These will likely be pretty quick posts in general, more notes on something cool I've read that might spark a story idea or add fullness to world building.
Here's one that I already kind of knew from my own research, but in canonized form. According to the 2013 IPCC summary, the water cycle has changed noticeably in roughly the ways we expect. I'm linking to this post that quotes the relevant section rather than the entire document, but if you want to see the whole thing, it's linked too. Anyway, in a nutshell, what the summary of the summary says is that snow and ice cover has decreased and the frequency and intensity of extreme precipitation events has increased thanks to anthropogenic warming. Also, the amount of the Earth's surface that is subject to the monsoon has increased.
Obviously not all bad--more summertime rain for the regions with monsoons is probably a good thing, especially since those tend to be the regions that depend on snow pack or glacial melting. Not all good, though, since snow pack is an important water source for many semi-arid regions, meaning droughts are likely to become more severe.
Why I like this for science fiction: there are plenty of stories where weather plays a role in setting the tone. Not that I have numbers, but tone or mood is probably the most frequent use for weather period. That makes sense, since most of the time weather is backdrop to the action of life. There are a few where storms or droughts are significant parts of the plot, but not often in science fiction or fantasy. Kim Stanley Robinson incorporates extreme weather into the "40 Days of Rain" series (which is specifically about global warming) and Brandon Sanderson includes highstorms (which are magical in nature, so probably don't really belong here, but I like the usage) in "The Way of Kings." Mostly they are plot devices, a way to throw in some man vs. nature action. This is mostly to say that such man vs. nature is likely to become more prominent in our future.
Sunday, September 29, 2013
Sunday, September 22, 2013
Science and fiction
I love science fiction. I love the tropes and the exploration of the what if scenario. I love hard sci-fi, where the physics of the world create the drama and I love space opera, even thought it might as well be fantasy.
I don't write science fiction, though. At least not often. I'm far more likely to create a fantasy setting than a science fiction one for the simple reason that I like science too much. I get far too wrapped up in the world building and forget about the human drama, which makes for pretty boring stories.
I have definite world-builder's disease.
It's a shame, too, because there's so much human drama still to be explored. To pick on my own science, climate change has a huge impact on populations, yet it's not something that's very often a feature of books. Part of that is scale, I'm sure. It's easy to tackle a single event--a flood or drought, hurricane, tornado, or tsunami--but the human lifetime is too short to really register climate change. Historically, climate change has more often been the driver of extinction, yet apocalyptic fiction tends to utilize things like plagues, nuclear winters, and meteorites to kill off the majority of the human species. Again, the scale is the issue here. Climate change is slow and a relatively slow famine isn't sexy.
There's also nothing to be done about one.
My plan over the next who knows how long is to post a weekly feature talking about something I've seen in the science world that I think would create interesting drama, or at least flesh out the world of a story. At worst, it's an excuse for me to spend some time talking about cool science ideas I think are underutilized or too poorly known.
Cheers!
I don't write science fiction, though. At least not often. I'm far more likely to create a fantasy setting than a science fiction one for the simple reason that I like science too much. I get far too wrapped up in the world building and forget about the human drama, which makes for pretty boring stories.
I have definite world-builder's disease.
It's a shame, too, because there's so much human drama still to be explored. To pick on my own science, climate change has a huge impact on populations, yet it's not something that's very often a feature of books. Part of that is scale, I'm sure. It's easy to tackle a single event--a flood or drought, hurricane, tornado, or tsunami--but the human lifetime is too short to really register climate change. Historically, climate change has more often been the driver of extinction, yet apocalyptic fiction tends to utilize things like plagues, nuclear winters, and meteorites to kill off the majority of the human species. Again, the scale is the issue here. Climate change is slow and a relatively slow famine isn't sexy.
There's also nothing to be done about one.
My plan over the next who knows how long is to post a weekly feature talking about something I've seen in the science world that I think would create interesting drama, or at least flesh out the world of a story. At worst, it's an excuse for me to spend some time talking about cool science ideas I think are underutilized or too poorly known.
Cheers!
Saturday, August 24, 2013
Salisbury writer's forum
Today I went to my second writing conference. Lots of good thoughts, but I'm tired and headachy, and I've worn heel far too long today. So, here are a few highlights from my notes.
There is no big secret to getting published. Work hard at your craft.
Each project brings new challenges. Some lessons learned will be helpful; others might hold your writing back. Learn when to rewrite and when to leave it alone for a while.
A memory file (the mind) needs frequent updates. That's why some of us write.
Successful writers have at least one of the following:
--A spouse who earns a lot of money. Allows freedom to devote oneself to writing.
--Personal ability to not feel responsible for other people.
--The capacity to generate a revenue stream from writing related activities (speaking, involvement in conferences and workshops, etc.).
--Good enough to get out of Australian market.
First page reading by editors/agents showed how subjective liking someone's work is. None of the submissions were universally liked, though basically if one person hated it, everyone hated it. There is a basic level of good writing, but beyond that it's subjective. I really wish I'd submitted something, but oh well--next year.
Lots more, but mostly it was just fun to hang out with a bunch of other writers.
There is no big secret to getting published. Work hard at your craft.
Each project brings new challenges. Some lessons learned will be helpful; others might hold your writing back. Learn when to rewrite and when to leave it alone for a while.
A memory file (the mind) needs frequent updates. That's why some of us write.
Successful writers have at least one of the following:
--A spouse who earns a lot of money. Allows freedom to devote oneself to writing.
--Personal ability to not feel responsible for other people.
--The capacity to generate a revenue stream from writing related activities (speaking, involvement in conferences and workshops, etc.).
--Good enough to get out of Australian market.
First page reading by editors/agents showed how subjective liking someone's work is. None of the submissions were universally liked, though basically if one person hated it, everyone hated it. There is a basic level of good writing, but beyond that it's subjective. I really wish I'd submitted something, but oh well--next year.
Lots more, but mostly it was just fun to hang out with a bunch of other writers.
Friday, August 23, 2013
Oblivion
A few nights ago my husband and I watched Oblivion. Visually it's a stunning. The genesis of the movie in a graphic novel is obvious.
But...
I'm enough of a scientist that I have a hard time shutting off the analytic/logical part of my brain. While I can kind of ignore little logic holes in fantasy by pretending there are just different physics (to a degree, in any case) I'm very critical of science fiction. Thus, my not so impressedness with Beth Revis' "Across the Universe."
Oblivion falls short for me in the logic. Not that I can totally remember everything, but there were enough little things--claiming Chicago sits on bedrock; no explanation of the aliens stealing Earth's water when there are other more water-rich planets in our solar system; Tom Cruise's magic impregnation of his wife who was an astronaut and thus almost certainly on birth control; the convenient way in which the plot drives when the probes get shot, rather than there being, I don't know, a spot on them that has to be hit--enough little things that bugged me just enough that I couldn't quite turn off the science brain.
But...
I'm enough of a scientist that I have a hard time shutting off the analytic/logical part of my brain. While I can kind of ignore little logic holes in fantasy by pretending there are just different physics (to a degree, in any case) I'm very critical of science fiction. Thus, my not so impressedness with Beth Revis' "Across the Universe."
Oblivion falls short for me in the logic. Not that I can totally remember everything, but there were enough little things--claiming Chicago sits on bedrock; no explanation of the aliens stealing Earth's water when there are other more water-rich planets in our solar system; Tom Cruise's magic impregnation of his wife who was an astronaut and thus almost certainly on birth control; the convenient way in which the plot drives when the probes get shot, rather than there being, I don't know, a spot on them that has to be hit--enough little things that bugged me just enough that I couldn't quite turn off the science brain.
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
The AnaSwitch
Reading "The AnaSwitch," by Angie Baron, is so enjoyable I didn't notice not much happens plot-wise for most of the book. The story is pretty simple: Anna L Hare (our tall, awkward protagonist) finds out after her father's death that her name is actually Helanar Gatwick and she isn't human--she's half Elvari and half Cloaker. She's whisked off to a mansion where she makes friends with the other six Cloakers who are still alive (and conveniently about her age). In between tea parties, fancy dinners, and tours of their amazing mansion they teach Halanar/Anna about the world she's suddenly thrust into and (sporadically) try to decode the clues left by Helanar's father to lead them to to the AnaSwitch, a magical bracelet made from Helanar's mother's hair that she needs to survive. Along the way Helanar falls in love--twice--thus giving us our YA love triangle.
The world Baron creates is so lovely, and her writing so much darned fun to read it's a hard book to put down. The characters are quirky and fun, from Helanar, who is sweet and evokes such sympathy you don't want anything bad to happen to her ever, to Misty and her cloak of wonders (including an infinite supply of possibilitea, a microwave, and a whisk named Horace), to the tortured Jasper with his spider and snake friends and swoon-worthy hair. This is a book you read for the ride, and it is a fun-filled, magical ride.
(I admit, I might love the book in part because it's set in Australia. It's just a bit comforting to read about footy and winter in June.)
For those who care about the cleanness of books--this one is squeaky clean. Kissing is as scandalous as it gets, and most of the swooning is accomplished over chaste pecks to the cheek. This is a book that you could easily hand to a twelve or thirteen year old, but I still very much enjoyed as an adult. The darkness Helanar faces is of the variety most of us will face in our lives--self-doubt, selfishness, greed. There are hints that Baron is planning to turn the tables on our heroes as well, forcing them to confront more complex ethical questions. I'm expecting these characters are going to face some significant growth in future books.
My only worry while reading the book (and annoyance when I finished) is that most of the action-y stuff happens in the last few pages. I didn't read this book very quickly--it's too fun--until the very end, at which point I started devouring page after page. The ending is fast--it feels like a pleasant trot through the enchanted woods for the first 90%, at which point you're suddenly a contestant in the Kentucky Derby. While there's resolution for one major plot arc (the AnaSwitch itself) Baron leaves most other major plot threads hanging. Grr. Baron does have a fantastic sense of humor about leaving us hanging, at least, so if I ever have the fortune to run into her I'll simply glare in annoyance for a few moments before offering her a proper cup of tea with a frothy pink cupcake.
The world Baron creates is so lovely, and her writing so much darned fun to read it's a hard book to put down. The characters are quirky and fun, from Helanar, who is sweet and evokes such sympathy you don't want anything bad to happen to her ever, to Misty and her cloak of wonders (including an infinite supply of possibilitea, a microwave, and a whisk named Horace), to the tortured Jasper with his spider and snake friends and swoon-worthy hair. This is a book you read for the ride, and it is a fun-filled, magical ride.
(I admit, I might love the book in part because it's set in Australia. It's just a bit comforting to read about footy and winter in June.)
For those who care about the cleanness of books--this one is squeaky clean. Kissing is as scandalous as it gets, and most of the swooning is accomplished over chaste pecks to the cheek. This is a book that you could easily hand to a twelve or thirteen year old, but I still very much enjoyed as an adult. The darkness Helanar faces is of the variety most of us will face in our lives--self-doubt, selfishness, greed. There are hints that Baron is planning to turn the tables on our heroes as well, forcing them to confront more complex ethical questions. I'm expecting these characters are going to face some significant growth in future books.
My only worry while reading the book (and annoyance when I finished) is that most of the action-y stuff happens in the last few pages. I didn't read this book very quickly--it's too fun--until the very end, at which point I started devouring page after page. The ending is fast--it feels like a pleasant trot through the enchanted woods for the first 90%, at which point you're suddenly a contestant in the Kentucky Derby. While there's resolution for one major plot arc (the AnaSwitch itself) Baron leaves most other major plot threads hanging. Grr. Baron does have a fantastic sense of humor about leaving us hanging, at least, so if I ever have the fortune to run into her I'll simply glare in annoyance for a few moments before offering her a proper cup of tea with a frothy pink cupcake.
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
Heroine's Journey
Last night I watched a Barbie movie (Princess Charm School) with Sylvia and Paul. Having now spent a bit of time listening to people talk about the hero's journey, I noticed that there were definite aspects of the plot that fit that mould.
I just wish the skills Blair and the other girls have to master weren't quite so lame. Supposedly being a princess is the most important job in the realm, yet all the girls learn about in their classes is how to deport themselves in very traditionally feminine ways--with grace, beauty, and modesty. Most of what they're shown doing is learning how to walk and dance and be traditionally (and expensively) beautiful. I don't really begrudge the characters those things, but in my mind those things are the perks of being in the ruling class, not 'skills' you have to master to become part of the ruling class. There's essentially no mention of book lernin' or critical thinking or any of the other, more masculine traits that are characteristic of people truly in the ruling class.
And then there's race. Blair is, of course, blonde-haired and blue eyed ('cause she's Barbie). Anybody else with a speaking part is white. There are some darker-skinned girls shown, notably in the crowd of hopefuls at the lottery, but they're all in the background.
Anyway, not a terrible movie, but problematic in kinda predictable ways.
- Our heroine, Blair, is an orphan who, at the beginning, receives a call to adventure which she initially denies before ultimately accepting (like every hero's journey ever it seems).
- Blair has a mentor who tutors in the feminine arts in which she's deficient, just like a good mentor is supposed to.
- She 'meets' her dead parents in the form of a painting of them where her mother looks a lot like her.
- In order to prove she is the true princess she and her friends go on a quest to look for the lost crown that will reveal Blair's true identity, eventually venturing into an underground vault.
- The underground vault is under the control of the primary antagonist, and the girls are locked in there in the climax of the story.
- After they escape from the vault the girls are chased by the security guard who is in cahoots with the primary antagonist.
I just wish the skills Blair and the other girls have to master weren't quite so lame. Supposedly being a princess is the most important job in the realm, yet all the girls learn about in their classes is how to deport themselves in very traditionally feminine ways--with grace, beauty, and modesty. Most of what they're shown doing is learning how to walk and dance and be traditionally (and expensively) beautiful. I don't really begrudge the characters those things, but in my mind those things are the perks of being in the ruling class, not 'skills' you have to master to become part of the ruling class. There's essentially no mention of book lernin' or critical thinking or any of the other, more masculine traits that are characteristic of people truly in the ruling class.
And then there's race. Blair is, of course, blonde-haired and blue eyed ('cause she's Barbie). Anybody else with a speaking part is white. There are some darker-skinned girls shown, notably in the crowd of hopefuls at the lottery, but they're all in the background.
Anyway, not a terrible movie, but problematic in kinda predictable ways.
Thursday, June 6, 2013
Good TV, Bad TV
I don't have tons of time to watch television, so I try to be a little selective. Even so, I'm pretty much always a sucker for spy shows and anything science fiction-y.
At my library I picked up a couple of spy shows on DVD: Spooks (aka MI5, I think, in the US), which is a BBC production; and The Protectors (Livvagterne in Danish, where the show was made). You know, I had high expectations for Spooks, but in the end it was just annoying. It felt like the creators couldn't decide if they wanted to make a joke out of the show or not. The characters were very cliche'd, they all had stupid issues, and they really not consistent from one episode to the next. The worst was a romantic subplot in which, in stereotypical TV fashion, once Ellie, Tom's significant other, finds out he's a spy (and not really named Matt) she loses trust in him and turns into a petulant, over-emotional wreck. They finally patch things up in the last episode, but Tom accidentally locks them in his house with a bomb he unwittingly took home. It's a bad sign when as a viewer you're secretly hoping the bomb will go off and remove the idiotic, unbelievable characters from your life.
The Protectors is completely different, in spite of also being a spy show and having basically the same cast of characters. The difference, I think, is that instead of giving characters stupid drama to deal with, and spending a lot of time then dealing with it on screen, we only get to see the parts of their drama that interact directly with the plot. For instance, the only time we see Jasmina, a Muslim immigrant, dealing with the tension between her and her more devout sister is in plot arcs where their conversation can give deeper meaning to greater plot. That happens not infrequently, as several of the plot arcs involve the tension between Muslim immigrants and Danish society. It also does a nice job of showing the diversity in Muslims and Danes. The writers take their characters seriously, and while their characters are stand ins for the broader society, they're also realistic individuals.
These realistic individuals deal with their life dramas in internally consistent ways, which I have to say is also refreshing. The character arcs feel specific to each character. While each character serves a purpose on the show, they evolve and react in ways I can see real people reacting. For example, in one episode in the second series Rasmus shoots and kills a child. It is, in the moment, the appropriate course of action but it haunts him and eventually leads him to leave the protection service. I admit, part of what I love is that he offers to be a stay at home dad, because he realizes he wants a more normal life. Anyway, in the same episode, Jonas kills someone. Again, it's the appropriate action in the moment. Not that we see too much more of Jonas in the series, but it's pretty obvious he hardly thinks about that action. He was simply doing his job and thus is able to completely divorce himself from any serious feelings of guilt. It's all the difference between the characters. Rasmus is always a more empathetic character, which causes him to feel immense guilt over the mistaken killing. Jonas is more self-centered, which is why he cheats on his wife and is able to move on from the negative part of his job.
I could go on, but I've thrown in enough spoilers there. Protectors was a fantastic show. I wish it'd kept going, though I'm happy with where it ended. The second series was increasingly dark and I think dragging it on would have left the more realistic characters of the show dealing with serious PTSD. More than just Rasmus, anyway.
At my library I picked up a couple of spy shows on DVD: Spooks (aka MI5, I think, in the US), which is a BBC production; and The Protectors (Livvagterne in Danish, where the show was made). You know, I had high expectations for Spooks, but in the end it was just annoying. It felt like the creators couldn't decide if they wanted to make a joke out of the show or not. The characters were very cliche'd, they all had stupid issues, and they really not consistent from one episode to the next. The worst was a romantic subplot in which, in stereotypical TV fashion, once Ellie, Tom's significant other, finds out he's a spy (and not really named Matt) she loses trust in him and turns into a petulant, over-emotional wreck. They finally patch things up in the last episode, but Tom accidentally locks them in his house with a bomb he unwittingly took home. It's a bad sign when as a viewer you're secretly hoping the bomb will go off and remove the idiotic, unbelievable characters from your life.
The Protectors is completely different, in spite of also being a spy show and having basically the same cast of characters. The difference, I think, is that instead of giving characters stupid drama to deal with, and spending a lot of time then dealing with it on screen, we only get to see the parts of their drama that interact directly with the plot. For instance, the only time we see Jasmina, a Muslim immigrant, dealing with the tension between her and her more devout sister is in plot arcs where their conversation can give deeper meaning to greater plot. That happens not infrequently, as several of the plot arcs involve the tension between Muslim immigrants and Danish society. It also does a nice job of showing the diversity in Muslims and Danes. The writers take their characters seriously, and while their characters are stand ins for the broader society, they're also realistic individuals.
These realistic individuals deal with their life dramas in internally consistent ways, which I have to say is also refreshing. The character arcs feel specific to each character. While each character serves a purpose on the show, they evolve and react in ways I can see real people reacting. For example, in one episode in the second series Rasmus shoots and kills a child. It is, in the moment, the appropriate course of action but it haunts him and eventually leads him to leave the protection service. I admit, part of what I love is that he offers to be a stay at home dad, because he realizes he wants a more normal life. Anyway, in the same episode, Jonas kills someone. Again, it's the appropriate action in the moment. Not that we see too much more of Jonas in the series, but it's pretty obvious he hardly thinks about that action. He was simply doing his job and thus is able to completely divorce himself from any serious feelings of guilt. It's all the difference between the characters. Rasmus is always a more empathetic character, which causes him to feel immense guilt over the mistaken killing. Jonas is more self-centered, which is why he cheats on his wife and is able to move on from the negative part of his job.
I could go on, but I've thrown in enough spoilers there. Protectors was a fantastic show. I wish it'd kept going, though I'm happy with where it ended. The second series was increasingly dark and I think dragging it on would have left the more realistic characters of the show dealing with serious PTSD. More than just Rasmus, anyway.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)