From Esquire:
It’s a cliché to say that we live in science fictional times. But recently it’s felt like we’re living in every science fictional time simultaneously. The world’s richest man decides to purchase a global communications platform on a whim, then decides to back out on a whim. Climate change heat waves lead governments to patrol borders with robot dogs. Meanwhile, a global pandemic rages on, new dystopian technologies are unveiled every day, and the wealthy work on their plans to escape into space. When a scroll through the news reveals a dozen dystopian scenarios—and the daily tasks of work, life, and family trudge on—what’s a novelist who hopes to capture our reality to do?
Maybe novels must do everything too.
In the last couple of years, there’s been a wave of ambitious genre-bending novels whose wide scopes and wild imaginings reflect the surreal state of our times. I’ve come to think of the form as “the speculative epic.” “Speculative” is used here as an umbrella term for science fiction, fantasy, magical realism, and other fictional modes that imagine worlds different from ours. Examples of these speculative epics from the last two years include Emily St. John Mandel’s Sea of Tranquility, Matt Bell’s Appleseed, Anthony Doerr’s Cloud Cuckoo Land, Sequoia Nagamatsu’s How High We Go in the Dark, Monica Byrne’s The Actual Star, Vauhini Vara’s The Immortal King Rao, Hanya Yanagihara’s To Paradise, and Kim Stanley Robinson’s The Ministry for the Future. These novels vary in style and range from breakout debuts to works from established masters, but they all share an epic scope and the use of speculative premises to tackle the biggest concerns of our day.
In 2022, speculative fiction is realism.
Link to the rest at Esquire
I’m not convinced Musk ever intended to buy Twitter. The timing raises eyebrows.
Just when it began to look as though Trump would be able to get his social network going, Musk begins buying Twitter. He drags out the process through the time Trump is getting the business going. To me, it looks like deliberate undercutting of a potential competitor. Would LOVE to know who was backing Musk’s play.
The answer has been out in the open since day one.
Lots of places report it but I doubt you’ll find fault with Slate:
https://slate.com/technology/2022/05/elon-musks-twitter-investors-a-guide-to-whos-who.html
As for why buy it, look to the valuation of the other social networks. Instagram, for one is by itself worth over $100B, aroubd triple of the pre-Musk Twitter. Is it hard to believe he figured he could double its value after fixing its disfunctions (not related to speech), like message size, ability to edit, reputation, etc?
He (and his backers) saw big money to be made, no conspiracy theory needed, just run-of-the-mill money grubbing.
I suppose one might also say Musk also acted in the 2022 election cycle, and it could disrupt liberal communications. With so many things happening, we can pick from a menu of possible motivations.
Indeed. He could theoretically be counterattacking for the bureaucratic harrassment from the administration. “But they started it!” He is quite capable of such as demonstrated in Germany and California.
But the Principle of Parsimony, colloquially referred to as Occam’s Razor, suggests the simplest explanation is the most likely. And Musk’s track record of opportunistic ventures (flamethowers, crypto, toys, batteries, “AI”, etc) is a strong indicator. The guy started with nothing and ramped up to billions by opportunistic reading of markets.
Even as we sit here, Musk just signed a deal with MATTEL. And it’s not his first.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/20/mattel-inks-deal-with-elon-musks-spacex-to-produce-line-of-toys.html
He has a stated mission and that needs money wherever he can find it.
Once upon a time, a long time ago, in a world that was different to one I live in now, I probably would have gone wow, yes, they get it!
Now, I live in the future where the internet and SpaceX exist. Where personal computers are phones, and our technology has become transparent to those who have never known a world without.
So, yes science fiction can be real; whatever ‘real’ means, which I say because fiction is story; a narrative of how we perceive the world. But, what is mentioned, with a couple of exceptions, is not what I recognize as being science fiction.
Of course, one could argue that I’m being a gate keeper, keeping out those who strive to make science fiction great; or perhaps I’m bigoted against literature; and of course the perennial favourite, “I can’t define what science fiction is, but I know when I see it.”
For me, the desire to classify works that are admired as great literature as science fiction – Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein being the Ur example for most cases – says more about the insecurity of people, and the human condition than it does about science fiction.
For example, if hard-boiled pulp or Noir stories were treated by the fans like science fiction is, then imagine having Agatha Christie’s crime novels labelled as such to make the genre more respectable (sorry, best metaphor I could come up with, but hopefully I’ve made myself clear?).
Get off my lawn!
They don’t get it, though.
Too many people think that SF and Fantasy are just the trappings.
If it looks like SF it has to be SF.
Wrong.
STAR WARS being exhibit one. Nota Roberts’ JD ROBB books being exhibit two. The first is fantasy and not terribly self consistent, which means it isn’t particularly good as either SF or Fantasy. The first six ranged from watchable to were good but none is a good example of writing in either genre. The Robb books are neither. They are romance wrapped in mystery. Either genre might fit. Lots of folks pretend they’re SF because tbey’re set in a future time. Problem is, the narratives are about the puzzle and the protagonist’s relationship, not about the world or tbe science that created it.
In contrast, Bob Shaw’s 1978 Vertigo (aka, Terminal velocity) is seen by some as anything but SF because the plot is about the protagonit dealing with PTSD and “discovering himself”. Except that the whole store takes place in a society where cheap antigravity harnesses allow anybody to fly and tbe protagonist’s trauma keeps him from doing his job as an air cop. Instead of focusing on the hardware, Shaw (one of the best writers of his time) focuses on the *consequences* of the tech. It’s a people story on the surface but in its true nature it is about the science and how humans deal with it. Short and seemingly mundane but actually really good. Plus he was a good wordsmith.
It is easy to tell SF from the imitators if instead of looking at the form of tbe story, the surface appearance, we look at its nature, its intent, its core idea(s). Paranormal romance is a fine subgenre and usually clever in coopting SF settings and tropes. But the nature of the store, its core, is romance and writers in tbe field don’t pretend otherwise. (Besides, there’s more money in appealing to romance readers).
The latter is probably the reason litfic writers/publishers like to market their fringe narrative as SF or fantasy. Marketing as such doesn’t make them fit, though. And since all genres come with expectations, their proud “subversion” of genre only leads to rrader disappointment. They get the sale. Once. They also get tagged as bad SF writers. And get kicked off the lawn. 😀
If you want to write SF (or any other genre) *learn* what the genre is about first.
Once you figure out how to get it right, then you can try to explore its borders. But you don’t walk in and redefine a genre just because you say so.
I had the privilege of hanging out at British SF cons when I was a young fan. Listening to his Serious Scientific Eastercon speeches that were so funny to listen too. Loved Vertigo, and he wrote a bunch of excellent both humerous and serious SF.
It’s a shame he doesn’t get more recognition.
I try to have some SFnal concept that I’m obliquely exploring through story telling. In my Gate Walker trilogy it’s about space-time and the multiverse all wrapped up in tropes of military tech, exploration, and first contact.
My World of Drei series explores emerging AI wrapped up in what appear to be a prescient war in Russia where Ukraine has incited a civil war by encouraging Belarus to revolt to create a democracy.
But, like Shaw (though I stand in the shadow of the greats like Bob) my sales show that my stories lack that certain something (quality of writing etc) to appeal to a wider audience. It is what it is. I just need to write a story that doesn’t suck.
Shaw got his recognition when it mattered: when he could bask in it. 😉
Those that don’t know him, well it’s their loss.
Plenty of others from that time period are available and selling but not broadly known. Somebody ought to do a website highlighting them.
Like, one of my favorites from that time period is F.M. Busby’s RISSA KERGUELEN. (The “omnibus” full story.) Some of the combat mechanics are dated but the science holds up–relativistic star travel and its consequences–and the socio economics are as current as today. Plus it’s lots of fun.
Not well know out there.
It happens.
It’s the snowball nature of the market.
Which is why you should not assume you are at fault.
Time was one could honestly aspire to read all new SF as it came out, or at least hear of it. True for most of Shaw’s career but by the 80’s no longer true.There is much too much for anybody to be knowledgeable about the entire field. One of the many reasons Hugos are irrelevant and Nebulas are headed that way. The field is too broad and too diversified. Discovery is key but discovery is too hit or miss. Not much even the best writers can do.
It does add to the reader satisfaction of finding somebody who touches them, though. True fans will follow you zealously. That is the new measure of success.
Thank you. A long period of depression, iatrogenic from treating another health issue, has left me struggling to regain, restore my urge to write. It’s all about the balance between work, fun, and failure.
More simply, meaning: what good does it do to create something that that is not appreciated (financial reward being the only measurable indicator of value).
Sorry, that probably comes off more maudlin than I mean, just saying writing has less priority over enjoying my life.