con­ven­tion goer, to pro­vide this help­ful list of activ­i­ties you can  par­tic­i­pate in to make your convention-​​going expe­ri­ence that much more interesting.

  1. In a very pub­lic space, ask Gord Sellar to imi­tate his Quebec-​​born mother.  (The result­ing mob will give you all the exer­cise you need for the week).
  2. Dress up as a polyp and jump out at Jay Lake every time you see him, yelling “Boo!”
  3. Squeeze Harlan Ellison’s boob.
  4. Walk up to Tempest, and whis­per, in a ner­vous voice.  “I see black people.”
  5. Go to a Gordon van Gelder panel and stand up to ask a ques­tion.  Congratulate him on finally break­ing down and accept­ing elec­tronic sub­mis­sions and start a stand­ing ova­tion.  Then flee. (Also, scratch F&SF off your sub­mis­sions list)
  6. Treat every­one in cos­play as you would treat their actual char­ac­ter.  Run in ter­ror from stormtroop­ers.  Try to res­cue Slave Girl Leia.  Laugh and point at Klingons.
  7. Ask Ted Chiang to tell you about the cover of his col­lec­tion.  (Only do this if you have 4 hours of time you need to kill).
  8. Find Cory Doctorow.  Secretly replace his iPod with a Zune.
  9. Dress up as the ghost of Robert Heinlein and demand roy­al­ties from John Scalzi all weekend.
  10. When they announce the John W. Campbell Award for best new writer, race to the podium, snatch the award, and smug­gle it home to ME.

Anyone else have any ideas to make those lucky folks attend­ing WorldCon have a more “fun” time?

Why You Should Apply to Attend LaunchPad Next Year

Posted on:

TheLaunchPad Astronomy Workshop has been held three times now, each sum­mer in Laramie, Wyoming. This project is the brain­child of Jim Verley and astronomer/​SF writer Mike Brotherton. The goal of the work­shop is to help expand the audi­ence for sci­ence lit­er­ate fic­tion and other pop­u­lar endeav­ors. This year, we not only had sci­ence fic­tion writ­ers in atten­dance, but also come­di­ans and poets. Utlimately, I think it would be great to have some screen­writ­ers for film and tele­vi­sion attend­ing as well. Especially con­sid­er­ing how much we harp on Armageddon dur­ing the workshop.

The goal of the work­shop is not to turn you into an Analog–style hard SF writer. The goal is to make sure you under­stand some of the basics of astron­omy so that, even if you’re writ­ing fan­tasy, you can get those details right. So that maybe you will *want* to write a story about the phases of the moon or about orbital mechan­ics in some way. Each year, sev­eral straight-​​fantasy authors attend and get just as much out of it as the nerds like me who already have a decent amount of astron­omy sci­ence under our belts. I even had one major mis­con­cep­tion of mine cor­rected. About the Earth’s axial tilt.

It’s a week of intense class­work, tele­scope view­ing when the weather works, fun meals, a hike, and gen­er­ally just get­ting to social­ize with amaz­ing peo­ple (many who hap­pen to be writ­ers). It will feel like, to quote Gord Sellar, a “pig has shit galax­ies into your head.” Ultimately, it’s knowl­edge, and knowl­edge has a way of mak­ing you a bet­ter, richer writer.

When appli­ca­tions open up again next year, I will post about it here, and I expect all of you to flood Mike and Jim with appli­ca­tions. Heh heh.

BREAKING: F&SF’s Gordon Van Gelder Does Not Want to Drink The Blood of Your Children

Posted on:

Last week, we had a lovely mini-​​controversy over the poorly announced inten­tions of the Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction to launch a work­shop for newer writ­ers run by Gardner Dozois.

The details that we were able to gather were:

  • The work­shop will be online.
  • The work­shop will be lim­ited at first to around 100 writers.
  • Gardner will be able to choose up to 3 sto­ries a year from the work­shop sub­mis­sions to appear in F&SF.

The details that we do not know:

  • When will the work­shop launch?
  • How much will it cost?
  • How much face-​​time will you get with the work­shop admin with 99 other students?

The issues that  weren’t clear to some:

  • Whether or not Gordon would pay for the sto­ries that come from the work­shop like any other story
  • Whether the cost of join­ing the work­shop would in fact include the price of the soul of your first-​​born child?
  • Whether this is a vio­la­tion of Yog’s Law, in which money flows from the writer to the pub­lisher? (“money flows to the writer”)

The con­tro­versy to me was exactly the same as Amazon’s screw-​​up a few weeks back regard­ing the data­base and adult/​gay con­tent being removed from list­ings.  It boiled down to this:  poor infor­ma­tion con­trol and release.  It was a PR fubar.

Perhaps I assumed the bes in that work­shop­pers selected for the pub­li­ca­tion would be paid just like any new writer, that Gordon was not plan­ning to sell my unborn chil­dren into slav­ery to the Mi Go  and that Yog’s Law was per­haps sim­ply bent, but not in a way that was unprece­dented.  Ultimately, I shouldn’t have to assume, nor should any­one else.  Once again, the issue is that, in the absence of real infor­ma­tion, the inter­net will invent a con­tro­versy.  WhateverFails are spon­ta­neously gen­er­at­ing every­where on the web because a rumor has got­ten out of hand and real infor­ma­tion has not stepped into to fill the void.

What could F&SF Done Differently?

Gordon and his staff prob­a­bly should have acted quickly to cor­rect any mis­in­for­ma­tion being spread (and to their credit, they did so, but I don’t think they did it com­pre­hen­sively enough).  He should have issued a full press release in the first place, out­lin­ing every detail of the project, from cost, to dura­tion to “here’s the web­sites, go sign up.”  The first any­one should have heard of this project should have been when every detail was sorted out and  ready to go.  If you are vague on any aspect, it just gives peo­ple an oppor­tu­nity to see bog­garts where there prob­a­bly aren’t any.

Information about this seemed to leak via hearsay on one blog, and the con­tro­versy built rapidly in this infovoid.  Damage con­trol would have been to imme­di­ately release all infor­ma­tion.  Unfortunately, I think not every aspect of the project as nailed down, so it seemed that they were rushed to release what they knew so far, which wasn’t and as far as I know, still isn’t every­thing.  I put my name on the list of inter­ested par­ties and I look for­ward to learn­ing more.

In gen­eral, I think F&SF needs to con­trol its online pub­lic rela­tions bet­ter (I imag­ine Gordon might think ‘great, yet another new job I don’t need and didn’t sign up for.’  Sorry, man. ).  The prob­lem is, and jus­ti­fi­ably so, they see relat­ing with the pub­lic online to be an antag­o­nis­tic thing.  n this posts, I am care­ful not to say ‘Gordon should do…” which is way too easy with F&SF.  I’m try­ing to say “the orga­ni­za­tion should do…”  Because I know F&SF has a team of peo­ple, pri­mar­ily dri­ven by Gordon.  Being the only editor-​​owned mag­a­zine of the Big Three in the field, its easy to place the blame or put a face to any per­ceived prob­lem with the ‘zine.  Gordon, for bet­ter and for worse, is F&SF in the pub­lic eye.  You can’t nec­es­sar­ily do that with the Dell Magazines. Their edi­tors gen­er­ally aren’t mak­ing the busi­ness deci­sions.  So the crit­i­cisms of F&SF often come across as too personal.

That’s unfor­tu­nate.  F&SF is a good mag­a­zine and Gordon is a great edi­tor.  The orga­ni­za­tion needs to reset their inter­ac­tions with the online world entirely, and design­ing a good PR plan would be a nice place to start, in my opin­ion.  I have some ideas of how to go about that which I will go into in more detail at a later date.

What Could We the Public Done Differently?

We should be bet­ter at real­iz­ing when we have par­tial infor­ma­tion and we should be less eager to jump to con­clu­sions based on that par­tial infor­ma­tion.  Perhaps our first instinct should not be to write a blog post or to start a com­ment thread on a forum.  Perhaps, when we have sus­pi­cions or are con­sid­er­ing cast­ing asper­sions, we should con­tact the par­ties involved over email or phone and ask our ques­tions.  If we don’t get sat­is­fy­ing answers, then maybe that is the time to scream from the rooftops.  Also, apply some com­mon sense.  What in Gordon or Gardner’s long career would ever make you think they weren’t going to pay writ­ers?  Yes, it’s impor­tant to make sure you get paid as a writer–but these guys are NOT the enemy. I have dis­agreed with Gordon on mat­ters elec­tronic in the past, but I know that he is a con­sum­mate professional.

This lat­est con­tro­versy is made up of mis­takes on both sides.  The bur­den of pro­vid­ing clear, accu­rate, and com­plete infor­ma­tion rests with the publisher/​project run­ners.  The bur­den of the rest of us is to not jump to assump­tions with­out ask­ing ques­tions first when we receive only par­tial information.

Keeping an Ideas File

Posted on:

When I first started writ­ing seri­ously, I kept a lit­tle text file on my desk­top where I would rapidly jot down ideas for the premises of sto­ries. Eventually, this turned into a note­book that I tried and failed to carry around. Then it turned into a col­lec­tion of ran­dom doc­u­ments on Google Docs. It’s cur­rent incar­na­tion is a folder on my EverNote account.

With ever­note, I can record voice notes, type ideas in on the com­puter or my phone, include pho­tos, and more. Pretty much any­thing I want to remem­ber and have acces­si­ble from any­where, I throw into Evernote these days, and that includes story ideas.

But I wanted to talk about the impor­tance of cap­tur­ing more than just the premise for sto­ries. I’ve started try­ing to cap­ture any kind of fas­ci­nat­ing tid­bit that I think might be use­ful at some point. When I see a per­son with a trait that I think would make an inter­est­ing con­cept for a char­ac­ter, I put it in. Collect every­thing, because I am find­ing that when inspi­ra­tion is run­ning a lit­tle low, these notes can be the ker­nel of cre­ative energy I need to steam­roll through a project.

I also carry around a flexible-​​cover Moleskine note­book, and I do jot down story ideas in here, but I also use that for web­site thumb­nail sketches, doo­dles, and more. Because I do all my writ­ing on a com­puter, it works very well for me to have this cen­tral, search­able tool for my ran­dom bits of ideas.

Somtimes, writ­ing a story is like play­ing Katamari Damacy. You just keep rolling the sticky ball of your brain around until it accu­mu­lates enough junk to let you go to the next level.

This Week’s Editoral Advice: Do Not Reply to Rejection Letters

Posted on:

This is still hap­pen­ing from time to time with my work for Escape Pod. I had kind of thought by now that argu­ing with an edi­tor over their com­ments in a rejec­tion let­ter was com­monly con­sid­ered a bad idea to be avoided at all costs, but I’m still get­ting these at Escape Pod. Let me put it to you all straight.

Nothing makes me more dis­in­clined to pur­chase your work than you argu­ing with me about me not buy­ing a story.

There are a lot of minor mis­takes you can make as a slush writer. I over­look most of them. For instance, we get sent things as attach­ments when our guide­lines call for them to be in the body of an email. I might men­tion it briefly to the sub­mit­ter, but I don’t hold it against them much. There are so many dif­fer­ing e-​​submissions sys­tems that I can under­stand why this hap­pens. No big deal.

But when you decide to quib­ble with an edi­tor over the points of his or her rejec­tion let­ter, you’re cross­ing a pro­fes­sional line. You are enti­tled to your opin­ion. It’s a good thing if you have enough faith in your story that you will con­tinue to send it out, because one editor’s opin­ion doesn’t amount to much, which is why I say my edi­to­r­ial com­ments are not intended as writ­ing advice.

The main thing it will lead to is an edi­tor not pro­vid­ing you any detailed feed­back at all. We will sim­ply write form rejec­tions for your work from then on out. Because noth­ing is more annoy­ing to me, at least, than some­one decid­ing to bicker over a rejec­tion. It’s not going to change our minds. It’s only going to make you look worse. So we’ll stop giv­ing you points to quib­ble with. This is not good for you. We don’t want to do this.

It is a no-​​win sit­u­a­tion for the writer.

So just don’t do it. Stick to cre­at­ing your edi­tor voodoo dolls and slag­ging us off to your cats. Take out your frus­tra­tions another way, even if the edi­tor is dead wrong. It doesn’t matter.

And another thing– I would rather not see replies, even short thank yous, at all. It clut­ters up my inbox, which I work very hard to keep orga­nized, and your con­tin­u­ing sub­mis­sions with us is thanks enough. Tack what you want to say on to the cover let­ter of your next sub­mis­sion. I would pre­fer that.

Also, Machine Gun Submissions

Oh, and finally, one last thing– it does you no good to send me story after story after story when I’m read­ing them quickly, when you get rejected every time. You should cool it and wait a bit between sub­mis­sions. Probably want to wait and let me for­get about how I rejected 3 sto­ries in an hour. Because I do notice, and I know other edi­tors do too, espe­cially with e-​​submissions at ‘zines with rel­a­tively fast turn­around times. Nick Mamatas even had a sub­mis­sions limit. I’m con­sid­er­ing imple­ment­ing one if this keeps up. At the very least, you’ll stop get­ting such rapid replies.