Aliette de Bodard on Non-Western/Non-Anglophone Science Fiction

Earlier this year Norman Spinrad's Asimov's column "Third World Worlds" stirred up a good portion of the speculative fiction community. Anyone who missed out on that explosion can see my original post on the subject. Be sure to also check out the comments and links below my post for more information.

Now the Sept. 2010 Asimov's presents an excellent response to Spinrad's views in the form of Aliette de Bodard's latest Thought Experiments column. Titled The View from the Other Side: Science Fiction and Non-Western/Non-Anglophone Counties, the column's introduction touches on the Spinrad controversy. However, Aliette herself focuses beyond Spinrad to present an excellent summary of world science fiction.

The most controversial part of Aliette's essay is likely to be her ideas on why so little world SF is being translated for Western cultures. To quote: "There is plenty of SF being translated from English into other languages, but little of it that makes its way into Western Anglophone countries." Aliette believes that this gap results from the cultural domination of the West, and of the United States in particular. She discusses how at the time of the Tang dynasty from the seventh to tenth century AD, when China was at its height of power, China exported its culture across the region but took very little in the ways of culture back into itself. The same when France was at the height of its power.

Aliette believes that since the U.S. has been the dominate world power since the middle of the 20th century, this dominate culture is following a similar track as the earlier Chinese and French and not bringing much of outside culture into itself.

This might very well be part of the reason so little non-Western SF is translated into the United States. However, I also wonder whether or not the immense size of the U.S.--over 300 million people spread across a massive landmass containing many separate cultural regions and identities--also adds to that isolation. China went through this same thing many times in their history. Not only were they for long stretches the dominant culture in their region, they were so large and contained so many cultures within their realm that they could ignore the need to look at cultural ideas outside their borders.

It's hard to say whether any of these ideas are true, but Aliette has presented a fascinating thought experiment. I suggest people go read it.

The Online SciFi Strange Anthology

Note: A year ago I first noticed a new trend in science fiction which I called SciFi Strange. Since then I've been compiling a list of SciFi Strange stories. Hence this online "anthology." Please enjoy.

Introduction to SciFi Strange

SciFi Strange isn't a label. It isn't a definition.  Instead, it's an attempt to describe the science fiction being created by some of today's most exciting writers. These stories combine the literary standards and cultural understandings of the New Wave movement with the basic strangeness and sensawunda from the golden age of science fiction--all seen through the lens of today's multicultural world, where diversity and difference are the norm even as basic human values and needs still bind us together.

SciFi Strange also flirts with the boundaries of what is scientifically--and therefore realistically--possible, without being bounded by the rigid frames of the world as we know it today. But don't call SciFi Strange fantasy. This is pure science fiction. It's merely an updated version of the literature of ideas. A science fiction for a world where the frontiers of scientific possibility are almost philosophical in nature.

Writers of SciFi Strange are a diverse group. Many are new writers who first came to the genre by experiencing science fiction in film and video games--meaning they don't see the term SciFi as derogatory but instead as celebratory. A few have been writing science fiction for decades. Others mainly write fantasy, but cross over into science fiction from time to time. The more established of these authors publish their stories in Fantasy and Science Fiction and Asimov's. The newer ones frequently find homes in Interzone, Clarkesworld Magazine, and Strange Horizons.

Please understand that this is a dream anthology. Unless a publisher offers to actually publish an book along these lines, this is as far as I go. But the stories below are still well worth the read, and I hope you enjoy them as much as I did.

The SciFi Strange Stories

Stories I'd love to include in this "anthology" but which aren't online include

  • "Third Day Lights" by Alaya Dawn Johnson
    Published in Interzone, reprinted in Year's Best SF 11.
  • "Skinner's Room" by William Gibson
    An older story, but still one which fits with SciFi Strange. Gibson later revisited this short story in his Bridge trilogy.
  • "Làzaro y Antonio" by Marta Randall
    Published in F&SF.

If you know any stories which would make a good addition to this online anthology, please add them in the comments below.

My Context 23 schedule

Next week I'll be a participating author at the Context 23 convention in Columbus. As I've said before, Context is a small literary con which is always well worth attending.

If you want to catch me at the convention, here's my panel schedule:

Friday, Aug. 27, 10 pm
"BFA: The Good, Bad, and Ugly?" with myself and Janet Harriett.

Saturday, Aug. 28, 10 am
"Blogging – Creativity and Publicity" with myself, Maurice Broaddus, Janet Harriett, Joseph Martino, Michelle Pendergrass, and others.

Saturday, 2:30 pm
"Is a SF Renaissance Around The Corner?" I'm moderating this panel and the current line-up includes Tobias Buckell, Timons Esaias, Maura Heaphy, Paul Melko, and Paul Stevens. This will be a great discussion, so don't miss it.

Saturday, 4:00 pm
"Southern Horror"with myself, Michael Knost, Michelle Pendergrass, and others.

Saturday, 7:00 pm
"Awards, Nominations, And Publicity, Oh My! Make It Work For You" with myself, Michael Knost, Michael West, and others.

Apologies for not having all the names for these panels, but I don't have access to the final line-ups.

During the con I'll be giving away extra copies of Interzone 228, which contains my story "Plague Birds." If you'd like a copy, simply ask for one. I'll even be happy to sign it.

Our science fiction isn't your father's SF

The February 2010issue of Asimov's contains an amazing story in "Stone Wall Truth" by Caroline M. Yoachim. This story is set in a far future village which exists alongside the ancient remnants of a high-technology wall. When a new ruler takes control of the land, he sends his vanquished foes to this village, where they are cut open and strung to a wall. The wall not only keeps these people alive but reveals to them their inner devils and hells. Once that is done, the person is sewn back together and allowed to live--if people can truly live after having witnessed the darkness within the minds and souls of all humans.

This is one of those rare stories I immediately reread upon finish it. In fact, I felt the same way reading this story as I did last year about Eugie Foster's novelette "Sinner, Baker, Fabulist, Priest; Red Mask, Black Mask, Gentleman, Beast" (which won a well-deserved Nebula Award and is a finalist for the Hugo). Like Foster's novelette, Yoachim's story also struck me as a perfect example of SciFi Strange and will be on my list of the year's best stories. But that said, I also knew many science fiction fans would have the same issue with Yoachim's story as with the other SciFi Strange stories I love. Because every single aspect of the story isn't explained, for many people a story like this simply can't be called science fiction.

Sure enough, when I looked for reviews on the story I found these comments in Tangent Online by Carl Slaughter. While Carl praises the story, he asks "What is the source of the wall's power?  The author doesn't say.  We don't discover the origin and nature of the wall.  Nor the identity of the Ancients who built it, nor the time and place of the story.  Thus the story is a masterpiece, but a masterpiece of fantasy rather than science fiction."

That review drives me crazy with its narrow view on what qualifies as science fiction (although I totally agree with Carl that the story is a masterpiece). The truth is there are many accepted tropes in science fiction which are not technically possible or can't be accurately explained, including faster than light travel, time travel, dimensional travel and so on. However, if an author uses these tropes in their story they're okay and still writing science fiction. But if an author tries to explore a possible future technology but don't explain said technology in mind-numbing detail, they aren't SF.

I have a mouth and I must scream! Which, by the way, refers to another famous science fiction story which doesn't explain how everything works. I mean, a computer the size of a planet which can trap people inside it for all eternity? Provide me a précis on how that is possible under what we currenty know about science and technology. It isn't. But Ellison's classic story is still pure science fiction.

Part of the problem is that the science fiction genre has become too narrow in what it accepts as legitimate SF. We live in a world where our most advanced theoretical sciences like quantum mechanics are almost philosophical in nature. But instead of allowing our science fiction to be as equally free to explore the universe, we box it in. And ironically, we're not even consistent in how we do this. For example, people screamed when the last Star Trek film tripped into the red matter realm, but they didn't say a word about universal translators, transporters, and Spock being the offspring of two totally different alien species. But all these conventions are accepted as SF without a second thought.

This is made even more amusing when you consider that the science in many older SF classics was flat out wrong when the authors originally wrote them. For example, in Robert Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land, the book opens with the discovery that Mars is inhabited, and even mentions Martian canals. Ray Bradbury's The Martian Chronicles deals with a similarly occupied Mars. However, when the authors wrote those science fiction classics it was known to science that Mars was a hostile environment which did not contain advanced life. So why were those books accepted as being part of the SF genre?

Likewise, in Gene Wolfe's classic Book of the New Sun series, the science and setting are so far in the future that the science behind everything is more fantasy than real.  Again, the science isn't explained to the Nth degree, but the books are accepted as being science fiction.

What these examples prove is that being part of the science fiction genre is about more than simply writing accurately about science. It is also about exploring ideas and visions and possible futures. So why the different standard when new writers like Yoachim and Foster do that very thing? I have yet to read a convincing explanation for this divide.

I suspect that just as science has expanded into disconcerting places in the last decade, some people are disturbed by where science fiction is going these days. So they simply wave their hand and state that certain stories can't possibly be science fiction.

Which is too bad. Because while our science fiction may not be your father's SF, all these stories belong to the same genre.

For students: A few words on genre and literary fiction

A while back I received an interview request from a high school student.  Based on the questions this student asked, it was obvious he'd run up against a teacher who believed that literary fiction was "good" and genre fiction "bad."

Since I encountered this same attitude from some of my teachers in high school and college, I thought I'd share my responses to the interview. Maybe this will help other students understand that great fiction can exist in both the genre and literary fields.
 

1. Do you think it is possible for a work of fiction to be literary and genre at the same time?

Absolutely. There are many works of genre fiction which exist on an equal plane with the best literary fiction. Examples include Gene Wolfe's Book of the New Sun and the writings of great genre authors like Samuel R. Delany and Ursula K. Le Guin. You will also find that some of the most famous works of literary authors like Toni Morrison, Cormac McCarthy, and Michael Chabon are actually genre works, with Morrison's Beloved being a ghost story, McCarthy's Blood Meridian a western/horror story, and many of Chabon's works resting fully in the fantasy and SF fields.

2. Why do you think there is a line between literary and genre, and what can writers and readers do to overcome it?

The line between literary and genre fiction results from the shared history of these types of fiction. By its nature, literary fiction attempts to hold itself up as the serious fictional genre while genre fiction is supposed to be mere escapist reading. But where there may have once been a bit of truth to these distinctions, that difference fell apart decades ago. The best genre fiction is the equal of the best literary fiction and vice versa. You'll find great stories in all areas of fiction. Likewise, you will also find horrible writing in all areas of fiction. As the science fiction writer Theodore Sturgeon once said, "Ninety percent of everything is crud." That applies equally to literary fiction as to genre writings. But that other 10 percent--that's the fiction worth reading, regardless of genre. And if writers and readers look for that 10%, we'll all be happier.

3. To you, what qualifies a work of fiction as literary, genre, or both/neither?

These days, that qualification depends on how a publisher wishes to market a book. There are many readers who will read one type of novel and not another (even though, as I mentioned above, there is a ton of overlap between genre and literary fiction). So if a publisher believes they can sell a book as a genre novel, they do so. Likewise with literary fiction.

4. What do you like about literary fiction, and what do you like about genre fiction?

It would be better to ask what do I like about fiction. I demand that my fiction be well written and take me to places I've never been and introduce me to people I care about. More importantly, I want my fiction to teach me something new. To open my eyes to new possibilities. What I don't want is to read fiction which merely reinforces what I already know or is a reworking of what I've already read.

5. What do you like about writing literary fiction, and what do you like about writing genre fiction?

While I've published fiction which could be considered both literary and genre, my goal has always been the same: To create the best possible story. I believe well-written stories take on a life of their own. That's what I aim for with every story I write.

Review of I Am Number Four by Pittacus Lore (pseudonym of James Frey and Jobie Hughes)

SF Signal has published my review of the young adult novel I Am Number Four by Pittacus Lore, which is a pseudonym for James Frey and Jobie Hughes. When I received this book for review consideration I wasn't sure I'd like it--after all, I've ranted before about literary writers dipping their toes in the genre pool. Add in the total circus which swirls around Frey's writing career and it is fair to state I wasn't expecting much.

But to my surprise, this is a fun, fast paced novel with the potential to bring new readers to the science fiction genre. While the novel is absolutely not original or deep, if you know a young adult who loves fantasy novels but refuses to touch science fiction, this might be a good book to tempt them with.

Read the full review on SF Signal.

Maurice Broaddus on how to avoid editorial fail with your next anthology

Maurice Broaddus has a great post up on Jeff VanderMeer's site called "The PC Challenges of Being an Editor." He mentions the recent complaints about anthologies which were either all male or lacked people of color, and gives some simple advice on how editors can avoid falling into this fail trap.

His suggestions:

  • Open submission period
  • Have a "rolodex" which includes a diverse group of people
  • Actually look around for great stories.

Amazing how simple the process can be, and amazing that editors keep messing it up.

Just FYI, Broaddus co-edited the wonderful anthology Dark Faith, which I'm in the process of reviewing. Apex Books is currently having a 40% off sale on all versions of Dark Faith.

Update on my Inception flop prediction

Last week I predicted that Christopher Nolan's Inception would be a good film but a flop. In the interest of testing my predictive powers, it's worth noting the film had a decent first-weekend box office of $60 million. However, we'll have to wait until the next week to see if it has holding power or merely played to the general SF fan base and the director's own fans.

By way of comparison, the SF film Serenity opened with ticket sales of $10 million its first week against a budget of nearly $40 million. Unfortunately, Serenity's box office dropped off sharply in following weeks and it only ended up making just over half of its budget back (which doesn't include the cost of ads and marketing). This suggests the film--while a great space opera film--only played to the genre's fan base.

At $60 million, Inception played to more than merely the genre base--obviously the opening also attracted all the Nolan fans out there. However, like Serenity it still earned roughly a quarter of its $200 million budget (again, not counting its massive ad and marketing campaign, and yes, I realize $60 million is slightly more than a quarter of $200 million, but I'm using Hollywood math here to make a point :-). Anyway, in order to determine if the film is successful or not the next week will be critical. Most Hollywood films these days experience a 50% or greater box office drop in their second week. If Inception can avoid this, then I will be wrong and the film will be a moderate to big success. If word of mouth doesn't bring in the audiences and it experiences a large drop off like Serenity did, then it will be on its way to flopping.

I'll write more on this in a week once the trend is clear.

Context 23 in Columbus, August 27-29

As an FYI, I'll be a participating author at the Context 23 convention in Columbus from August 27-29. This is a small literary con which Mike Resnick once called "the Readercon of the Midwest." This year's guest of honor is Tobias Buckell, while the horror guest of honor is Elizabeth Massie.

I highly recommend this con to all speculative fiction writers. One of the panels I'll be on deals with the future of science fiction--I'll let people know more about this when the panel schedule is firmed up. Context also hosts an excellent selection of writing workshops. These workshops fill up quickly, so register early.

Harlan Ellison and Prince flee the internet, which somehow survives without them

The internet died last week. At least, that's the message coming from Harlan Ellison and Prince, two controversy-loving artists who evidently couldn't stomach how social media makes it impossible to totally control their online image.

Harlan started the fun last Tuesday after reading this rather innocuous article on io9 about his current book sale. I've read through the article twice and can't see what pushed Harlan over the edge; perhaps it was one of the comments to the article (such as the commenter who said, "What is the current bid for Harlan to stand and yell at you for 15 minutes?")

In response, Harlan posted on his website forum that "I've finally had as much of the internet as I can bear. The 'news site' ... has actualized my worst dread nightmare of web involvement. I just gotta get the hell away from this awful thing. ... I abominate the public footprint being left for me by caitiff like the journalistically-knobheaded toddlers whose names are emblazoned on their editorial side-bar."

Because of the extremely dated design of Harlan's website forum, it is impossible to directly link to his comment. However, his words about how "I abominate the public footprint being left for me" does suggest his problem with the internet is that he can't control his online image.

The same thing popped up last week with the artist again known as Prince, who stated "The internet's completely over. I don't see why I should give my new music to iTunes or anyone else. They won't pay me an advance for it and then they get angry when they can't get it."

Obviously Prince has issues with the new ways people are purchasing music online, but I can't help but wonder if like Harlan Ellison, Prince's true issue is how social media has changed the dynamic around managing your own image. Both Harlan and Prince came of age when artists began receiving more media coverage for their persona than their artistic works. This isn't to say that Harlan and Prince aren't great artists--they are. But they have also cultivated their controversial image for maximum effect. The dust jackets to one of Harlan's books claimed he was "possibly the most contentious person on Earth," while Prince wrote the word "slave" on his cheek to protest being trapped in a contract with Warner Brother after the company paid him an unbelievably large amount of money to, well, be trapped in a contract with them.

But hey, controversy was good to these two artists and for decades they used it to promote their artistic works. But now the established order has broken. Instead of being able to create and manage controversy on your own terms, that pesky social media allows anyone to pick at your life and work. If you squeeze someone's breast on stage during the Hugo Awards ceremony, people will post the video online and rip you a new one. If someone isn't pleased with your archaic view of the internet, they can pick apart your opinion while the entire world watches in glee.

Please tell me how this can be anything but good?

The irony is that both Harlan Ellison and Prince were originally enfant terribles fighting the far-too conventional artistic establishment. Now they are the very establishment they once fought against--aging artists who don't like how the internet and social media gives millions of people the ability to criticize them.

Please don't mistake my criticism. I love the best examples of Harlan's writings and Prince's music. I have purchased a number of Harlan's books and Prince's albums, and if they release new works I might purchase even more.

But the days of micro-managing your controversies to raise your artistic profile are over. If you do something controversial, yes, the online world will notice. But you can't manage how people will react. People might as easily applaud as laugh or scream at you.

This doesn't mean controversy no longer sells. Of course it does. But if you light a fire in today's online world it can easily come back to burn you. And I suspect that is what Harlan Ellison and Prince hate about today's interconnected reality.

The genre film flop-o-meter: Christopher Nolan's Inception

So I thought I'd start predicting how certain science fiction and fantasy films will do at the box office. No real reason for this except I enjoy genre films and how they've become vital to Hollywood's well-being. Doubt this last fact? Simply look at the top grossing movies of all time and try to imagine that list without genre films.

The first film on my list is Christopher Nolan's Inception, set for a July 16th release. I've long been a fan of Nolan's works as are most critics and movie lovers, all of whom are already lining up to kiss this film's celluloid ass. None of this is surprising given Nolan's excellent record with high quality films like The Prestige and Memento.

But that said, this film will be a major flop at the box office. And I don't say that simply because Leonardo DiCaprio made his stupid comment that people don't like science fiction films "because we have a hard time investing in worlds that are too far detached from what we know." Yeah Leo, that's why that list of all-time highest grossing films is filled with nothing but SF and fantasy epics.

No, the bigger problem is that this film deals with dreams, a tough subject for directors to touch without losing their ability to make a watchable film. I mean, even the great Akira Kurosawa couldn't do it with his Dreams.

In addition, the budget for this film is in excess of $200 million. Are you kidding me? None of Nolan's non-Batman films have made that much, with two--The Prestige and Insomnia--grossing just over $100 million. And Leo is hardly a box office draw anymore--that ship sank with Titanic.

My prediction is that this will be a good SF film which the critics will love, but which doesn't find a large audience because of its subject matter. Since Christopher Nolan is still Hollywood's golden boy and is working on another Batman movie, studios will overlook losing their shirts on this film. But that won't change the fact that Inception will be a flop.

On the learning tool that is genre gossip

So I'm working on my novel when an email pops up from a writer I know. Said writer is in fits because his publisher has yet again pushed back the release date of his first novel. Naturally I sympathized. I also suggested the writer raise this issue in public. Maybe airing this delay will cause the publisher to stop jerking my friend around.

My friend was horrified at the suggestion. "I could be blacklisted," he says. "You know how it is."

Unfortunately, I do.

What my friend means is that word spreads easily in the genre world. There are things we discuss publicly and things we whisper in secluded conversations. And may the literary gods help the writer who mixes up their public and private comments.

Among the items we're not supposed to discuss in public: Juicy details about which publishers and editors rip off authors. Spicy tales of affairs and betrayals between writers who maintain a public facade that all is well. Inside details about the financial well-being of magazines which sit on our stories for years. All of this is kept private--until the gossip snowballs into a force which can't be ignored. Likewise, a few brave writers may finally mention the issue in public after deciding the risks to their career are offset by the need for others to know.

The funny thing is that the need to gossip is one of the basic drives of humanity precisely because gossip is both the most inaccurate AND most accurate of information sources. Only a fool totally trusts gossip. Only a fool totally ignores it.

At a convention last year, I listened to a famous science fiction author discuss working with genre editors. He mentioned one editor who'd been forced out of a high-profile position by that editor's publisher. I was shocked to learn the details on why this had happened and told the author he ought to write about this so others knew how poorly the editor had been treated. The author looked at me with a waning smile as if I was a newbie who didn't understand the publishing and genre worlds. And at that moment maybe I was acting like one.

Often this genre gossip needs to be publicly aired, such as when it deals with publishers who take advantage of writers. Such wrongs only take place when there is a wall of silence around the publisher's actions. By way of example, I mention the recent revelations about Night Shade Books. Personally, I love Night Shade Books. In my opinion they are one of the best genre presses around. So imagine my surprise to discover they have generated a good deal of bad will among the authors they publish. While there are always two sides to every story--and I hope Night Shade straightens this out soon--the interesting fact is how many of the writers involved discussed this issue among themselves before it became public.

In short, it can pay for writers to listen to genre gossip.

My point is that to succeed as a genre writer you need access to more than simply the public information. Go to conventions and talk to writers and editors. Listen to the conversations. Read the posts in closed discussion groups. You'll learn more genre gossip than you ever knew existed. A lot of it will be crap. But some of it might help you succeed as a writer.

What I'm going into debt for

Okay, only a little bit of debt. But here's what I've ordered lately:

  • StarShipSofa's The Captain's Logs. This is the first book I've purchased through Lulu, and I must admit how impressed I am. From a design and printing point of view, it is impossible to tell this from book from any trade paperback released by a major publisher. More importantly, these transcripts of early SSS podcasts are a blast to read. I loved the Harlan Ellison episode, and am looking forward to reading more in the coming days. This is a must buy for anyone who wants to stay current on the ever-changing science fiction scene.
     
  • Realms of Fantasy. I didn't renew my subscription to RoF when it expired last year because, to be honest, I was irritated with the magazine. It pained me that RoF often felt like an advertisement for every major fantasy film coming down the line because they gave said films their cover space. I also didn't appreciate their response to Fishboob Fail 2009. However, I continued buying the magazine from the bookstore and, now that they've settled in with their new publisher, I'm quite impressed with their work. The last few issues have been great, and remind me of how RoF used to be. Add in their need for more subscribers and I decided to go ahead and resubscribe.

Why science fiction predictions hold back the genre

Science fiction sucks at predicting the future.

There. I've said it. Sliced that painful boil off my robot helper's shiny metal ass. Except it's 2010 and I don't have a robot helper. Instead, I'm still cleaning my house with my own hands. Raising my kids without an android nanny. Wasting time stuck in traffic instead of commuting with my own jetpack.

Nine years ago there were a spate of articles about how the future predicted in Arthur C. Clarke's 2001 failed to come true. Pan-Am was history instead of flying space shuttles, while moon bases and manned trips to other planets were mere dreams. And homicidal Artificial Intelligences? Forget AIs going on a murderous rampage--scientists were still working on getting AIs to navigate through mazes.

As I mentioned recently when Charles Tan interviewed me, science fiction's overall track record on predictions is pretty bad despite the genre describing a number of technological advances before they happened. One famous example is when Robert Heinlein wrote about waterbeds in his novels, leaving the 1960 inventor of an actual waterbed unable to patent his creation. Another example is John Campbell's Astounding Stories publishing the story "Deadline" by Cleve Cartmill in 1944. The story described how an atomic bomb would work--a full year before the first actual atomic explosion. Other technologies predicted by science fiction include scuba diving, digital books, space ships, and geosynchronous satellites.

But while science fiction has made a number of correct predictions, the genre strikes out far more of the time with its technological extrapolations. I mean, crack open any major SF novel from the genre's Golden Age and you will be swept away by flying cars, infallible lie detectors, and nuclear bombs which fit inside your mouth--and that's without mentioning examples of purely bad science like Campbell's love affair with the Dean Drive! More importantly, the genre has missed most of the major trends of the last half century, including the Civil Rights, Equal Rights and Decolonization movements, the Green Revolution, the creation of the Internet, the end of the Cold War, the beginnings of an information economy, and the slow speed at which humanity is reaching into space.

So while it's nice SF correctly predicted the waterbed, the genre failed to predict the sexual revolution which made people want waterbeds. And while SF predicted the atomic bomb, the genre fizzled when it came to accurately describing how those bombs would affect future generations (i.e., the Cold War and the fact that since their initial use during WWII nuclear weapons haven't been used in another war).

So when people tell me science fiction is about predicting the future, I want to laugh. But the good news is that the genre's failure at predicting the future need not be that big a deal.

Here's why: Instead of being about predicting the future, I see science fiction as humanity’s dream of the future. How we go about creating our future. How we go about surviving and processing the incredible changes facing us and dealing with the consequences of such change.  Seen from this point of view, science fiction has the potential to be the most vibrant of all literary genres because it deals with the issues and concerns which are of vital importance to today's world. The most successful science fiction stories have always been written and read from this point of view, instead of merely predicting an accurate future.

In many ways, the idea that science fiction is about predicting the future is a remnant of the genre's past. During the 1940s and '50s, genre promoters pitched SF as a way to inspire and teach people about science and technology. And during the era of Sputnik and atomic bomb beauty pageants, perhaps this was the correct thing to do.

But that time is long past. And while few writers and readers within the genre give more than lip service to science fiction being solely about predicting the future, the problem is that outside the genre the general public still believes literary science fiction is mainly about predictions. Why is this bad? Because it turns potential readers off the genre before they even open a book. After all, why would anyone want to read a genre about predicting the future when said genre repeatedly failed to predict the world we now live in?

Ironically, you don't see this problem with the visual representations of science fiction. When the public blows the hell out of everything in the Halo universe or sees the Millennium Falcon fly across the screen, few believe these are actual predictions of the future. Instead, the public sees SF films and games as a fun escape. As a dream of the future they can enjoy today.

But ask the general public to read a SF novel and you'll get at best a shrug, and at worst a dismissal of the entire genre.

Yes, there are plenty of reasons why so few people read science fiction, including the insular nature of the genre's fiction and the wrong-headed stereotype that SF remains the reading material of adolescent males. But I believe another reason people turn away from science fiction is fallout from the decades of promoting SF as a predictor of the future. After seeing so many of the genre's predictions fail to come true, the general reading public simply doesn't trust science fiction literature to tell them something new. They're unwilling to take a chance on investing their limited time in reading a SF book.

So my solution--stop pretending science fiction can predict the future.

A few thoughts on the Nebula Awards

I was unable to attend the Nebula Awards ceremony last night, but thanks to the magic of SFWA I watched the shindigs through the full-on glory of streaming video. Overall, I'm thrilled with the winners. As I mentioned when the finalists were announced, I believe this year's award represents some much needed generational change for our genre. This is still my view.

First off, I couldn't be more pleased with Eugie Foster and Paolo Bacigalupi winning. Eugie's story "Sinner, Baker, Fabulist, Priest; Red Mask, Black Mask, Gentleman, Beast" was one of my favorite stories of 2009. Paolo's The Windup Girl was likewise my favorite novel of last year. As I wrote in my original review, The Windup Girl is a classic dystopian novel which deserves to be read and shortlisted for the major awards. While my review of Eugie's story was shorter, her tale stayed with me just like Paolo's novel.

In the other categories, I'm excited to see "Spar" by Kij Johnson and The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland in a Ship of Her Own Making by Catherynne M. Valente among the winners. And while I didn't win in the best novella category, I was thrilled "The Women of Nell Gwynne's" by Kage Baker took top honors. I'm ashamed that I didn't have a chance to read Kage's novella until after the Nebula nomination period had passed. It is a fine work and a fitting end to a career cut far too short.

It will be interesting to see how people react to these winners. One blogger is already calling this Nebulafail because he hates the short story and novel winners. I'm actually not surprised by this reaction and predict we will see more of it. Great stories do not appeal to all people--the surest way to tell that a story has a seed of greatness within is if half the readers love it and the other half hate it. And this has been the general reaction to many of this year's winners. While many people like myself have praised The Windup Girl, others have hated it or said it is simply a good first novel. Likewise with "Sinner, Baker, Fabulist..." which was overlooked by all of the year's best anthologies even as it made the shortlists for most of the biggest genre awards.

Still, I think the fact that these authors won this year's Nebula is indicative of what people will think about these works a decade or two from now. So congrats to all the winners and thanks to the SFWA for all the amazing work they do.

The Japanese fairy tales of Naoko Awa

Cover250 We live in a strange age with regards to fairy tales. In some ways, fairy tales have never been more influential, with film directors and authors continually finding new ways to adapt fairies and fairy tale motifs for 21st century audiences.

But at the same time, fairy tales have never had less influence, as very few people actually read the original tales. While younger generations know by heart fairy tale adaptations like Shrek, I doubt even a handful of these kids have read the actual stories which inspired their favorite green ogre.

Which might be one reason why Japanese fairy tale author Naoko Awa is only now being introduced to English audiences. Awa, who died in 1993 at age 50, was well known to Japanese audiences for her unique takes on Japanese fairy tales. While Awa used familiar motifs from Japanese folklore, she took these motifs in new directions by combining them with her deep love of Western fairy tales created by the Brothers Grimm, Hans Christian Andersen, and others.

Now the University of New Orleans Publishing has released the first English-language collection of Awa's fairy tales. Translated by Toshiya Kamei, The Fox's Window and Other Stories features 30 fairy tales spanning the last three decades of Awa's life. Even though it has been years since I've read a true fairy tale, I've loved this book. These tales spin through beautiful scenes and places, pitting sympathetic characters against dark forces while remaining true to the uplifting core of modern fairy tales. For example, in "The Sky-Colored Chair," the father of a blind girl convinces a young fairy to paint the colors of the sky over a rocking chair. When his daughter sits in the chair, she is able to see colors for the first time. Naturally, complications ensue. But where many post-modern fantasy authors would subvert the story into a tale of dire consequences, Awa reaches for an ending which is sweet and pure.

Toshiya Kamei deserves high praise for bringing Awa's tales to English audiences. While a few of these tales have been published in recent years in English literary journals and magazines--with one, "Blue Shells," making the notable story list for this year's Million Writers Award--an entire collection of Awa's stories is long overdue. I highly recommend this book to all lovers of traditional fairy tales and folklore.

Serving some more generation change with the Hugo Awards

I mentioned back in February that the Nebula Award finalists were a giant scream of generational change. Well, the Hugo Award finalists are out and guess what, the change continues.

I'm thrilled to see The Windup Girl by Paolo Bacigalupi in the list, along with the novelettes "Eros, Philia, Agape" by Rachel Swirsky and "Sinner, Baker, Fabulist, Priest; Red Mask, Black Mask, Gentleman, Beast" by Eugie Foster. This novel and two novelettes were among the best stories I read last year, and are well deserving of this honor.

I'm also thrilled to see so many other exciting writers like N. K. Jemisin, Kij Johnson, Will McIntosh, Cherie Priest and John Scalzi on the list. Online magazines are well represented, as is the ever-great StarShipSofa in the Best Fanzine category. All of this reinforces my view that change is bubbling through the genre these days. And I'm not the only one to pick up on this.

Anyway, congrats to all the Hugo finalists!

Do writers suck as readers? Prove me wrong.

The Polyphony anthology series, published by Wheatland Press, is asking for people to pre-order the seventh volume in their acclaimed cross-genre short fiction series. If they can land 225 pre-orders, then they'll bring out the new volume. If they don't, they'll refund the money and close the anthology series.

Even though Wheatland Press has been beating the drums about this since November, they have sold less than half the needed pre-orders to publish the anthology. And as Deborah Layne stated today, this is shocking because in "a typical submission period of 45 days we receive 650 submissions. During a last gasp desperation sales period of over three months, we received fewer than one fourth that many orders."

WTF? I mean, come on you author-type people. I have long heard that writers constantly submit to places they don't even bother to read, but this is ridiculous. If even a quarter of the authors who submitted to Polyphony pre-ordered a copy, they'd be set.

And don't give me that BS about writers shouldn't be the only ones to support a market. Of course not. But if writers don't read the markets they're writing for, why would you expect non-writers to bother? 

Even though I haven't submitted to Polyphony, I just pre-ordered a copy. Please do the same before this Friday on the Wheatland Press home page. Otherwise, don't whine when there's one less short story market looking to publish your precious little stories.

Shine anthology, Million Writers Award, other updates

Shine A few updates:

  • The most eagerly awaited anthology of 2010 has to be Shine: An Anthology of Optimistic SF, edited by Jetse de Vries. I've already pre-ordered a copy, and I suggest others do the same. As a sweetener, I have a very very short prose poem in the anthology--a piece of Twitter fiction I wrote last year for the Outshine Twitter magazine will help introduce Holly Phillips' story "Summer Ice." I'm thrilled to have a tiny part in the anthology, and can't wait to read the book.
     
  • The preliminary judges have started submitting their selections for the Million Writers Award notable stories of 2009. So far it looks like a great lineup, and I'm eager to read the stories. I will release the complete list of notable stories on April 1st--and April Fool's Day be damned!
     
  • One story beloved by the judges was "Quella, Querida, Quintessa" by Matt Bell, published in Guernica. Unfortunately, the story was published this year so can't be considered for the award, but I wanted to still mention it here.
     
  • Finally, Mark Watson gave a very nice review of my Interzone story "Here We Are, Falling Through Shadows" on his Best SF website, while on IncWriters Andy Hedgecock mentions me alongside other great Interzone authors "who offer idiosyncratic revelation, in rich but elegant language and in a form that, however fragmented, however innovative, has what Graham Joyce has called the primal pulse of storytelling at its heart." Many thanks to both Mark and Andy for the kind words!

I promised myself I wouldn't rant, but then...

I promised myself I'd cut back on my outrage at humanity. After all, it's so easy to get outraged these days. In fact, everyone's doing it. Outrage seems to be the de facto normal state for people in today's world.

So I promised myself I'd let all that go. Simply focus on my fiction writing. Finish running this year's Million Writers Award.

But then I read Norman Spinrad's latest On Books column "Third World Worlds" in the April/May 2010 Asimov's. So many statements in this review made me want to throw the magazine across the room that, in the end, for my own sanity I had to rant.

For example, Spinrad says, "With the exception of the Japanese, I at least, am at a loss to point to any science fiction that I know of that has evolved independently in non-European languages or cultures disconnected there from."

Right off my head I can name a few: Juntree Siriboonrod, the "father of Thai science fiction." Or how about Rimi B. Chatterjee of India, or perhaps more well known in SF circles in the United States, Vandana Singh. Or, good grief, what about science fiction in China, where the most widely read SF magazine on the planet--Science Fiction World--is published.

Perhaps Spinrad would discount all this by saying these SF authors, and the cultures which produced them, didn't evolve independently. But in today's world, what culture is truly independent of each other?

Still, I might have avoided this rant if that was the only statement I screamed at. But there was more. For you see, Spinrad refers to Mike Resnick as follows:

So, for now at least, and in the apparent absence of a significant body of science fiction written by born and bred Africans, this Caucasian American is probably the closest thing there is or has been to an African science fiction writer, with the exception of Octavia Butler. Who did write the same sort of thing, and did it well, and was Black to boot, but I use that politically incorrect word rather than “African American” because aside from her genetic heritage she was no more African than Mike Resnick.

Now I like Mike Resnick as a person and love his writings (especially Santiago, one of my favorite SF novels). Resnick isn't responsible for what Spinrad wrote, and would probably laugh at that comment. But seriously. Is Spinrad saying Resnick is the closest there's ever been to an African SF writer. Excepting Octavia Butler, who Spinrad then dismisses as not "African" enough? But Resnick is?

Must. Control. My. Need. To. Scream. And. Rant!

Err, what about writers like Nnedi Okorafor? Doesn't she count? In fact, by a funny coincidence Okorafor recently wrote a fascinating essay titled "Is Africa Ready for Science Fiction?" where she gives some examples of African SF. All of this information could have been found with a simple Google search.

To Spinrad's credit, he admits he is ignorant of much of the world's literature, being limited to what is translated into English. And he is also specifically talking about science fiction, not the larger speculative fiction traditions which include fantasy and magic realism. But come on! The SF community had been talking about world science fiction for the last year, especially in light of Lavie Tidhar's excellent anthology The Apex Book of World SF (which, again, focuses on more than only science fiction) and Tidhar's related blog.

I don't have the patience tonight to dissect all that is wrong with Spinrad's column. Because I swear if I don't get off the computer right now it will be weeks before I can stop ranting.