The great TOTU giveaway

TOTU30I've received my contributor and subscription copies of Tales of the Unanticipated issue 30 and, in the interest of bringing attention to this long-running semipro magazine, I'm giving away four copies.

Inside is my "Twenty-First Century Fairy Love Story," which is a story I loved writing. There are also a number of great stories by other authors. Among my favorites are "If You Enjoyed This Story..." by Sarah Totten and Matthew S. Rotundo's "Ashes, Ashes." In addition, I absolutely loved "Personal Jesus" by Martha A. Hood, and believe it should be considered for the year's best lists.

If you'd like a free copy of issue 30, email or DM me on Twitter; be sure to explain why you are TOTU worthy. :-) I'll pick the four best responses I receive by next Wednesday and give each a copy. Please note I'm only able to ship these issues to addresses in the US, Canada, and Mexico. My apologies for international readers, but TOTU is a hefty magazine/anthology and what little money I have is being squeezed tight.

Writers should also be aware TOTU will open to submission from March 15 to 30. Be sure to read their complete guidelines. And whether or not you receive a free issue, consider purchasing a subscription and helping support this great semiprozine.

Why the new Nebula Award rules ... rule

In both my comments as part of the new Mind Meld at SF Signal, and my editorial in the new edition of StarShipSofa, I praise the revised Nebula Award rules. I believe the new rules helped create one of the best Nebula final ballots in years. Obviously this is a somewhat delicate position to take since I'm finalist. But I'd be saying this even if I wasn't because so many of the authors and works I've praised for the last year are on the final ballot.

However, not everyone agrees with this view. In the comment section of that Mind Meld, Steve Berman says the following:

I think Mr. Sanford is a bit deluded if he thinks there's no logrolling happening with the new rules--which I think are a vast disappointment. How many members voted early and then saw that, by Feb. their nominations had no choice to make the top 6? A lot. How many of these people then made changes, which could be done to the very last moment!?

As for logrolling, it's actually easier. See an author you like that needs votes to reach the top? Switch your vote or send out advocacy emails. See an author you dislike near the top? Switch your vote to block them. If Mr. Sanford thinks this isn't being done he's mistaken.

The Nebulas have, as Sandra McDonald put it, "become American Idol-ized."

I totally disagree with this. The traditional definition of logrolling is the "trading of favors or quid pro quo." The old Nebula rules encouraged this by making it easy to both nominate friends and supporters for the preliminary ballot (by letting members nominate so many stories) and to verify that these people were returning the favor, since all nominations were public.

Under the new Nebula nomination rules, this ability to pimp unto each another is limited because members are limited to 5 nominations in each category (meaning fewer spots to waste on pimping), and nominations are now private. This last point is extremely important, and is why most democracies have the secret ballot--when no one can see who you vote for, you're more likely to vote for the best person instead of your best friend.

Now is it possible some SFWA members agreed to vote for each other's works? Yes. In fact, this likely happened. But the difference this time is that thanks to the changes mentioned above, such practices were far less likely to affect the final outcome. In addition, another change undercut the ability to logroll. Under the old rules, if you could convince 10 of your friends to vote for your story, you made the final preliminary ballot (from which the final ballot was then voted on--see the comment from Geoffrey Landis below for more details). This time, the top six vote getters in each category were finalists. None of this year's finalists made it onto the ballot with only 10 votes; in fact, all were far above that mark. There is a limit to how far logrolling can carry you, and with the Nebulas the bar has been raised far above even the highest rolling log.

I also disagree with Steve labeling the changing of one's vote as logrolling. Yes, a number of members changed their votes as the process unfolded. But that's democracy. If a story you like wasn't doing well in the voting, but another story you liked just as well was close to making the ballot, why not switch your vote? There's also nothing wrong with asking someone to consider a story or novel for the Nebula. If someone asks me to read their story, I'll likely do it, and if it's a great one I'll even thank them for bring it to my attention. But this is a far cry from people telling me that they'll vote for my story if I vote for theirs, and that if I don't they'll verify this nasty slight and enact a hideous revenge on me at some point (okay, maybe this last part was more implied than stated under the old rules :-).

To me, there are two easy ways to analyze the outcomes of the old and new Nebula rules, and see why the new rules, well, rule. First, participation and nominations appear to be up. The other proof of the new rules' success is that so many of the authors now making the Nebula final ballot for the first time have previously been finalists for, or have won, the Hugo, World Fantasy, and other major awards. I have trouble believing these authors are only now worthy of being a Nebula finalist. Instead, the more obvious explanation is that the old rules did not work as well as they could.

Anyway, I'm thrilled with the new Nebula Award process, and commend everyone at SFWA for setting up and running this year's awards. And if you're an active member of SFWA, don't forget that voting for the overall winners is now open through March 30th on the SFWA website.

And yes, if you want to change your vote at any time during the voting process, you're still allowed to do so.

A few updates, and an apology

At midnight this year's storySouth Million WritersAward closed to reader and editor nominations. I'm still sorting everything out, but it looks like we experienced the most nominations ever. Look for an update on all this in a day or two. The next step is for the preliminary judges to report back to me with their selections for the notable stories of the year, which will be released by April 1st.

In other news, I recorded an editorial discussing the recent Nebula Award finalists and also supporting StarShipSofa for a Best Fanzine Hugo. Unfortunately, I messed up a few facts, so I apologize to everyone for that, and especially to Cheryl Morgan and John Klima. I've now recorded a corrected editorial, which you can listen to here. The editorial will also be released on Wednesday as part of StarShipSofa's new podcast. Thanks to Tony and all of the Sofa's listeners for putting up with my irritatingly mistaken ways on this.

Finally, I received my contributor's copies of Tales of the Unanticipated issue 30. While I'm still reading the issue, it looks to be a strong one. So far Martha Hood's story "Personal Jesus" (based on the Johnny Cash cover of that famous song) and Matthew S. Rotundo's "Ashes, Ashes" are my favorites. Consider ordering your issue ASAP.

Serving some generational change with that Nebula Awards ballot

Yesterday the finalists for the Nebula Award were announced, and I'm really excited about the line-up. Yes, part of my excitement is because my novella "Sublimation Angels" made the final ballot. Nothing I can do to change this very personal need to jump up and down in happiness. So if you believe this makes me too biased to ruminate on the other Nebula finalists, I suggest you find something else to read.

Anyway, here's why I'm excited about the other names on the ballot: This Nebula ballot represents a sea change in speculative fiction, a change in terms of recognizing the next generation of speculative fiction writers. This doesn't mean all these writers are young things--their ages vary a good bit--and this doesn't mean the more established writers on the list aren't also worthy of inclusion. For example, I couldn't be more thrilled that Richard Bowes' great novelette "I Needs Must Part, The Policeman Said" is a Nebula finalist.

That said, here are the authors (besides myself) for whom this is their first time being a Nebula finalist:

In addition, a few authors on the ballot have been nominated before without winning, but still strike me as notable additions. These include Paolo Bacigalupi, Kij Johnson, and China Miéville.

I'm not going pretend all these writers are at the same point in their literary careers. Some, like Scalzi, Miéville, and VanderMeer, are established best-selling authors. Others, like Ahmed and Jemisin, are brand new authors (with Ahmed only publishing his first stories last year). And they all write a vast array of stories across different styles and genres.

But the reason I'm excited to see them on this ballot is they represent the writers who are bringing new passion and readers to the speculative fiction genres. They are literally the genre's future.

Unfortunately, some in the speculative fiction establishment have been slow in recognizing these exciting new voices. For example, Eugie Foster's nominated story "Sinner, Baker, Fabulist, Priest; Red Mask, Black Mask, Gentleman, Beast," which remains one of my favorite stories of 2009, was overlooked by all of the Year's Best anthologies and the Locus Recommended Reading List (although there are still many great stories on both the list and in the anthologies). But the fact that so many people have praised the story, and that it is also a finalist for the BSFA Award, shows that despite being overlooked it is still finding its audience.

Another work I'm excited to see on the ballot is The Windup Girl by Paolo Bacigalupi. Named one of the best books of the year by everyone from Time Magazine to Publisher's Weekly, this is another case where the speculative fiction establishment has partially overlooking a groundbreaking piece of fiction. While The Windup Girl has received many glowing reviews, I was shocked when the Locus Recommended Reading List only named Paolo's book to their "First Novels" listing. This is the best science fiction novel of the year. Period. But somehow many of the critics who select for that list felt it was only worthy of a "first novel" nod. (Note: See "Update 2" below.)

Now I'm not stupid. I realize there isn't some monolithic SF establishment holding new writers down. In addition, many of the more established members of the SF community have worked long and hard to promote the writers listed above. No, this isn't an frakking conspiracy. Instead, the SF community is like all cultures and has difficulty quickly recognizing the accomplishments of the next generation. But such recognition does eventually come, and as proof of this I present this year's Nebula Awards final ballot.

And that is why I'm so excited--because the writers I love and read are being recognized by their community. I hope this recognition helps them to thrive and grow, and create even greater stories for us to enjoy.
 

Update: 

A SFWA member emailed and said the ballot's many first-time nominees results more from the new Nebula nomination and voting process than mere generational change. Basically, the old system was subject to "logrolling" because SFWA members had to publicly state who they were nominating. When combined with members being able to nominate so many stories--I believe it was up to 10 in each category--the result was people nominating each other. In short, a daisy chain of "You pimp my story, I pimp yours."

Under the new Nebula nomination rules, this ability to pimp unto each another was limited because nominations were private (meaning no verification that one had indeed been pimped) and members were limited to 5 nominations in each category (meaning fewer spots to waste on pimping). The result was a final ballot filled with stories SFWA members actually liked.

I agree with this assessment. Many of the writers who are first-time nominees for this year's Nebula have been multiple-time nominees for the Hugo Awards. So it's likely had these new rules been in place earlier, we'd have seen many of these writers already being named Nebula finalists.

Still, no matter how this ballot came about, it remains an overdue generational shift--and one I'm excited to witness.

Update 2:

I guess this post exposed my ignorance on multiple levels. As was kindly pointed out to me, first novels are traditionally placed on the "first novels" category of the Locus Recommended Reading List. While I could quibble about this, if such is the practice then such is what gets done. I also don't mean to suggest that anyone not loving both Paolo's novel and Eugie's story like I do is a fool. Obviously we all love different types of stories and novels, and what works for one person won't always work for another.

StarShipSofa and a podcast Hugo

When I wrote last year about circulation estimates for online magazines, I was surprised to discover that major podcasts like StarShipSofa and Escape Pod have astounding levels of listenership, with tens of thousands of downloads per month. If there is a resurgence in written SF going on these days, with new readers and fans embracing the genre, then much love for this fact should be thrown the podcast way.

So on this Valentine's Day, why not show our podcasts how much they mean to us by nominating one for the Hugo Award. Ideally, there should be a podcast Hugo, but until that time Amy H. Sturgis suggests nominating StarShipSofa for the Best Fanzine Hugo. I think this is a great idea.

There are many great genre postcasts (in addition to Escape Pod, another of my favorites is the wonderfully produced Dunesteef Audio Fiction Magazine). But StarShipSofa has been around so long, and has influenced so many others, that I agree it should be the first to get the nod. And when you add in the amazing work they did last year with their fundraiser to help Jeanne and Spider Robinson, well, they proved not only do they deserve to be the first podcast to win a Hugo, they are also the fanzine most deserving of this year's award.

Complete information on nominating for the Hugo Award is available here. Remember, the deadline is March 13.

Vincent Chong's new blog and art book

If you haven't seen the art of Vincent Chong, you're missing out on one of the best artists currently working in the SF/F/H genres. I totally lucked out by having him illustrate two of my Interzone stories. He's also illustrated highly acclaimed covers for writers ranging from John Scalzi to Stephen King and many more.

Now you can fulfill all your Vincent Chong desires in two ways: through his new blog and his first art book Altered Visions. The book is a 48 page full color hardback edition printed on high quality silk paper, designed byVincent and featuring commentary alongside each image.

One image in the book is The Weather Tower, which Vincent created for the Interzone publication of my story "The Ships Like Clouds, Risen By Their Rain."

The book will be released at the World Horror Convention in March, but you can pre-order signed copies now.

A few updates on Nebula nominations, Czech magazine Ikarie, and my writing

Ikarie235 Thought I'd touch on a few updates this morning.

  • Yesterday I received an entire year's worth of the Czech SF magazine Ikarie. Wow! What a beautiful magazine. They reprinted two of my stories in 2009, "The Ships Like Clouds, Risen by Their Rain" and "When Thorns Are the Tips of Trees," and I ordered additional issues to explore what is one of the best SF magazines in Europe. At right is the issue containing my "Ships Like Clouds" story. I plan to do a blog post at some point about this great reprint market, along the lines of what I wrote about for the Russian magazine ESLI.
     
  • Speaking of "The Ships Like Clouds, Risen by Their Rain," Rachel Swirsky has selected the story as one of her Nebula Award novelette nominations (while the story was originally published in Interzone in 2008, it is eligible due to first being published in the U.S. in 2009 in Year's Best SF 14). Many thanks! Rachel is posting about her nominations on Jeff Vandermeer's website. Here are her short story picks, and her novelette picks.
     
  • Speaking of Nebula nominations, remember the deadline is Feb. 15. Here are my nominations. Of my selections, the following are doing well but need more love from SFWA members to push them over the top: "Hooves and the Hovel of Abdel Jameela" by Saladin Ahmed (in the short story category with 9 nominations); "A Memory of Wind" by Rachel Swirsky (in the novelete category with 11 nominations, "Sinner, Baker, Fabulist, Priest; Red Mask, Black Mask, Gentleman, Beast" by Eugie Foster (in the same category with 9 nominations); and The Windup Girl by Paolo Bacigalupi (in the novel category with 11 nominations). Remember, the top five six selections in each category make the final ballot, so don't forget to vote!
     
  • In addition to Rachel Swirsky, I also want to thank the people who nominated my other stories ("When Thorns Are the Tips of Trees" and "Sublimations Angels") in the Nebula's short story and novella categories. I don't know who you are, but many thanks. While I'm under no illusion that the stories will make the final ballot, it's nice to know people enjoy my work.
     
  • Finally, for those keeping track--and why would anyone but myself being doing that?--last week I spent 7.5 hours editing and revising short stories, 2 hours submitting stories to markets, 0 hours working on my novel, and way too much time online because I was launching this year's Million Writers Award. But I'm giving myself a pass on that online time because the award is now up and running!

Interzone Readers' Poll Selections

The Interzone Readers' Poll is running now through March 31. Readers can see all the eligible works, and vote for or against the stories and art, over on the Interzone Readers' Poll page.

Last year I was honored to have my story "When Thorns Are the Tips of Trees" win the Readers' Poll. This year I have two stories eligible: My novella "Sublimation Angels" (available at that link as a PDF download) and the short story "Here We Are, Falling Through Shadows."

Obviously I won't be voting for my own stories in the award. My positive votes for stories are:

  • "Sinner, Baker, Fabulist, Priest; Red Mask, Black Mask, Gentleman, Beast" by Eugie Foster, which made the BSFA Award shortlist for best short fiction and is doing well in nominations in the Nebula Award's novelette category. (Note to Nebula and BSFA voters: Read this story and vote for it!). This was one of my favorite stories of 2009, for reasons explained in my original review. This is the story I expect to win the Readers' Poll.
  • "No Longer You" by Katherine Sparrow and Rachel Swirsky.
  • "The Festival of Tethselem" by Chris Butler.
  • "The Godfall's Chemsong" by Jeremiah Tolbert.
  • "The Killing Streets" by Colin Harvey.
  • "Memory Dust" by Gareth L. Powell.
  • "By Starlight" by Rebecca J. Payne.

My positive votes for the art are

I could have voted for more stories, but decided to limit myself to seven. I also decided not to cast any negative votes this year because none of the Interzone stories really rubbed me wrong. Interzone remains my favorite SF/F magazine, and 2009 will go down as one of their best years ever.

Free ebook copy of Paolo Bacigalupi's The Windup Girl

I've written before about the good that is Paolo Bacigalupi's The Windup Girl. Now comes news that the novel is available as a free ebook, tied in with io9's selection of the novel as their book club pick. Go to that link for instructions on how to receive your free ebook version.

Instead of reposting why I think the novel is so good, here's a link to my original review. In short, I feel The Windup Girl reads like a classic dystopian novel with amazingly well-written prose, compelling characters, and a fascinating and believable plot. I'm also pleased to see the novel doing well with the Nebula Award nominations (with 9 nominations so far--don't forget the deadline is Feb. 15). The novel deserves to make both the Nebula and Hugo Award short lists, so if you haven't read it please grab a free ebook copy.

My two favorite anthologies of 2009

I'm late with this. The time to mention the best books of the preceding year is at the star of a new year, and here it is almost February.  Still, I want to plug my two favorite anthologies of 2009:

  • The Apex Book of World SF, edited by Lavie Tidhar.
  • Tesseracts Thirteen: Chilling Tales from the Great White North, edited by Nancy Kilpatrick and David Morrell.

Now I must admit 2009 was an top-notch year for anthologies, and I didn't have the opportunity to read most of them. I'm also not considering the numerous Year's Best anthologies which came out, many of which were great reads.

The Apex Book of World SF is simply put an amazing and long-overdue anthology. I'm not sure I can add much to the glowing reviews Tidhar's collection has already received, but the proof of the pudding is in actually reading these stories. With works ranging from by S.P. Somtow "The Bird Catcher" to Aliette de Bodard's "The Lost Xuyan Bride," you will not find a better anthology of international speculative fiction. I eagerly await the next volume in this series.

Tesseracts Thirteen, while attracting less attention that the Apex anthology, is another great installment in this ongoing series of Canadian speculative fiction. Where the last volume focused on novellas, this time the focus is on horror and dark fantasy. There are too many good and great stories in this volume to mention them all. Among my favorites were Michael Kelly's cold and chilling "The Woods" and the masterful "Lost in a Field of Paper Flowers" by Gord Rollo. In addition, Robert Knowlton's essay "Out of the Barrens: Two Centuries of Canadian Dark Fantasy and Horror," which closes out the volume, demands to be read by anyone curious about Canada's contributions to these genres.

So if you're interested in great anthologies--and especially anthologies focusing on non-American speculative fiction--check out these two books.

Art for "Into the Depths of Illuminated Seas"

Into-the-depths Artist Ben Baldwin has posted the original artwork he created for my story "Into the Depths of Illuminated Seas," which appears in the new issue of Interzone. I love the art and am wondering how my family will react to a print hanging in our house (fingers are crossed for a positive reaction, because I plan to order one). If you want to see a larger version, click on the link above.

I should mention, though, that readers won't find a naked woman standing in ocean waves in the story. Ben used that oft-mentioned "artistic license" technique to great effect, as he aimed at capturing the story's essence instead of illustrating a particular scene.

And while there has been a lot of worthy debate recently about why so many naked women are featured in fantasy magazine art (especially on the covers), in this case I believe the subdued nudity is appropriate. My story deals with a woman cursed to have the names of dying sailors continually flow across her body. Without showing her skin, I don't see how anyone could illustrate this story. If a fantasy magazine plops a naked woman on every cover, yeah, I have major concerns about that. But when an artist illustrates a particular story where you have to see some skin to expose (pun intended) a major plot point, then such an illustration strikes me as appropriate. Especially when it's done as tastefully and artistically as Ben did. It'll be interesting to see what other people think.

Ben is an incredibly talented artist who has illustrated a number of books and magazines. You can check out more of his art on his website at www.benbaldwin.co.uk. For more on my story, please see this recent post.

My final nominations for the 2009 Nebula Awards

Back in November, I made a few initial nominations for the Nebula Awards because I wanted to bring early attention to deserving stories and novels. But I still had a few spaces left on my nomination ballot--you can nominate up to five stories or novels in each category--so after additional reading I've added more stories to the mix.

Here are my final nominations:

Short story

Novelette

Novella

  • "Arkfall" by Carolyn Ives Gilman, F&SF, September 2008. Read my original review here.
  • "The God Engines" by John Scalzi, Subterranean Press, 2009.

Novel

  • The Windup Girl by Paolo Bacigalupi. See my review here. If this novel does not make the final ballot, it will be a true shame.
  • Green by Jay Lake.
  • The Walls of the Universe by Paul Melko.
  • Boneshaker by Cherie Priest

Bradbury Award

  • Moon, film by Duncan Jones and Nathan Parker.
  • Avatar, film by James Cameron.
  • Coraline, film by Henry Selick.
  • Ponyo, film by Hayao Miyazaki.
  • Up, film by Bob Peterson and Pete Docter.

Andre Norton Award

  • The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland In A Ship Of Her Own Making by Catherynne M. Valente.
  • Odd and the Frost Giants by Neil Gaiman. Read my original review here. And you should know my son threatened me if I didn't add this book to my list (but I was going to anyway).
  • Fire by Kristin Cashore.

The Nebula Award nominating period runs through Feb. 15. I hope people will check out the stories and novels listed here--I can't recommend them enough--and make their own nominations before the deadline.

The only Avatar analysis worth reading

Okay, maybe I'm being a bit melodramatic with that title because there are a ton of Avatar reviews out there and I can't pretend to have read them all. But Roz Kaveney's examination of the film on Strange Horizons is still the most insightful I've read, and is highly recommended for anyone trying to scratch deeper into the film.

While you should read the entire review, here's one of the many points I totally agree with:

The most important and telling criticism levelled at the film—to the extent of causing some people to boycott it altogether—is that its central plot structure is a standard neo-colonialist one, in which the Pandorans need the help of a superior being, a white American, to survive and the story is about him, not about them. The argument is that, even granted that sometimes members of a privileged group renounce privilege, telling their story inevitably still privileges them above the unprivileged group whose story is not being told. This charge is not, let us be clear, without merit, though it is hard to see how a film with any other plot structure could be scripted, let alone made in Hollywood at vast expense.

As well as being the Great White Saviour, Jake is that most useful of plot devices, the protagonist who has to be told things; he is also the Man Who Learns Better, and discards earlier convictions; he is also someone who cheerfully signs up for complicity with what he comes to realize is atrocity, and has quite a lot of expiation to do. Yes, the story is about him, but all stories have to be about somebody—Jake is somebody who has been part of the most negative aspects of human society and who comes to understand that he has been exploited and spat out. His relationship to privilege is complicated even at the start. It may be fanciful to think his surname a reference to the great French Protestant rebel and statesman, but, given Cameron's form in such matters as embodied elsewhere in the film, possibly not.

It might be superficially appealing to reimagine the story so that it could have been about a Pandoran coming to understand the degradation of human society. This is superficially attractive, save for the fact that we would need to be shown from the film's inception the underlying assumptions from which such a protagonist was operating. We would need to have an entire alien world and society shown us in what would end up being "As you know, Bob" conversations, and with the risk that such a protagonist's naivete about human institutions would end up being portrayed in a way best described as minstrelsy. Moreover, the process of thinking oneself into the mindset of a Na'vi would almost inevitably involve an even greater appropriation of the identities of actually existing forest hunter-gatherer peoples, which would itself be problematic.

This is the best response I've seen to the neo-colonists criticisms, which while raising valid points in my opinion miss the overall message of the film.

And for my final comment about Avatar, I point people to the best explanation I've seen for why James Cameron's films have been so successful: He "made a pact with Satan. How else do you explain Titanic being the highest-grossing film of all time? Seriously, think about it. Someone should look into this."

The science behind Avatar

My wife and I saw Avatar last night in 3D, and we both totally enjoyed it. Yes, the plot was somewhat simple, and yes, it is a white man's escape fantasy. (I mean, what people would let an outsider lead them into war after only 3 months?) But that doesn't take away from the fact that it is a very good movie, which my non-SF-loving wife loved as much as I did. That last fact speaks to why this film is so successful with audiences.

What really impressed me was that the science behind the movie was so accurate. No Star Trek red matter here. For anyone interested in the science behind the movie, go here. I should note that Cameron's comment about writing science fact instead of science fiction is arrogant and irritating, but in light of how accurate the science behind the film is, I'll give him a pass.

The best stories of the year, as overlooked by the Year's Best anthologies

Yesterday I posted about Gardner Dozois releasing the table of contents for his Year's Best Science Fiction 27. This was preceded by the list for Jonathan Strahan's The Best Science Fiction & Fantasy of the Year: Volume 4 and Rich Horton's The Year's Best Science Fiction and Fantasy 2010 (the TOC for all of these can be found in this thread on the Asimov's forum). The last of the big 4 anthologies, David Hartwell and Kathryn Cramer's Year's Best SF, has not yet released a TOC.

There are some great stories listed. For example, "Eros, Philia, Agape" by Rachel Swirsky (Tor.com) and "Before My Last Breath" by Robert Reed (Asimov's) are fighting for my last nominating spot in the Nebula Award short story category. But that said, I'm disappointed so many of the stories I loved the most in 2009 were overlooked by these three anthologies.

For example, "Sinner, Baker, Fabulist, Priest; Red Mask, Black Mask, Gentleman, Beast" by Eugie Foster, originally published in Interzone and reprinted in Apex Magazine, is without a doubt one of the top SF stories of the year (and according to people like Rusty at BestScienceFictionStories.com, one of the best modern SF stories, a view I'd agree with). I've read this story multiple times because it is so great, and have heard the same from other readers.

Other overlooked stories include "Greetings from Kampala" by Angela Ambroz and "The Shangri-La Affair" by Lavie Tidhar (both from Strange Horizons), "From the Lost Diary of TreeFrog7" by Nnedi Okorafor (Clarkesworld), "The Killing Streets" by Colin Harvey and "By Starlight" by Rebecca J. Payne (both from Interzone), and "The Art of the Dragon" by Sean McMullen (F&SF).

Thankfully Lavie will appear in Gardner's anthology with the equally great "The Integrity of the Chain" (from Fantasy), which will be his well-deserved debut in a year's best anthology. And as I mentioned, Hartwell and Cramer have yet to announce their selections, which are always good. But so far, I feel the riskier stories were overlooked precisely because they are not your standard SF tales.

For example, I really liked "Black Swan" by Bruce Sterling when it was originally published in Interzone. This is a solid SF tale of multiple dimensions, alternate history, and quantum mechanics, which is well written (as is everything written by Sterling) with characters the reader instantly relates to. When I read the story, I instantly knew it would make some of the year's best anthologies, and it did.

How did I know this? Because it was a safe choice. The story explores subjects which challenge the reader without ever making them feel uncomfortable. And that is why I believe so many of these overlooked stories were not chosen. They disturb the reader. They diverge too much from accepted SF conventions by mixing personal and social issues with more traditional SF themes. They challenge the frontiers which separate SF from fantasy (as if theoretical science itself isn't also mounting such an assault).

In fact, the biggest complaint SF critics seem to have with stories like Eugie Foster's great "Sinner, Baker, Fabulist, Priest..." is that they aren't truly science fiction. Well, I call BS on that. If "The Motorman's Coat" by John Kessel (F&SF) (see update below) is SF enough to be chosen for one of these anthologies, then "Sinner, Baker, Fabulist, Priest..." definitely fits the mold. These are SF stories for a world where the frontiers of scientific possibility are almost philosophical in nature.

In the end, I'll still buy these anthologies because they contain a number of stories I haven't had the opportunity to read. It's also always fascinating to read the stories that someone else considers the best of the year. But even as I read these books, it'll be sad to know some of the best stories of 2010 won't be reprinted within.

UPDATE: BlueTyson rightly pointed out "The Motorman's Coat" by John Kessel is in an anthology containing SF & fantasy, so my mistake on that. But other selected stories flirt between fantasy and SF and other genres, or deal with subjects which stretch the bounds of scientific possibility (such as faster than light spaceships or time travel, which in my book are both pure fantasy and in no way SF). So my overall point remains.

TOC for Year's Best Science Fiction 27, edited by Gardner Dozois

Over on the Asimov's forum, Gardner Dozois has posted the table of contents for his Year's Best Science Fiction 27. Here are the stories:

  • UTRIUSQUE COSMI, Robert Charles Wilson--New Space Opera 2.
  • A STORY, WITH BEANS, Steven Gould--Analog.
  • UNDER THE SHOUTING SKY, Karl Bunker--Cosmos.
  • EVENTS PRECEDING THE HELVETICAN REVOLUTION, John Kessel--New Space Opera 2.
  • USELESS THINGS, Maureen F. McHugh--Eclipse Three.
  • BLACK SWAN, Bruce Sterling--Interzone.
  • CRIMES AND GLORY, Paul McAuley--Subterranean
  • SEVENTH FALL, Alexander Irvine--Subterranean
  • BUTTERFLY BOMB, Dominic Green--Interzone.
  • INFINITES, Vandana Singh--The Woman Who Thought She Was a Planet.
  • THINGS UNDONE, John Barnes--Jim Baen's Universe.
  • ON THE HUMAN PLAN, Jay Lake--Lone Star Stories.
  • THE ISLAND, Peter Watts--New Space Opera 2.
  • THE INTEGRITY OF THE CHAIN, Lavie Tidhar--Fantasy.
  • LION WALK, Mary Rosenblum--Asimov's.
  • ESCAPE TO OTHER WORLDS WITH SCIENCE FICTION, Jo Walton--Tor.com.
  • THREE LEAVES OF ALOE, Rand B. Lee--F&SF.
  • MONGOOSE, Elizabeth Bear & Sarah Monette--Lovecraft Unbound.
  • PARADISO LOST, Albert E.Cowdrey--F&SF.
  • IT TAKES TWO, Nicola Griffith--Eclipse Three.
  • BLOCKED, Geoff Ryman--F&SF.
  • SOLACE, James Van Pelt--Analog.
  • ACT ONE, Nancy Kress--Asimov's
  • TWILIGHT OF THE GODS, John C. Wright--Federations.
  • BLOOD DAUBER, Ted Kosmatka & Michael Poore--Asimov's.
  • THIS WIND BLOWING, AND THIS TIDE, Damien Broderick--Asimov's.
  • HAIR, Adam Roberts--When It Changed.
  • BEFORE MY LAST BREATH, Robert Reed--Asimov's.
  • ONE OF OUR BASTARDS IS MISSING, Paul Cornell--Solaris Book of New Science Fiction, Three.
  • EDISON’S FRANKENSTEIN, Chris Roberson--Postscripts 20/21.
  • EROSION, Ian Creasey--Asimov's
  • VISHNU AT THE CAT CIRCUS, Ian McDonald--Cyberabad Days.

Looks like a good list of stories, and once again original anthologies are well represented. My only disappointment is that only two Interzone stories made the list. There were several great Interzone stories I'd have included, such as "Sinner, Baker, Fabulist, Priest; Red Mask, Black Mask, Gentleman, Beast" by Eugie Foster. But it's Gardner's book and his choices, and I look forward to reading the stories I've missed.

Response to "Should SF Die?"

Over on the Shine Anthology's weblog, editor and writer Jetse de Vries has posted the deliberately provocative essay "Should SF Die?" Jetse covers the full range of issues facing the genre, including a lack of racial and ethnic diversity, how international SF is snubbed by a WASP-dominated genre, a general lack of readers, and a lack of imagination among today's SF writers.

I'm really looking forward to Jetse's new anthology of positive SF, and in general I support his calls for more positive SF. I differ with him in some regards (as I mentioned the other day, instead of placing SF's failures on a lack of positive answers to the world's problems, it is more likely the genre's negative outlook on life turns away readers). Still, I can't fault the goal he's pushing toward.

But his "Should SF Die" rant is simply too much. Yes, all of the issues Jetse addresses must be dealt with. But his words remind me of the mundane manifesto from a few years ago, and how that was also the answer to what ails SF. But then the mundane SF issue of Interzone came and went without any love from readers, and that was that.

The reason mundane SF disappeared quietly into the night is because it was merely an intellectual exercise. People debated the issue, threw angst left and right, dangled their philosophical thoughts proudly, and what happened next? Nothing. Because the stories produced under this manifesto failed to stir readers.

Stories are what matter first and foremost in any writing genre, and no amount of intellectual debate can ever change this. No one sits around bemoaning what is wrong with the fantasy genre, or saying that fantasies could be even more successful if only they were more relevant to today's lives and/or provided the answers people need. Instead, fantasy authors produce the best fantasies they can, and readers either embrace the stories or they don't. If SF wants to have a future, it must do the same. The genre must embrace works by writers from all parts of the world, and embrace new types of stories, and embrace new readers by giving them exciting stories they can't find anywhere else.

I agree it's a problem when SF writers avoid writing about today's issues, and that the imaginations of genre writers are often limited. But the answer isn't more talk about the problem. The answer is for authors to write stories which address these concerns. For editors and publishers to publish stories without regard to a narrow WASP outlook on life. And for we as a genre to put up, or shut the hell up!

If we write exciting SF stories relevant to a multi-cultural and ever-changing world, the readers will come. If we don't, then the genre dies. And no amount of intellectual back and forth will ever change this basic fact.

So I look forward to Jetse's anthology. I hope it contains some great stories. Because if it doesn't, all this debate will have mattered for nothing.

Positively positive that positive SF doesn't have to be positive to be positive

Despite having fun with that headline, I'm talking about a serious subject. Over on his Twitter account, Jetse de Vries--editor of the upcoming Shine anthology of positive SF--says the genre is failing the people of the world, who are suffering from global warming, disease, hurricanes, job losses and so on. These people are looking for answers on how to improve their future, and "SF isn't telling them: SF only tells them how excriciably horrible the next apocalypse will be. Trust me: they *know*!"

Jetse adds: "I'm extremely tired of the argument that projecting the 'if-this-goes-on' future will prevent it from happening: people want *solutions* too. So yes, Paolo (Bacigalupi), make fun of me all you want, but while calling out FIRE, FIRE is one thing (SF is great at that), it's the firefighters who extinguish the fire & the foreseeing planners who try to *prevent* future fires. SF lacks the latter, unfortunately."

In closing, Jetse says that because SF isn't providing these answers, the genre has become marginal.

Since the biggest movie event of the year is a SF film--and people embrace all things SF in video games and Hollywood blockbusters--I wouldn't use the term marginal to describe the genre. Has literary SF become marginal? Yes, that could easily be argued. But even this lesser marginalization isn't due to a lack of positive forecasting of answers.

First off, I'd like to know what "solutions" the Golden Age of SF actually projected, or indeed any age of SF ever successfully projected. The most famous example given for the genre projecting positive answers was dealing with nuclear holocaust, as in Walter M. Miller Jr's classic A Canticle for Leibowitz. But these stories didn't provide answers on how to avoid destroying ourselves with nuclear weapons. Instead, the genre gave a warning. Humanity had to find our own way (and we still are).

Likewise with SF from all ages. Yes, the genre dealt very well with showing us how technology was changing, and how human could adapt and change with our technology. But on all of the major issues of the last century, SF either missed the boat or played catch-up once the issues were already being dealt with. For example, the Golden Age of SF of the 1940s and 50s took place when a lack of equal rights for women and people of color were pressing issues around the globe. But you do not find the classics of Golden Age fiction offering solutions to these issues (or even acknowledging they existed except in a off-handed manner). By the time the genre began to write about environmental and population issues in the 1960s and 70s, our society was already trying to deal with these problems--and again, the genre merely showed the problem, not the solution. Same with the current problem of global warming. While writers dealing with global warming show what could happen, I haven't seen one offer a valid solution that doesn't already exist in some way among the advocates and politicians trying to deal with the problem.

The truth is SF rarely gets in front of human understanding on the problems we create for ourselves. As such, it is difficult for the genre to provide answers for what ails humanity--especially problems created by social issues, which again is where I'd place global warming and most of the other items mentioned here.  We create our own messes, and we must find a way to clean up the mess even as we create ever more messes.

So what is positive about the genre? That's simple: SF's outlook on humanity's future. That humanity is able to always find a solution to the problems we create. That we as a species do not give into despair and give up. I would argue that this positive outlook is what is missing from SF these days, and also explains why the literary SF genre is in such trouble. SF found in video games and on the big screen generally keeps to the classic positive attitude of SF; while this doesn't totally explain their success, I believe it is part of it.

I'm all for positive SF, even as I also see a need for SF with a less positive outlook on life. And if SF can provide some positive answers for our future, even better. But based on the genre's track record, I'm not holding my breath.