Monday, September 29, 2008
Cover art by Todd Lockwood. Now, here's Publishers Weekly on the interior:
"British literary agent Lloyd begins this dense and involved sword and sorcery debut by introducing Isak, a penniless young man with no fixed home who serves as a slave to his resentful, unhappy father. Worse, Isak is a white-eye, born with distinctive eyes, a large frame, unusual strength and an exceedingly quick temper. Isak’s world changes in an instant when Aracnan, an immortal sorcerer, tries to offer Isak a mysterious scroll. Within a day, Isak has become heir to Lord Bahl of Farlan, and he learns that he is a nascent mage and the focus of a thousand-year-old prophecy. Whether Isak is willing or able to fulfill that prophecy is just the beginning of this tale. Lloyd pours enough testosterone into his high fantasy to power past a few inconsistencies, creating a fine start to a reported five-book series."
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Friday, September 26, 2008
After reading endless positive things about Pyr’s books, I acquired six of their titles. With statements like “Pyr only publishes Gems” and “Pyr can do no wrong!” I wanted to see it for myself. I read through their list of available books, looked for a few themes that fit my tastes (and a few that didn’t) and when the pile arrived I randomly picked one. Assuming they only publish awesome stuff, it should be a good book right?They picked Theodore Judson's The Martian General's Daughter.And was it a good book?
It was. I loved [it]... The characters are awesome, the story is as compelling as it is bloody and the history-is-repeating theme all make for a memorable read. ...a great choice for anyone who likes alternative history, historical fiction and military conquest."
Dusty was reading the book last time. I wonder who will read it tonight.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
I'm very excited about this one, which might be the best anthology I've ever assembled. Next week I'll be putting up an entire short story from the book at the new Pyr Sample Chapters page. And, when the Pyr newsletter goes out next on October 1, we'll be offering the previous volume - Fast Forward 1 - at 50% off cover price in a special offer exclusive to our newsletter subscribers. If'n you're not one and want to be, go to www.pyrsf.com and sign up (from the link below the menu buttons in the left margin).
Meanwhile, with quotes from Yours Truly and a LOT of commentary from Lockwood himself, and 20 different sketches, roughs and detailed close-ups, the post is well worth checking out.
The book is also well worth checking out, which you can do here.
So, I can do without flying cars, thank you. No, what I'd like to see is sane and rational leaders ushering in those SFnal visions of world peace, an end to poverty and disease, inequality. That's a future I'm still waiting for, one that's still worth believing in and writing about. So I find myself both in agreement and taking issue with this article in the Guardian by Damien G Walter, "Science Fiction Doesn't Have to Be Gloomy, Does it?" But certainly I'm onboard with this sentiment: "The best science fiction, as with all great art, doesn't just reflect the world but seeks to influence it."
Update: Kathryn Cramer's "Gloom & Wartime SF: A reponse to Damien Walter" is worth checking out. "...what I would substitute for 'influence,' as a goal, is that writers provide us with perceptual tools with which to understand the world, the future, and what is to be done. I view science fiction partly as a set of perceptual tools we take with us into the world. I don’t think SF can be held responsible for finding solutions to all the world’s problems, but I think it is SF’s task to help us understand them."
Update 9/26/08: Jetsie de Vries alerts us to his lengthy response to Kathryn Cramer. He takes issue specifically with her comments about SF's scope of influence, and says, "Now shoot me, but I like to think SF that's really audacious, gutsy and forward-looking dares to make predictions against the flavour of the month. Dares to make totally unexpected predictions, and -- in the process -- dares to be wrong: but nevertheless inspires others to carry the torch of progress. Depicting a world like today that's going down the drain is easy: people love to complain, and blame the world's problems on someone else. Depicting -- convincingly -- a world that changes -- even if marginally -- for the better, is much more difficult, for an SF writer."
In callng out SF's obligation to be audacious, to act as if it can change the world, whether or not that notion is realistic, he reminds me of one of my favorite quotes of all time:
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
--George Bernard Shaw, Maxims for Revolutionists
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Monday, September 22, 2008
I am really excited about this book. I'm not the only one:
"Magical creatures and high speed action scenes... packed with detail without being too heavy. The Stormcaller shows how high the bar has been raised with its sheer vision and inventiveness." —SFX
Thursday, September 18, 2008
More love for John Meaney always good!
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
And check out the recent praise for MultiReal:
- io9: “I’m in it for the long haul, because it feels like Edelman is writing about real people and real issues, in a thrilling, engaging way. And that’s rarer than it should be.”
- Pat’s Fantasy Hotlist: “This is one sequel that delivers! No middle book syndrome for David Louis Edelman… The Jump 225 trilogy remains one of the very best ongoing science fiction series on the market.”
- Bookgasm: “Infoquake’s strengths have carried over to its sequel… With Infoquake and MultiReal, [Edelman]’s got new archetypes aplenty, and he doesn’t need old tropes to slow him down.”
- Chicago Center for Literature and Photography: “(Rating: 8.8 out of 10) This is a series that genre fans will definitely want to check out, and an individual chapter here that could very well garner a Hugo nomination next year.”
- Through a Glass, Darkly: “Even for a reader who loves laser battles and big explosions, MultiReal still comes across as extremely satisfying and fun.”
- Death Ray Magazine (not online): “A mix of cyberpunk and The Wall Street Journal… Where Edelman does excel, and the true focus of the book, is exploring the economics and political powers behind new technologies, their development and routes to market and the social and moral implications of such advancements.”
Monday, September 15, 2008
Sean Williams on Adventures in SciFi Publishing giving advice to new writers at the Writers of the Future event.
Jason Stoddard on "What's an author to do?" given self-marketing/promotion advice. Jason again on "What's a small publisher to do?"
And although it's a few months old, I just listened to this Agony Column podcast with the owner of San Francisco's Booksmith, Praveen Madan (direct link).
Consuming all this across 2 days makes the ganglia twitch. In a good way.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Seven Seas Jim takes on 'Plague Year'
Feature version of Carlson's sci fi thriller planned
Jim McNally of Seven Seas Jim is producing a feature version of Jeff Carlson's high concept thriller "Plague Year."
The novel, which is currently the lead hard cover from European publisher Minotauro in Spain and has also seen major releases in and in Germany, is about a medical nanotechnology that breaks loose and devours all warm-blooded life below 10,000 feet elevation.
"Plague Year" is the first of a planned trilogy published by Ace/Penguin in the U.S. and Canada. "Plague Year" was released last summer and its sequel, "Plague War," appeared this August. Carlson's other works include more than a dozen short stories such as the Writers of the Future award-winning novelette "The Frozen Sky" and an upcoming in collaboration
with New York Times bestselling author David Brin.
Of "Plague Year," McNally said, "It's the unusual concept that spoke to me first, but ultimately the characters in this story are who really grabbed me-their grit and their resourcefulness in the face of ever-mounting odds."
were secured via Vince Gerardis of the Created By Agency in a "nice" option against a mid-six figure pickup.
Jim McNally was vice president at LifeSize Entertainment, an international sales company and domestic distributor of over 50 specialty titles such as Academy Award Nominee "Zus and Zo," Spirit Award Nominee "Oasis," Kim Ki Duk's "Time" and Venice film festival award winner "Khadak." McNally is also the producer and editor of the feature films "Sleepover" and " ." He envisions "Plague Year" as a post-apocalyptic summer blockbuster.
PLAGUE WAR, from Ace Books in July 2008
"Long Eyes" in Fast Forward 2 from Pyr in October
and MIND PLAGUE, from Ace in Summer 2009
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Harper launches new sci-fi imprint
is to launch a new science fiction imprint, which aims to have a global appeal, selling directly to consumers as well as through retail channels. Angry Robot's first titles will be published in July 2009. The publisher has hired Marc Gascoigne, former publisher of the Solaris and imprints at Games Workshop, as its head.
The imprint will publish two books per month, ramping up to three within the first two years. The majority of titles will be B format paperback originals but there are plans for limited edition hardbacks and deluxe versions.
"This year, and not for the first time, other areas of mass-media such as movies, television and computer games have enjoyed massive popular success across a variety of science fiction and fantasy subjects," said Gascoigne.
He will report to HarperCollins' m.d. Amanda Ridout and will work alongside publishing brand manager Chris Michaels to develop its sales, marketing and digital models. Ridout said that Gascoigne was "the perfect person to spearhead this innovative and creative venture". The business will be based in Nottingham and is expected to employ around five people by the end of its first year.
Michaels told The Bookseller that it would be a completely different model to HC's existing Voyager imprint. "We really see Voyager as the gold standard for science fiction," he said. "They take big name authors like Robin Hobb or Terry Goodkind. At Angry Robot we will be building the next wave of authors, people like or who are on their first books with us at Voyager."
The imprint will target early adopters of science fiction, who begin reading the genre between the ages of 14 and 16, and the "massively aggressive consumers" of the titles, who are aged between 27 and 40
Angry Robot would have a transactional website, which will sell the imprint's titles as well as digital audio and e-books. "The pricing will be at the generic standard," said Michaels. "The interesting thing is that there is no definitive business model. This is an opportunity to see what people want to pay for digital content."
Michaels said the imprint would also have print on demand books available for those "titles that have gone beyond their conventional shelftime".
Here, Charles Stross does a good job of articulating what several people commenting in my original post said, which is that there is a difference between art and propaganda, when he says, "I don't really care what politics or religion an author advocates, so long as their portrayal of all viewpoints is honest. Why? Because fiction is an attempt to construct a consistent vision of a universe which accommodates the human condition; and twisting the beliefs of your characters to fit some ideological preconception damages their humanity. This in turn tends to introduce gaping plot holes that rely on the protagonists being stupid or self-destructive for no obvious reason (other than that they are wearing the Bad hat that makes them do Bad Things). And it frequently goes hand-in-glove with Idiot plots, where the Idiot wins out in the end purely because his heart is pure, and the author said that it was so, and re-arranged the plot accordingly."
My favorite response comes from Cheryl Morgan, who reminds us "that science fiction has always been a conversation. And that doesn't mean just a conversation about methods of faster-than-light travel, or First Contact protocols; it also means a conversation about politics and religion. If you are not prepared to listen to other people, you can't have conversations with them. So yes, we ought to be reading books we disagree with."
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Charlie Jane beings the review, which is titled "MultiReal is your antidote to science-bashing scifi," by saying, "With so much mass-media science fiction featuring anti-science heroes who battle to stop science from "going too far," it's great to read a really smart novel about a hero who's fighting to save scientific progress from being suppressed." She characterizes the books as being "about the nature of technological progress" and says, "Where MultiReal really shines, however, is in the debates over the ethics of this reality-twisting software. There really is no right answer to the question of how society should deal with software that 'liberates you from cause and effect,' and the sequence where Natch's mentor debates the government's attorneys is easily my favorite part of both books. It's a complex issue, and Edelman draws it out enough that you can see how it applies to today's real-life challenges: should we try to suppress new technologies, should we regulate them heavily? Is it possible to suppress new knowledge after all? Does information really want to be free? It's a lot more nuanced than the 'science iz scary OMG' idea that seems to be popular in media SF right now.
Now, with the understanding that I am generalizing horribly, I think that traditionally a majority of filmic sci-fi is concerned with maintaining the status quo and getting the genies back in the bottles. Something is developed, approaching, on the loose - and its up to the protagonists to stop it. An asteroid is going to hit the earth, aliens are invading, a man has turned himself invisible and is running amok - how do we divert it, repel them, contain him... In other words, there is a threat to consensus reality and by the end of the film or television show, it's been dealt with and nicely put away. Go on with your lives. Nothing to worry about here.
By contrast, literary science fiction is often set after such an event has already happened, sometimes a good deal after, and throws us in medias res into a world in which part of the fun of the narrative is working out how the world in the tale differs from the world we know and part of the theme lies in examining how these changes act as a lens to illuminate some aspect of humanity that we take for granted. So, an asteroid hit the earth and killed everyone over 18, how do the survivors cope? Aliens invaded and are now our overlords - would you let one date your sister? 1/3 of the population is invisible, what new class of people do they form? The intrusion isn't repelled, it's part and parcel of the way things are now going forward. I find this the more honest approach, and underscores on of science fiction's strengths as the genre that embraces the reality and inevitability of change.
There are, of course, examples of both approaches in both mediums. In fact, one of the (many) failures of The Matrix trilogy is that it began from what I'm calling a more literary position of science fiction and transitioned to the filmic. At the end of the first movie, Neo promises to hang up the phone and, "then I'm going to show these people what you don't want them to see. I'm going to show them a world ... without you. A world without rules and controls, without borders or boundaries. A world where anything is possible." The goal of the protagonists isn't to preserve consensual reality, but to destroy it, by ushering in a world where anyone can do the things he can. But instead of this, the subsequent films shift the emphasis radically away from the Matrix (which is never anything more than a set for agents and rebels to play in henceforth) to saving Zion and restoring the status quo of balance between machine and rebel. We never actually deal with another person who still believes in/is imprisoned by the Matrix's view of reality - and the battle that is fought is all about getting things back to the way they were in the first film. I don't know why this is, though the best explanation I've heard is that 9/11 occurred between the first and second films, forcing Warner to rethink the wisdom of making two more movies staring a group of admitted terrorists out to destroy 1999. (In some ways, V for Vendetta - which was released as public opinion was beginning to change re: the current war and Bush's approval ratings were dipping, and questioning him was no longer being seen as being unpatriotic - is the film the Wachowski's should have made out of Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions and didn't/couldn't at the time). But I digress...
To bring this back to the Jump 225 trilogy: What I personally love about Edelman is that he sets his story not before (and up to the point) of the radical transformation, nor after (and at a comfortable distance from) the transformation, but that he is actually charting the course through the societal singularity, showing how all the institutions of government, business, and society rearrange, realign, and topple. To an extent, Charlie Stross did this with his brilliant and essential Accelerando (though he moves his action off-world for a good deal of it - which is no criticism, it's a different animal), but I've never personally encountered a work that did such a thorough job and concentrated so much of its focus in taking us through the shift point between paradigms. I think that's why so many readers say that the future Edelman presents is a "believable" one, and why I think, though he mixes and matches tropes we've seen before, his approach is so unique.
Monday, September 08, 2008
(I should point out that the submission guidelines are for their books only, not Pyr. We have separate submission guidelines here.)
Sunday, September 07, 2008
Saturday, September 06, 2008
A big thanks to John-Mark for the freeze frame image above.
Friday, September 05, 2008
"Editor Lou Anders assembles a little over a dozen contributions on the theme of alternative history and crime in this interesting mix of stories. As is the case with most anthologies, some of the selections resonate more than others. Stand-outs for me were Mary Rosenblum’s “Sacrifice”, Paul Di Filippo’s “Murder in Geektopia”, and John Counrtenay Grimwood’s “Chicago”. Although I preferred the more wide-open possibilities found in Anders' Fast Forward anthologies(I was struck by how many of the stories in this collection touched on contemporized Aztec culture, Sherlock Holmes, and French-controlled Louisiana), Sideways in Crime proved an entertaining read in its own right."
Thursday, September 04, 2008
It's a subject that I've had a change of heart on in recent years, going from borderline hostile to casually tolerant, bolstered largely by observations on the difference between 20th and 21st century fandom. But looking over the SF Signal posts, the arguments in favor go something like this:
1. Media tie-in novels are a gateway drug for (young) readers to discover "real" sf&f.
2. Even media tie-in novels get people thinking about important SFnal concepts.
3. The sales numbers associated with media tie-in novels brings its own kind of respect to our section of the bookstore and makes more non media tie-in works possible.
The arguments against go something like this:
1. Media tie-ins are eating the shelf space.
2. Work for hire isn't a good thing for a writer to be doing, career-wise.
3. Media tie-ins encourage people to want "same book, different cover" and not stretch.
4. Media tie-ins present the "poorest face" to the general public and hurt the perception of SF&F in the general public.
(A lot of these cons come from Alan Beatts, a very smart and articulate man, whose bookstore, Borderlands Books, is one of the best genre stores in America. The fourth point, which Alan makes, is probably the best argument against in my book.)
Now, as I said, I myself started out with a bias against media tie-ins that I've dropped when I realized it was a bias. As Rob H. Bedford points out when he says, "The funny thing is that the perception of non-genre readers towards 'us' is not too different than how genre readers look down upon media tie-ins." I don't ever want to take the position of "grumpy old man" and that alone might be enough to sway me.
Then I happen to have a lot of my friends writing them - from Paul Cornell (arguable the best of the Doctor Who novelists, though he's moved past it now), to Chris Roberson (X-Men, Star Trek, Warhammer 40k), to Sean Williams (who just hit the #1 spot on the NYTimes Bestseller list with The Force Unleashed.) Now, these guys are all great writers. I know this from their non-media tie-in work, but I can't imagine that they give any less when they do their tie-ins. And, in fact, I see reviewers calling out their work as being the best in their respective franchises.
And I've met enough people for whom the media tie-in was a gateway drug to know that it happens. As Kevin J. Anderson says, "A large percentage of the readers of my Dune novels with Brian Herbert have also followed my Saga of Seven Suns (enough that those books are now hitting general fiction bestseller lists). Anybody who claims that tie-in readers don't read other novels is simply misinformed..."
The Dune books are tie-in novels?!? (With the Dune films, maybe?) Still, the man does know media tie-ins, so if he says they follow him home, I am betting they do.
That being said, anytime you are trying to convert one type of behavior into another, you are dealing with very small percentage. So whether you are trying to get someone to respond to a direct mail campaign, or click through a banner ad on a website, or read a newsletter and buy a book, you are dealing with something like a 1 or 2% adaption rate. So while I don't doubt that the readership for the highest profile authors -- hugely-successful writers like Kevin J. Anderson, Michael Stackpole, Timothy Zahn, etc... -- are following them home to their non media tie-in material in significant numbers (because 2% of a million is significant), I'm not sure that the average media tie-in author is pulling a significant percentage of readers back to his/her creator-owned work. I'll be curious to see what Sean Williams' NYT Bestseller does to his Books of the Cataclysm, for instance, as the first is still on shelves in paperback and the second comes out in paperback in November. I certainly hope we get a bounce - but it might take two or three bestselling Star Wars novels in succession before we do. What Chris Roberson is doing - working his way through a succession of different franchises - might be smart, since if it's true that he's only going to pull off only a few percentages of a given fan base, then by writing for a different fan base each time he should be able to begin to aggregate these percentages into some measurable numbers.
On the other end of it, I'm not sure that media tie-ins are taking eyeballs away from the "real" stuff. My own experience penning over 500 articles for the pages of magazines like Star Trek Monthly, Babylon 5 Magazine, etc... is that the vast majority of the readers (that 97-99%) don't care about the byline, only the subject. As David Gerrold says, "Tie-ins are merchandising. They are marketing. They are also a particular kind of advertising, using the bookstores as additional channels to raise consciousness of the primary product." Walter Jon Williams reverses this when he says, "Trek reruns became nothing less than hour-long advertisements for Trek fiction- and the commercial advantages of having hour-long ads for your fiction soon became apparent." But the point is, I don't think the readers that are gobbling down Star Wars would pick up Brasyl if only George Lucas wasn't in the way. I think those readers wouldn't be in the SF&F section in the first place, they would be out watching more Star Wars and playing with Star Wars toys and games, and Brasyl's numbers would remain unchanged. As Andrew Wheeler says, "Avid tie-in readers are, again, fans of the property rather than of the genre as a whole, and expecting them to suddenly jump to books that aren't about that property is unlikely."
I also know from my time on Star Trek that media SF can get you thinking "in SFnal ways," as witness the large number of inventions, from the compact disk to the beds in use in our M*A*S*H units, that were directly inspired by the tech of Trek. And I do think that thinking "in SFnal ways" is good for the world at large.
But what really strikes me is how many of the fifteen people who responded to this question came themselves to SF&F through media tie-ins. So while maybe it's only a small percentage of media tie-in readers who graduate to the "real" stuff, it may be a high percentage of readers of the "real" stuff who came in via media tie-in. I know I came to SF publishing after a stint in SF television myself. And as Chris Roberson says, "You hear a lot about the 'graying of fandom,' and there are eternal cries for new fans and new readers. As nice as it would be to think that we could simply hand young readers the smartest, most 'challenging' novels that our genres have to offer, it seems unlikely to snare more than a bare handful of them. How much better to hit them where they live, to take franchises they already enjoy-in tv, film, video games, you name it-and offer them more of the same?"
Of course, the number one way that books are discovered isn't via browsing in bookstores. It's still good old word of mouth. Which means that the best thing you can do for SF&F is to share it. And on that note, I have to agree with Walter again when he says, "The success of media SF is on the whole a positive thing. It shows that there's an audience for SF, and that there's money to be made on science fiction ideas."
As long as those ideas are top notch, I think we're okay. Which it means its down to the individual writers to be excellent (even if excellent isn't a requirement). And, in a world where what we are being told to be is "spreadable," then seeing SF everywhere can only be good for the overall health of SF. As I've said before, more of everything means more quality as well as more crap. Omni-media SF is here to stay, we might as well start thinking of more ways to make it work for us.
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
I enjoyed the article, which if nothing else points to a lot of equally enjoyable essays and opinions, but I think the usefulness of this sort of thing is drying up for me. Is science fiction dying? From where I stand it appears to be exploding, but even if it is dying, what am I supposed to do with that? I'm reminded of the final lines from H G Wells' the Time Machine. "If that is so, it remains for us to live as though it were not so. But to me the future is still black and blank..."
Here's to a black, blank future!