The Poison In The Pen

This morning over breakfast we were talking about where jobs seem to be going.  (Into the wormhole, but that’s not what we mean.)  Yes, we were talking about it for the usual reason – we fear the one full time “regular work” job in this household will end up going that way too.

In a way it’s almost inevitable.  You pile regulations on something and make it really difficult to do it legally –ie the regulations contradict each other – people WILL stop doing it.  Only…

Only people still have to do something.  Well, right now, as someone who occasionally hires contractors to help in my work, (yes, I wish I could hire full time, but I don’t think it’s happening) I can tell you the regulations are crazy.  You have to read through tome-like volumes to figure out what you have to pay and how much and… It adds a week of admin work onto your work.

But people still have to work.  And people still need employees.  So, what we see happening is a lot more temp/contracting/part time, and the work of managing the regulations etc to a great extent off-loaded to each individual as “self-employed contractor.”

As someone who has worked on this for ever, I can tell you we get the ugly stick on taxes.  No, seriously.  We pay self-employment tax, for the privilege of working for ourselves.  Many states have other taxes on top of that.  We contribute both sides of social security.

Tax policy lags reality and I think most of the self-employment beating we get comes from the fact that forty or so years ago most self-employed people were in the very well paid professions: doctors, lawyers – people who could hire secretaries and accountants to not only manage the paperwork but to find every possible loophole.

We don’t have that, so the end of the year, unless I made nothing (which has happened a couple of years) is hectic and vaguely angsty, as we gather all the paperwork, etc and make sure every I is doted and every t is crossed.

Which brings us to where all these regulations on employers is leading (into the kaki, but that’s not important right now.)  I think over the next few years everyone we know is going to become a contractor and working  probably for multiple people every year.

I suspect the people making these laws, if they’re thinking at all beyond the “this would be nice to make employers do”, think that the fact that this will make life more uncertain will make people rely on government more.

That’s not how it works.

Looking back the level of confidence in big government coincided the era of cradle to grave employment in large companies.  People who thought their bosses were competent to manage their job security and retirement would also trust other large, faceless entities.

The level of distrust in government has been growing since the eighties and while the people in government – who, after all, have cradle to grave security at least most of the time – might think this was because of Reagan’s rhetoric (Which is part of the reason Obama wanted to be the anti-Reagan) I think they have it wrong.

The world my generation faced when we came of working age was one of temp work, of layoffs for being less than absolutely efficient, of…  Yeah.  What it meant was that we learned to trust only ourselves and our network.  People we knew well, people we could trust.  No big, faceless entities, which, of course, means not government, by extension.

I don’t think they understand that in a world of all-contractors, first, resentment against tax regulations is going to grow like mad – when you spend your holidays doing books and trying to figure out how much you made and how much you’re going to owe, you get a tadbit resentful.   When you see how much you have to pay for the “freedom” of working for yourself, particularly for people forced into it by new laws, you get even more resentful.

Your reaction is not to go “Oh, daddy-government, look after me” – it’s “Those right bastards are robbing me blind coming and going.”

I don’t think the people making full time employment impossible (though I’ll admit that it was going that way anyway with technology, to where people might PREFER to be contractors – but not by force and not this quickly) realize this.

I don’t think they know they’re making their own poisoned pill.

Witchfinder, Free Novel, Chapter 70

*This is the Fantasy novel I’m posting here for free, one chapter every Friday.   If your conscience troubles you getting something for free, do hit the donate button on the right side.  Anyone donating more than $6 will get a non-drm electronic copy of Witchfinder in its final version, when it’s published.
There is a compilation of previous chapters here  all in one big lump, which makes it easier to read and I will compile each new chapter there, a week after I post.  When the novel is completed and about to be edited the compilation page will probably be deleted.

Oh, this is in pre-arc format, meaning you’ll find the occasional spelling mistake and sentence that makes no sense.  It’s not exactly first draft, but it’s not at the level I’d send to a publisher, yet. *

 

This Unwanted Crown

Nell advanced.  It seemed to her that it got unbearably hot, but she didn’t feel it as heat, so much as unbearable confinement, touching the skin at all points.  She got sweaty, too, instantly, and uncomfortable in ways she didn’t even know people could be uncomfortable.  It seemed to her she could feel every inch of her skin, and she realized, startled that this was not normal, that in fact, most of the time, people forgot about most of their body.  Just let it run on its own.  Perhaps that was necessary to stay sane.  You couldn’t always be thinking of your left eyeball.

Then she thought these were very odd thoughts, and then that she must be dreaming.  Yet she continued walking towards the glow ahead.  There was a sense that if she were to get out of here and return to the world as she knew it – one of the worlds that made sense, at least, be they Earth or Avalon – she needed to go forward.

Only as she got closer, the light seemed to grow dimmer.  No.  Not dimmer, just more concentrated into strands, which seemed to drape all over, from ceiling to floor, like immaterial cobwebs.  They gathered in three glowing cocoons at the end of the corridor in a sort of domed cave-chamber.  It seemed to Nell that the walls of the chamber glowed gold and also that inside the cocoons were three people – tall people with broad shoulders, though it was impossible to say whether they were men or women.

When they spoke, the voice that resonated didn’t give her any idea, either, since it was a vibration, more than a voice.  It gave the impression of a boom in the ears, but there was no sound.

“Daughter of the isles,” it or they said.  It was hard to tell if it was one person or all three speaking.  “You come to claim your crown.”

Nell spoke before she could stop herself.  “No,” she said.

“No?”

“No.  I want no part of the crown.”

There was a low thrumming.  She couldn’t tell if it was a thrum of disapproval or not.  Then there was a question that almost managed to sound surprised and taken off expectations, “Why not?”

Nell had to think, because her words had come out before thinking.  But as she looked into her heart, she saw that it was indeed true.  She wanted no part of the crown.  “I am not of this world,” she said, and as the thrumming resumed, she said, “what I mean is, I believe I was born in Avalon.  Someone… someone I trust said I was.  But I am not of this world.  I was taken while still very young to another world, to a world we call Earth, a world without magic, and that is my world and what I think of as home.”

No thrumming, but the words came again, “And yet, that person you trust – perhaps love? – is in Avalon, is he not?”

Trust and perhaps love.  Nell didn’t have much experience with men.  There had been Antoine, but apparently he hadn’t been a man as such, just a lost centaur, carrying out some ancient prophecy.  Then there was Seraphim.  She had enjoyed her days with him.  And perhaps it was love – maybe.  She could imagine his moving back to the farm and living there, while they took some of the work from grandma and did their best to make the place profitable and—

And it was totally impossible.  He was a duke.  Yes, he had brothers, and yes, perhaps he could leave and leave the inheritance to his younger brothers, but she was not stupid.  While other dukes in the same position might do it, Seraphim would not.  His family and his responsibilities were at least part of his being.

She shied away from what this might mean for her and for her family and for her responsibilities.  “I… I am not for him.  We’re not of the same worlds.  Our positions are so different.”  That was a justification, her unforgiving mind told her for dereliction of duty.  But why should she have this duty?    She hadn’t chosen to be born of this world, this kingdom or this family.  She hadn’t been raised to them.  She didn’t want them.  “I want to go back home and live there.”

Another low thrumming, this one with a note of …  yes, she was almost sure of it now.  There were words in there.  This low thrumming was a conversation between the people in those cocoons.  “But you came to Avalon willing,” a voice said, and it seemed to her this voice had what she would call an Irish accent, even though there was no sound as such, just a feeling.  “You embraced magic willing.  This is not normal on Earth.”

“I was curious,” she said.  And then felt herself blush, fiery red.  She knew she was blushing because her cheeks were even hotter than the chamber she found herself in, so hot she expected to smell burning flesh.  “And there was a man.  Or rather, he was a centaur.  It is perhaps not known in Avalon, but women with…  Women who work in professions of the mind, on Earth, often have trouble…  That is, men are not very interested in most of them.  Or only some men.  Most men who had been interested in me didn’t interest me, and then there was…  The centaur.  He was interesting, and he took me traveling the worlds.”

She waited.  The thrumming resumed.  “The centaur fetched you obeying a prophecy and gave his life for it.  Does that not move you?”

“No.  It is not my prophecy and I did not want him to give his life.”
“In fact,” another voice said, one that sounded somehow older.  “You have known or suspected for some time, perhaps from before the centaur fetched you who you were and what your responsibilities were, have you not?”

“No,” Nell said, in a little cry, then stopped.  “Perhaps,but…”

“But?”

“It is crazy to imagine you’re the princess of a lost world, and besides…  and besides, I did not want it.  Not after I saw the real Avalon, the responsibilities, the needs.  Even with my fath–  Even with the king in power, the heir would need to take up her share of magic.  I’ve heard old people say the land suffers from lack of an heir.  I–  the heir would need to take up any future planning that involves magic and carry a burden that…  I do not want it.”

The thrumming picked up again, this time sounding like a furious swarm of bees who were running rather hoarse.  “In fact, you’d prefer to desert?” another voice said.

“Not desert.  Not that,” Nell said.  “I wasn’t raised to it. There are better people than I.”

A long silence fell and for a moment, for just a moment, Nell thought they’d now let her go, probably transport her all the way to Eath and then she…

“Well then,” the voices said altogether.  “Look what will happen if you’ll not take this unwanted crown.”

In front of the cocoons of light, a mist formed, thick and glossy, like reflective fog.  And upon the fog scenes formed and moved.  People she knew, people she–  Yes, she was sure she recognized Seraphim, and her heart leapt.  Why on Earth was he in an underground chamber, trying to fight a dragon with what appeared to be a flint knife.

And then the scene shifted.  And Nell screamed.

 

To Dream The Impractical Dream

*And I’m sorry I’m late again.  Will probably be posting “latish” all week, since it’s the end of the year, which is when we have to do legal stuff for the business (writing IS a business) and adjust stuff for next year, etc.  It’s a massively busy time for us.*

Each writer comes into the field to write something.  Sometimes it’s a single story or series.  You can tell these writers, because they will stick doggedly to their series through thick and thin, gamble everything on it.

Life being what it is, and therefore a stone-b*tch, this means most of them never broke in, and continued to write their series, often less and less, until it suffocated in the drawer, unseen by human eyes.

I thought I was one of these writers, long before I broke in, until it became obvious even to myself that I would NEVER break in unless I wrote things that other people wanted to read – that is things that weren’t so intensely in my own head that no one else would have any interest.  Then I wrote the Shakespeare trilogy.  (I had, by that time, written he first draft of DST but I was told no one, ever, would buy science fiction, because “it just doesn’t sell.”)

And when that crashed and they told me they wanted historical mystery, I found my interest in writing SOEMTHING was greater than in writing one thing in particular.  I liked writing – it was the best way I knew to make a living, too – so I was going to jump through whatever hoops I had to.  There followed historical mystery, historical romance, contemporary craft mystery and – eventually – science fiction.  My fantasy too ranges from historical/literary to urban adventure.

Perhaps that means I’m a total sellout because I didn’t stick to my vision.  I don’t know. T o have a vision, it helps to have eaten three meals and have a roof over my head, so… it works for me.  Also, to an extent everything (okay, almost everything) I wrote was something I WANTED to write.  What I mean is, the thought of historical mysteries might never have occurred to me before, but the Three Musketeer mysteries gave me a chance to spend time with my four literary crushes.  And while I never thought of Fantasy, I like travel fantasy set in the nineteenth century.  And as proven by the fact I’m writing Witchfinder on my own, I rather like steam-punkish multi-universe settings.

Same with urban fantasy, which maybe DOITD is not at all, but anyway – I read everything and I can write everything.  And enjoy it.  IN fact now that the “I’d never do that” barrier is broken, I probably can’t help writing everything, just to see if I can.

BUT at the core of it, there is “what I thought I would write when I first thought I might like to be a writer and that was “SF like Heinlein” and “Mysteries like Agatha Christie.”  These last  were actually very specific and would now be “historic mysteries set in a certain social class, in Britain between the wars” – I was going to say I’m sorry I didn’t think to propose them as historical (part of the issue being I think of things less than 100 years old as current, not historical.)  I’m actually not sure I’m sorry.  Best case scenario, the series would be going on and paying me 5k or so per book.  Worst case scenario (and that house is capable of doing this) it would have tapered out and I would now be fighting for rights.

Well, the SF “like Heinlein” – though not, of course, because I’m me and not Heinlein (in case some of you weren’t sure) I’ll be doing, probably mostly for Baen.  I might or might not submit The Brave and the Free (which really will be done after I finish Noah’s Boy and Witchfinder and probably WHILE working on Through Fire (it’s a dark book.  I’ll need breaks)) to Baen depending on where I think my state of trying Toni’s patience is at the time (grin.)  But mostly – like 90% of my SF will go through Baen as long as they want it.  I’ll finish the ones they’ve already rejected (mostly because they are TRULY WEIRD) and the ones that will be episodic (nuns in spaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaace) and do those indie.

But the mysteries…  Yes, as soon as I get rights back I’ll do more refinishing mysteries.  And YES as soon as I get rights back, I’ll finish the musketeers (well, finish is a way of speaking, the planned series is twenty books long) at least as long as they sell indie (I still have that thing about meals and roof.)

I’m working on orphan kittens as we speak, just very slowly, since it ties in to the other Goldport stuff.

BUT – it occurred to me – why NOT do “Agatha Christie like historicals” updated for the current time, but not like the TV series (the new one) where apparently the solutions always hinge on EVERYONE being gay (shrugs.)  Just not quite SO immersed in the time – which also means not thinking well of socialists and communists, btw, where Agatha tended to be rather wobbly.

One of my friends has volunteered to beta (or alpha, he says, chapter by chapter) as I undertake these.  Now I need to find material to research.  As I said, I’d like to set them between the wars, or perhaps – just perhaps – starting when the main character (female, of course, think a young Miss Marple) is a young woman, just before the wars.  I’ll have to find novels (and movies/series/documentaries, for the touch/feel) set in that time period.  I’ll also have to look for books of recipes and clothes patterns, because that’s the daily details that trip you up.

Mind you, this will be very much backburnered until I deliver things that will bring in cash on the nose, and things that are already started, like Witchfinder.  Part of me is toying with the idea of doing these as a kickstarter, with a first delivery (first book) in a year – but it worries me a little because to do so I need a first chapter (I think) and I don’t have time to research enough to do that, just now.

Anyway – this is the advantage of indie.  I’d advise each of you to think deeply about what you wanted to do when you started writing.  Why not try it now?  Yeah, it might not sell enough to keep you in Purina’s Writer Chow, but if it doesn’t you can stop.  And you can at least say you tried.

And you CAN get it into readers’ hands.  No one can tell you “That just isn’t writing.  Write a book with lesbian lawyer penguins instead.”

I like that freedom.  And the dream?  It’s just over the rise.

The Appetites We Share With Gods

I read an article by Ed Driscoll about how Christmas is getting – I don’t think he used the word – desecrated.  Not by commercialism as such.  He doesn’t go into a “buying gifts for people you love is evil” rant which is good because I like Ed.

People driving around with bumpers that say “Jesus is the reason for the season annoy me about as much as people driving around with Coexist bumper stickers spelled in symbols in which only one has a problem with all the others.  It’s just as SMUG and, sorry, I HATE smug.  Besides, it’s a-historical.  As far as we can tell the historical Christ was born when there were shepherds in the fields – i.e. NOT December in Israel.  And most European religions have always had a holiday with which the longest night of the year is marked.  For a secular treatment of the need that satisfies in the human mind, please refer to Terry Pratchett’s Hogfather and The Amazing Maurice And His Educated Rodents.  (Yes, I am serious.  I daresay even the religious will find echoes there.  At least, I find my theological thinking in the oddest places, but maybe that’s just me.)

And if you’re a Christian and getting ready to blast me, please don’t.  I don’t think the fact that we celebrate the birth in the wrong day invalidates the whole religion.  The birth date is unknowable, (even if guessable at.  Yes, Israel had a calendar and Rome had a calendar and we have a calendar and with enough time, pencil lead and skull sweat someone who, unlike me, doesn’t transpose digits, could possibly calculate something approaching the “right” date.  The question is, would it be?  Look, my dad was born in 31 (I think I said 41 the other day because I do that with numbers) in a country with widespread literacy and official birth registration.  When time came for him to enter school grandma counted backwards, the way people in rural areas did/do, “Thirty seven, that was the year that the farmer’s cow died.  Thirty six, that was when it rained into August…” and gave his birthdate that she thought to the best of her knowledge was correct.  Except that she always told the story of his birth.  How he was born on a Sunday and she was alone at home and the village half empty because everyone had gone to some Saint’s celebration nearby.)  When dad turned 50 my brother bought him one of those “your birthdate newspaper.”  The date grandma gave wasn’t a Sunday.  So, either dad was born in another year – possible, since in the village school age was determined by “is large enough and has started taking an interest in reading” and if dad was like my boys he grew early – or in another day altogether.  We still celebrate on the date Grandma gave, because that’s the best guess all the same.) and we really have no clue of his real birthday.  And it might have been thirty two or perhaps thirty three.)  And from a theological point of view it makes sense to celebrate in the darkest of the year.  “For those who were in darkness saw a great light.”

All I’m saying is that even if the West hadn’t converted to Christianity (yes, yes, but bear with me) or even if we had adopted the more Jewish-rooted form of Christianity that Peter supported at least for a time, there would still be a winter celebration and reassurance that the light will come back and that darkness won’t swallow the world.  Christianity and Judaism are perhaps to thank for the fact we no longer spill human blood to ensure that.  (Just like alternate histories in which Rome survives rarely include the fact that slavery would/might/likely survives with Rome, alternate histories in which the Celts took over the entire world tend to ignore the blood thirstiness of their religion.  Though nothing and no one had anything on the Phoenicians when it comes to spilling blood in sacrifice.  I’m not sure piety is a virtue when it comes with taking someone else’s life – or to quote Pratchett “And the goat ran away swearing off religion forever”.)

Anyway, forgive me.  I haven’t had but one cup of coffee, or I wouldn’t have wondered so disastrously from the point.  The point being that Ed (and apparently Lileks) were shocked by things like people selling sh*t lipbalm, on Christmas, near a register.

It is a post about the coarsening of the culture, in other words, and most of those make me roll my eyes – but not that one. Partly because it hooks up with Witchfinder writing itself in my head, and I just endured a long speech from a dead character about how it is one’s duty not to rub other’s faces in the grit of the world.  How the honorable man smooths out the worst, most harsh realities to make it possible for others to go on living.  (We’ve spoken of it here, too, in the contest of the Alies crediting the French resistance with helping more than they should to allow the country to heal.)  Look, if you read biographies from the Victorian age, or early, you find a lot of our vices again and again.  But not in public.  In public there was a face and a smoothing, and a way of allowing people to go on.

Hypocrisy?  Perhaps.  But it takes a lot of hypocrisy for people to live together, particularly in large, cohesive populations.

Look, if I hate someone I’m related to (I don’t.  Most of them have died.  Which is the best revenge) with the deep gut-level hatred that’s making me sick for days in advance of a family gathering, is anything gained by my telling the person hosting the gathering that I’m not coming, that she has to choose between me and that SOB?  Or is it better to go to the gathering, make nice if I have to, stay as far from him as I can the rest of the time, and enjoy the other people.  Or alternately to call and say “I’m sick.  I can’t make it.”  Is it a lie?  Sure.  Is it hypocrisy?  Sure.  But what would be served by telling them “I hate so and so” – chances are they already know it.  We’re far more transparent than we like to think. But they still wish to see this person, and they wish to see me.  What does “frankness” do but make life miserable for as many people as possible?  The cry against hypocrisy often seems to me the cry of the two year old who just made a poop mural all over the bathroom wall and is screaming that everyone must admire it and not wash it away.  (Interesting, reading the biographies of “intellectuals” who insisted on “frankness” and railed against immorality, they were only frank when it was convenient.  I.e. when it hurt everyone but them.)

But somehow – and probably because of resentment of the just and good men – weirdly most of them REALLY were such, just not perfect – who caused WWI and WWII we have decided that a sort of rude frankness, the rubbing of people’s noses in the worst/darkest/rudest aspects of life for no other reason than just doing so, is the greatest public virtue.

I’m not talking of sexual orientation – though the Witchfinder speech in my head is tangential to that.  At that time, in those circumstances, the only way to smooth over things is to soft pedal that – or even political orientation.  When something is intensely at the center of you lying about it CONSTANTLY taints the soul.  I know this.  I speak from knowledge.  This doesn’t mean I don’t lie about it occasionally by omission.  The best way to get along with people who think all libertarians are terrorists is to enlighten them, but at a family party or an office gathering, if the boor in the corner is screaming about evil libertarians, it might be best to smile in a strained way and slide away.  (And the insistence to bring politics into occasions that are definitely not political is why I don’t have many friends on the other extreme of the spectrum anymore.)

To an extent – a limited, “appropriate time and place” extent – frankness is a virtue at least in matters pertaining to the essential qualities of a person.  Appropriate time and place?  Well, yes.  Do I need to know the guy selling me tickets to the amusement park is gay?  I mean, I might suspect it, but that’s neither here nor there.  His interaction with me has NOTHING to do with his sexual orientation and it would be very odd if he said “Here are your tickets, by the way, I’m gay.”  Or if the elderly man doing alterations on my dress said “It’ll be tomorrow before it’s done.  By the way, I am a Maoist.”

However, what we’re facing is exactly that – a slipping of the intrusive “doesn’t belong here” in places where it doesn’t belong.  And in many cases, what we’re seeing is the slipping of the “doesn’t belong anywhere outside the nursery” into adult life.

What I’m talking about is stuff like the sh*t lip balm…

Look, adults know that every animal excretes the end product of our metabolic processes.  That’s fine.  It’s perhaps not ideal – in an ideal world, we live off unicorn twinkles and good wishes – but we live in flesh and flesh has needs.  What Rex Stout called derisively “The appetites we share with dogs.”

Kids are fascinated with this – partly I think because they’re fresh from potty training.  Learning to control their sphincter is SUCH an accomplishment they’re fascinated with the whole process. – I remember my younger kid and a little female friend, at three, while her mom and I were in a bookstore, looking over a book of cat pictures.  They were planning to get married and have cats.  And they kept reassuring each other their cats would poop.  They talked about it all through lunch, afterwards, making the adults’ diet easier.  (No, to this day I have no idea what the alternative to cats who poop is.  They just swell very large and eventually burst?  I mean, it seems like it would be easier on the litter box but hard on cat longevity.)

And for the last few decades, society has become fascinated by it as well.  Excretory processes, meaningless sex, and just sheer strange and demeaning antics have long been a staple of modern literature, and have been making their way into popular books, movies and other forms of entertainment. (There was the year Water World came out, where every movie HAD to have the obligatory pissing scene.)

Some of my socon friends see in this a plot to desensitize society and take us down the primrose path to hell.  I think they’re giving it too much credit.  Oh, someone or other at the head of houses MIGHT think that, but I don’t think so.

It is all the worship of “frankness” and this vague idea that if it’s taboo it MUST be violated.  That violating a taboo – or what used to be a taboo, these people are preserved in amber and seem to be unaware we don’t live in the fifties – by itself makes a rather pedestrian craft into art.

I am not, understand opposed to the representing in art of excretory processes, or of sex, not even of the strangest forms of sex (TENTACLES!) provided it serves a purpose.  (I’m not even opposed to the representation of it in craft, which is more what I do than art.)  But it has to serve an internal story purpose greater than “And it’s one in the eye of the Man” – particularly since these days “the Man” is likely to be a jaded aged hippie who will be cheering you with “right on.”  I will even cheer you right on, if you’re writing this to provide the readers with titillation.  That is an ancient and traditional purpose, and what the heck, why not if you CAN do it?  But in that case it serves a purpose – it’s part of why you’re writing this.  Again, it’s your right.

Regardless of people’s opinions, I maintain that Heinlein was serving a story purpose with the talk about sex in his later books. (No, he really didn’t SHOW sex, not really.  If you think he did, you’ve never read romances.)

If you’re going to show me your characters in bed with an octopus, show how that scene changes the characters, and what it means for the plot.  And then I’ll defend to the death your right to put it in the story and yell at anyone who slanders you.

However, showing such things just to show them, to be “modern” and “taboo free” is a) stupid.  b) boring.  BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT EVERYONE IS DOING.

And making lip balm out of sh*t seems completely bizarre when there are so many things you can make it out of.  Not that I dispute your right to make it.  I also don’t dispute your right to sell romance novels between a woman and her squid.  JUST don’t think you’re being brave or speaking truth to power, or even being very interesting, because you’re not.

Look, the Rex Stout derisive comment about “the appetites we share with dogs” was said by his detective, Nero Wolfe about sex.  Nero Wolfe is a character who is grossly fat due to his indulgence in food.  Food is also an appetite we share with dogs.  So there is a contradiction, right?

No.  If I remember the scene well, Wolfe was talking about sex as sex.  Not love, not even one of the more refined forms of lust, but the use of another human being as a masturbatory device.  Reading a blog the other day and seeing commenter after commenter say “women have the right to orgasms” and “It’s our birthright” made me want to weep because it was a glorification of the appetites we share with dogs, simple and unvarnished.  It was the pursuit of physical reaction with no thought and nothing attached.  I wanted to say “chickies, if that’s your birthright, you’d be better off with a mess of pottage.”

Rex Stout’s relationship with food does not consist of eating whatever he finds by the way side.  He has a refined relationship with food, one that takes in account years of tradition and culinary expertise.  It is not in any way an appetite we share with dogs.

Humans are more than orgasms.  Arguably our mating rituals involve everything from poetry to quantum physics.  Giving yourself an orgasm by means of a mechanical device (what the blog was talking about) might be okay (if your religion permits it.  So not going there) to take the edge off or whatever.  However, I’ll quote Heinlein here (or perhaps allude to it.  I remember the saying in Portuguese as I first read it, and I never QUITE remember it in English. “Masturbation is clean, cheap and doesn’t keep you outdoors till all hours.  It is also lonely.”

And if you think your birthright is to give yourself endless orgasms with a mechanical device, you’re going to end up, sooner or later, feeling rather hollow.

Because we’re not just the appetites we share with dogs.  If we were we’d still be living like dogs – or rather – like wild wolves, falling on whatever might give us calories or sexual pleasure without a second thought.

We and our overgrown brain have also the appetites we share with gods.  By which I mean, in this case, not Himself, maker of the Universe and in many ways beyond our knowing, but those flawed gods of the ancient mythos, who were human like us, only more so.

They too shared appetites with dogs, but all of Zeus philandering was marred — enhanced? — by his wife’s jealousy, which is what made it relevant to hear about, because even the gods themselves cared enough to be jealous, and to want this other god to love only them.  Some of the myths still move us, because they go beyond the appetites we share with dogs, to that place of flawed greatness we each senses within ourselves.

In my corner of the world, which is the arts, all I can tell you is that submerging yet another object in urine, or flinging poo at yet another icon is jaw-cracking-yawn boring.  It’s been done.  In fact it is “the done thing.”  It might at one time – if it did it was before I was born – have shocked people out of complacency and made them think.  Now?  It’s just “oh, yeah.  He/she thinks he/she’s being edgy, poor sod.”

To move people, to reach them, you need to violate some real taboos.  Say, for instance suggest that men and women aren’t EXACTLY alike other than the obvious reproductive organs?  No?  Of course not.  Because the people in charge will never let that through, (unless you’re with a  few, limited publishers) and if they do you’ll be crucified…  Which tells you what the real taboo is.

By which I mean – you want to do REAL stuff, do so.  Violate real taboos.  (Go indie, if you have to.)

If you don’t have the courage to/don’t want to, then don’t.  But stop pretending to.  Stop rubbing our faces on things that are no surprise to anyone who has learned to tie his own shoes – and of no more interest.

Think instead on the appetites we share with gods.  The mythological stories survived the demise of the religion because they reach some deep aching place within us – a place of strife between the animal and the something other which can neither be reduced nor appeased.

And then – if that’s your purpose, and if you’re very, very good (which I’m not) – maybe you’ll achieve art, which will still make people weep when you’ve been dead a thousand years.

Even if you fall short, that is worth trying for.  And trying for it IS our birthright as humans.  Why should you settle for less?  Go all in or go home.

UPDATE: As is usual on Wednesdays, there is a different (writer craft related) post over at Mad Genius Club.  And sorry to be so late.  Today is one of those… interesting days.

The Ghost Of World War One

Perhaps today is as good a day as any to talk about blood and blood guilt.

Pratchett was right that once you get really far deep into any religion, any myth, any legend, any story that MATTERS, it’s always about the guilt and the blood.

The genius of the averted sacrifice of Isaac is that – and those who aren’t believers will forgive me, okay? Just assume there is some genius in the story, even if you don’t believe it happened. – humans learn only by example.  Saying “don’t sacrifice your kids, then m’kay” doesn’t work.   Even the Greeks, when the going got really tough reverted to human form, which is grab the nearest defenseless human being and sacrifice him/her so the angry/hungry gods, spirits, ghosts, creatures of the night will be happy and leave us alone.

No, I actually have no idea why that is built into our psyche.  I mean, as Ori mentioned in the comments, the paleolithic “envy is good” thing actually made sense in a very small group of humans or hominines or whatever they’re calling it these days.  If one of you gets all the food, someone is starving.  (Though even in that situation there are reasons someone should/would eat more.  But never mind.)

Where the “things have gone pear shaped, let’s kill someone to stop it” makes less sense.  Unless, of course, the someone you are killing is responsible for the tensions in some way, or you can convince yourself he or she is.

Which bring us to blood guilt and World War One, because Christmas Eve or not, I’m not going to get in religious arguments in the comments.  (You’ve been warned.)

So we’re going to talk about World War One, which in a way is TOTALLY traditional, because for your information it was traditional to tell ghost stories on Christmas Eve.  (And all through winter I tend to bop around the house listening to my audible editions of Agatha Christie’s Mr. Quin tales – ghost stories – while waging merciless war on the dust bunnies and chasing the cats with the vaccum. [Well, THAT’s what they think I’m doing.])

If you prefer I start again (Should I come in again?) it could go this way:

There is a ghost haunting western civilization.  It is the youth of the early twentieth century, the fine flowering of the early industrial age.  I am told in certain fields in France, you can put in the plow and turn up human bones, and uniform buttons.

The enormity of it can’t be perceived by anyone of my generation, and probably – maybe – not even anyone of my parents’ generation, born during World War II.  Possibly, it can’t be understood by anyone who either wasn’t there, or didn’t read extensively about it.  (Which I have done.  And yes, I AM quite aware what I “know” is not a patch on the people who served.  OTOH what I know is quite enough to dip me head first in unimaginable horror.)

Let’s back up, shall we?  Let’s take the very long view (though the person who suggested fifty thousand years is unduly optimistic about our species’ survival, at least unless we find a better way, and more importantly our chances of understanding something that far off.)

Let’s take the view of backing up and up, away from our present troubles, and then look way back from– say —  two thousand years in the future.  Our present civilization, which is well nigh worldwide, comes from the fact that we’re descended from the BEST sorts of sons of b*tches.  Specifically, the Indo-European culture seems to have won out big time.  And part of this is because other people adopted their culture a lot, (we now believe that a lot of the people who became “Indo-Europeans” were not related by blood, they were just imitating) but this wasn’t done out of fluffy goodwill.  It was done because frankly not only could the Indo Europeans kick the butt of all their neighbors, (Chieftains were buried with maces as a symbol of their power.  Their power was, of course, the ability to crush people’s skulls.) no – they seem to have come up with a new idea.  They glorified the ass kicking in long spoken poem sagas.  The Iliad is a good example.  A more advanced form, mind, as the death, mayhem and glory seeking is less.. in your face than in the fragments surviving of the older examples.

Perhaps it is my professional deformation.  When all you have is a keyboard, everything looks like a story, or something.  Or perhaps it is the truth.  In one of those ridiculous “reading cravings” I get into every so often, I spent a good part of the last year reading what we know and conjecture about Indo-Europeans and their sweep through Europe.  No, I have no idea why.  Yes, there are things I would rather/should rather read, that are still sitting in a pile.  Sue me.  It’s the way my brain works, you know, like sometimes you simply MUST have that roast pineapple or something.  Sometimes I have to have books on something.  And sometimes I figure out why years later.  And sometimes… I don’t.

Anyway, perhaps it is my professional perspective leaking, but I think the extraordinary success of our culture was in telling stories to fit us.  To fit our expansion, to fit our conquering.  The saga-poems made other tribes want to join in.  They too wanted their share of righteous ass-kicking glorified.  (How much ass kicking?  Well, it always amuses me to go to New Age Stores and find Celtic this and Celtic that.  As far as we can tell, the Celts were as much cattle thieves as the Maasai (well, like the Maasai they seemed to believe all cattle belonged to them) but they also believed there was an inherent good to raiding/war/headhunting.  The niches in Celtic homes are believed to have been put there for displaying human skulls.  “You should see that one.  I caught it when…”  And when they weren’t at war with anyone else, they would go to war among themselves, because that would allow them to attain manliness and glory.))

So…  Manliness and power depended on spilling blood.  Sometimes a lot of blood.

But things changed.  We… tamed ourselves.  And the stories were part of it.  (And Christianity with its own set of admirable virtues was a great part of this.  Though the Romans and Greeks had made SOME steps in the direction of what we consider virtues.  Filial piety, as opposed to killing the old man and taking over was an ideal, for instance, even if more honored in the default, I think.  And before you attempt to throw things at me, I’m AWARE Greek and Roman Values weren’t exactly our own.  As older son put it after visiting an exhibit of Roman artifacts and every-day life-objects “Rome is like us and not like us in startling ways.  It’s like P.J. O’Rourke said about the Phillipines, more shocking that some utterly alien culture.  It’s like thinking that this person is your mother, and everything is fine, till you find mommy in the kitchen, in the middle of the night, eating live snakes.)

It took time.  This sort of thing takes a lot of time.  One of my favorite things about nominally Christian rulers in the Middle Ages is the way they’d put off being baptized until they were on their death beds, because then all their sins would be washed away.

The ideals changed humans and humans changed the ideals, until by slow progression we had the industrial revolution, with its printing press, its trains, its glorification of another type of – no less – manly virtues: protecting, taking care of women and children, creating wealth.

If “rulers” – leaders – in the nineteenth century had been buried with symbols of their power, it might have been a fountain pen and a watch.  Or rather, a lot of them were buried beneath symbols of their power – beneath statues of weeping women and children.  The feminists, who are almost as bad as communists at getting symbols, (they’re like the man who is afraid of dogs and who sees a dog in every ink blot) would  say that those women and children were the man’s possessions, symbolically buried with him, but truly, they have a tin ear for meaning.  The woman/women and children were the outward projection of his power  “Look, I can protect/look after this many.”

Helped, in large part, by the printing press, by the ability to disseminate stories far and wide and to everyone in society, the story of the vast Indo-European civilization, by then spread over much of the globe, even if in the position of conquerors, changed.  All of a sudden, the glorification wasn’t of our power to kick ass.  That had been demonstrated well enough, but now the story was about looking after other people.  Even when we invaded, we invaded for other people’s OWN GOOD.  (And btw some of it is still arguably so.  I mean, look, no, all cultures aren’t created equal, and some cultures would be better off eradicated.  No.  Really. YOU whistle past the graveyard if you wish, but any culture that enslaves women, kills people because of their sexual orientation, and which keeps their people mired in Medieval-levels of poverty does not deserve to survive.  Yes, they might make beautiful buildings.  And?)

So that was the logic of empire, and how Europe justified the righteous ass-kicking it was still inflicting around the globe.  “We’re bad asses with a purpose.”  “Yes, Indian culture is older than ours, but WE stopped suttee.” “Yeah, okay, we are getting this and that, but—”

The expansion and conquest had a price in blood and sometimes a high price on both sides, BUT it was against those people, over there, who needed to be saved from themselves.

Then came World War One.  To some extent, what made it horrible was that it was the result of an archaic survival, of doctrines and facts not quite meshing – trench warfare, who the h*ll came up with that.  To another extent it was, as RES has pointed out a family quarrel.  It was all about what Wilhelm said about our king.  To another extent, it was the result of the competition for markets, the change in value, the shift in power.  It was, in fact, a violent, convulsive, change in material culture, in how things are done.  (Which btw, scares the living daylights out of me, considering how fast we’re changing those now.)

Up until that moment, one power structure of the Indo Europeans remained in place.  The reason the leaders were leaders might have changed, but we were still led by the “wise old men.”  (Who, for the feminists benefit, were sometimes women.  Yes, even in pre-historic times, sometimes it was women buried as men and with the mace of power.  Yes, yes, sometimes the best man for the job is a woman and not being gender doctrinaires the ancients could see that.  Look you to the mote in your own eye.)

The stories were still about the wise old leaders.  If you read stuff from the nineteenth century you get the whiff of respect for years, for position, for learning.  It wasn’t so much our ersatz belief in the experts in whatever field but the “people in position to know.”)  (The final flowering of this was eugenics, and let’s not go there, shall we?  Yeah, there was a patriarchal structure, in the new patriarchy, where men not only ruled, but defended and protected.

And then…  And then the story failed.  Those we trusted, those in a position to know, sent waves of young men to be slaughtered for not much purpose at all.  They sent them to stack ten deep in death and to stink the air so badly with their rotting that everyone in the vicinity took up smoking to dull the sense of smell.  Worse, this was reported in papers all over Europe.  Worse, people could go to the front and back in almost no time.  Worse, yet, was the reports of German atrocities, a lot of it, at that time, made up to incite people to hatred and war.  (There weren’t as many nuns in Belgium as, reportedly, were raped by the German Army.)  It was all too big and too glaringly obvious.  After all, it’s not unusual (though it tends to surprise Americans) for Europeans to have relatives all over Europe, relatives who are nominally foreigners.  This was especially true in England with Germany.

It wasn’t the same thing as going and conquering them-over-there no matter how much for their own good.  These were people we knew.  This was, beneath the superficial differences, our own people.

The narrative collapsed.  It broke and shattered.  The veterans coming back from WWI and those who heard their stories didn’t believe the elders of the tribe knew better and there was an inclination to reverse it all.

The worm of Rosseaunism that had been biting at the edges for a while, the whole idea of the noble savage, took deep, deep hold after WWI.  “Let’s upend everything” became a “sane” cry.

Only it wasn’t.  Oh, yeah, patriarchal power can be thrown over.  We’re safer now than in the Neolithic.  We don’t need the big silver-back up front.  But… but we’ve thrown the baby out with the bath water.  We’ve thrown out the idea of honor, even when honor means “looking after yourself and those who depend on you.”  We’ve thrown out the confidence in our own culture.  We went looking for some mythical noble savage who was never there.  Back there, in that unthinking age, when reason is not applied, there’s only our cattle-thieving ancestors and their polished skulls of enemies, or cousins, or brothers if there’s no one else on whom to prove one’s manliness.  There’s only the ululating darkness where tribalism reigns and everyone’s hand is against everyone else.  And we’ve gone an awful long way towards that.

However, we’re still humans, still social animals, still designed for hierarchy.  So we’ve fallen into the rabbit hole of this sort of anti-hierarchy hierarchy, where greater power is given to those who claim (even while making d*mn sure no one unseats them) to want to “smash the establishment” and where greatest honor is given to those who hate their own culture and who glorify some mythical “other” who will never come close to their imagined greatness.  Power is attained by claiming a wish to commit cultural suicide.  And the sad thing is that some of these people actually mean it.

The story has come unmoored and is flapping in the wind, like a shroud.  The specter of WWI is haunting western civilization.  It’s time to lay the ghost to rest.

Western civilization was never a thing of tribe. From the beginning we’ve absorbed people of different genetics who wanted to adopt our customs.

We’re all of us humans descended from murderers, rapists and sons of b*tches.  EVERY ONE OF US.  But we, in the West, are descended from the sons of b*tches who told stories.  We’re descended from those who gradually convinced themselves it is not always right and just to smash the weak.  We’re descended from those who told themselves we should help the helpless.  We’re descended from those who believed in doing the right thing even when it hurt.

We’ve sold our birth right for a mess of modernism and post-modernism.

Metaphorically speaking, we’re the little kid screaming in the dark because he/she can’t face the blood guilt.

Let’s let go of it.  Let’s make stories about it.  Let’s make the horrible and largely senseless sacrifice of WWI the place to begin.  They died, yes, but let’s not build chaos on their graves.

In the blood soaked soil of Europe, and in the US to which Europe has offloaded a great part of their blood guilt (no?  Well, that’s another post) let a new idea flourish: the state, the state that considers the individual as nothing but a cog in a machine is wrong.  Let the individual count.  Let the individual come forth as the harbinger of the new age.  The new tech is suited to it.

Let’s start from the individual.  Let’s employ reason.  Let’s stop dreaming of the noble savage, the noble animal.  Let’s start as humans, flawed, wounded.  Let’s build from the flawed individual human, accepting we’re flawed.

Let’s build neither utopian schemes nor great individual-mauling bureaucratic apparatus.

The long night is gone.  The blood has been paid.  Let’s not go back there, to that yawning maw of irrationality.

The old is not necessarily worse.  The new is not necessarily better.  No one’s skin color/gender/age is proof of good (or evil.)  On the other end, some cultures are better than others: those that provide better living conditions, more wealth, better ability for individuals to survive.  We need to start making those distinctions again.  Those distinctions did not lead to WWI.  No, the old thirst for power, the old family arguments on who gets to be the leader of the clan did.  It was an old, old evil.  And not the same at all as the spirit of the age in which it occurred.

Which is why it fractured us.  And it’s time we understand that.

Let WWI rest in peace.  And come out of the dark.

Shaking the Kaleidoscope

Clifford Simak’s City contains a device built into a kaleidoscope – you shake it, and look through it, and it alters your mind and your perceptions.

This is not a post about Simak, or City or Classical Science Fiction, but I’ll say in passing that the device – perfectly sensible way for a writer to dramatize the changing of minds necessary to take everyone out of Earth and into space – both fascinated me and made me uneasy.  The uneasy is because I don’t approve of any kind of mind-control.  Heinlein’s mind-engineering does the same to me: that creepy feeling at the back of the skull. It fascinated me because I had never seen a kaleidoscope and well… I like shiny things.  (In fact I just realized I don’t own one, which is a little odd.)  The other observation in passing is that Simak throws out more ideas under the guise of McGuffin or plot device that could be used for short stories or novels and that I mean to – supposing I get the time – mine a lot of them.  I mean, a pattern of shiny lights that can change minds?  That is an entire story – an entire novel.  That would turn society upside down (and not in a good way, probably.)

So, this brings us to…

A kaleidoscope.  You shake it and suddenly you see things in a completely different way.  That is how I woke up this morning, and it is an inconvenient feeling, uncomfortable and prickly, like clothes that don’t fit quite right or scratch the skin.

We’ve been talking about the death of Western Civ.  I still think there is a wound in our consciousness, something that is slowly destroying our spirit.

But back up.  No, back up further.  Take the long view.  The longer view.  See it from very far away.  This is what we do as science fiction writers.  Okay, fine, this is what science fiction writers are supposed to do.  In the last thirty years or so, they’ve mostly obsessed over the trendy cause of the moment: pesticides! Global cooling! Global Warming! Women’s equality! Squirrel!

What we’re supposed to do, however, if truth be told is take the long view, look at history, visualize things as they could go/would go/would be.  In a way if Science Fiction is anything more than fantasy with machines and engineers it is the ability to shake the Kaleidoscope and see things as if we weren’t ourselves and gain a new perspective on how things move and what is really going on, even when it presents in a way that seems totally different.

So imagine you’re a thousand years in the future, and you are learning about European history.  This is important.  European.  Remember that.

The first glimmer of an European identity was Rome.  Rome was the first European entity to look beyond tribalism – yes, yes, barbarians, but all the same, they considered these people, at least after a while, as potential Roman citizens.  That was a huge step, and why every large polity in Europe since harks to Rome and tries to imitate or revive Rome, consciously or not.

We fall victims to this too.  We think of ourselves in terms of the Roman empire.  I wonder how much of this is the Soviet Union’s doing.  As I’ve mentioned in the past, the one thing they’re really, really, really good at is propaganda and the rewriting of history, partly through commanding pet intellectuals.

They loved comparing us to the decadence of Rome.  Partly because it made their people feel better about living in caves and eating acorns – sorry, that was how the Romans of the republic seemed to view virtue.  Yeah, I know, the Soviet Union was somewhat better.  Maybe.  Most of the time.

The funny thing is that we are in no way in the mold of Rome.  The Soviet Union was closer.  (Which again, from the distant future would make perfect sense.  The communists were the Red Tzars – tzar being a corruption of Cesar.  These things aren’t hard to seek.)  Like Rome it was an empire which relied on loot to make the life of its citizens back home better (it wasn’t as successful as Rome.)  Like Rome it had a populace on bread and circus (though again, at least if history is semi-accurate, not nearly as successfully) while the people who ran the society lived lives of unimaginable luxury.  (Unfortunately still rather lower than the lifestyle of our middle classes, except for power over other human beings.)

The rest of Europe is not that much different – no, please, listen, I’m not doing Europe down.  We come from them, and to an extent they were the best example of human civilization until we came along.

But all amity between colony and mother country(ies) aside, let’s keep in mind who and what we are.  We are the dregs, the rebels, the rejects of Europe.

The people who stayed behind are those who fit into Europe’s pattern, which again, comes from Rome.  Yes, yes, Rome fell.  Yes, yes, we lost technology.  But the Roman pattern was preserved, brought back.  And to an extent that was good because the Roman pattern transcended tribalism which makes Europe different from the rest of the world.  In Rome you could be a citizen no matter who your brothers, your cousins, your parents were.  This is not true anywhere else.

Europe, to an extent, ported the same pattern of citizenship, of a state that is larger than the tribe.  Of a civilization that is larger than tribes, than blood, than that kind of loyalty.

Now, view it as a journey.  Europe conquered Africa and the Americas not because it is uniquely colonialist or imperialist but because it had transcended tribalism.  Look, when conquered the “new worlds” we were slightly more advanced in weaponry than the natives, but not by that much and not by that far.  But the furniture in our heads was different.

Time and again, I read stories of colonization where the natives acted in the way that had always worked in tribal warfare: they killed everyone in the colony in a horrible way.  If they were facing a tribe the size of normal tribes, this would make colonizing their land too expensive.  It would stop colonization cold.

Only they weren’t facing a tribe.  Reports of the atrocity in European Newspapers brought the wrath of all Europeans on them.  The end was always the same.

(We’ll pretend here that I explained that Christianity hooked on top of Roman citizenship to eliminate tribalism, and that also European colonization was aided by germs and blah blah, blah.  Not germane.  We’re a thousand years in the future, the details have softened.)

Now look at the last century.  The two world wars, not as world wars, but as the wars of European Unification.  The decision of who gets to run western civ.  Then expansion, always expansion because the old European model is the old Roman model.  You go abroad and you get good things to bring home.

Only they’ve lost the plot a little (because of the horrific long civil war of the twentieth century) and they forgot that model implies conquest and despoiling.

On the other hand, the European model is going everywhere: India, China.  Yes, yes, it is our tech they use, but it is the European model of civilization.  They’re still expanding.

And that brings us to where we are.  The war with Islam is just the front in the current European Expansion.  Europe is, of course, expanding its form of government, its mental furniture, to the lands of Islam, and Islam resents it.  They are the ultimate tribalist society.

Then there’s us.  We are the other front in that war.

You see, we are part of Western civilization, but not part of European civilization.  Even our parent, Great Britain, is only half digested into Europe.  We are the castoffs, the redheaded step child.  Part of them, but not.

Part of their resentment of us over intervention in the two world wars is the resentment of parents whose kid intervenes in an argument – particularly if the kid was right.  If you view the long war of the twentieth century as a civil war, they resent we came in and settled it.

And they’ve done a lot of projecting – aided by Soviet propaganda – they call us imperialist and war mongers, because they can’t bear that in themselves.

And also they have no clue what makes us work, not really.  They don’t know why we innovate more than they do.  They don’t know why our consumer society is what is softening their politics advancement into the rest of the world.  They know it, but they resent it.

We are of them, but we are also the others.  And being the others, we must be absorbed, and we must be brought in line.  There can be no competing mental furniture, as Europe takes over the rest of the world.

Which brings us to where we are.  Since the early twentieth century, they’ve been conquering our intellectuals, our universities, convincing them the European way is better.  (And look, they’ve changed from monarchy to “democracies” of various kinds, but the same people are in charge.  The bureaucrats that have the real power are the same people – often from the same families.)  They’ve been telling them about the soft power of redistribution, of socialism, of an entrenched bureaucracy, set to encompass the world.

Intellectuals – and bureaucrats – like that.  It’s the sort of power they understand and the sort of power they crave.

And now intellectuals and bureaucrats are in power.  Europe is trying to swallow us.

It won’t work.  Of course it won’t. They don’t understand the reason the soft imperialism has worked is because we remain free to create wealth that can redound back on them in more ways than one.  (Not just aid, but us being the main consumer of the world’s goods – the engine of the world’s commerce.)  They don’t understand that, because all they understand is the old model: wealth comes from elsewhere and makes the people at home prosperous.

They don’t understand that without America it will have to be back to Roman-style (or Soviet Style) rapine and everyone will be a little poorer.  All they understand is that we make their model look bad and we must – must – be brought into line.

So – that’s where we stand.  Islam is a front in European expansion (and they’re completely dysfunctional and have nothing to oppose it, so they turn on… us – because it’s our gadgets and our wealth that are dismantling their poverty and ignorance from within.)  Curiously, we have to fight them too.

But we’re the other front.  We’re under assault by Europhiles who think that if they just bring us under control, they’ll be in charge of the world.  A sort of empire of the paper-pushers.

Even if they succeed — and they’re well on the way there — all they’ll manage is a brief period of time of increasing misery and then (and in this the Roman analogy is somewhat apt) an age of darkness.  (No, don’t want to hear it.  Yes, yes, the middle ages were not as dark as painted.  And yet, for the average peasant, they were.  No, life might not have been as blood-soaked as some parts of Roman history could be, but it was still brutal and nasty and short.  Yes, I know the works to the contrary.  This seems to be part of the European project.  As in the Soviet Union, it’s the past that keeps changing.) And then probably a repetition of the pattern all over again.

If they eliminate us, as the new model, their model will still be the best thing in human civilization.  And when civilization comes back again, it will be in their model.

I have only one question for you guys – are you going to let them get away with it?

UPDATE: Welcome instapundit readers, and thank you, Glenn, for the link!

And if ya’ll are so inclined, go and vote for me on the Gay Patriot Conservative Diva Bloggress Poll. (Or for one of the others, if you think you should.  The competition is formidable.)  Remember, you can vote once a day.

Humans, Waving — by RES

Are you tired of the same old grey goo you’ve been getting in your SF for years?  Are you hankering for some red meat, served fresh and hot?  Do you want stories you can sink your teeth into, that leave you satisfied when you’re finished instead of wondering why you even bothered consuming them?  Then brother, then sister, you want to try some Human Wave Fiction.

Human Wave Fiction comes in both SF and Fantasy as well as other genres and combinations. It is guaranteed to satisfy, with a rich flavourful taste and real substance in every bite.  Eschew boiled oatmeal plots, spit out cardboard characters, Human Wave Fiction gives you main characters who just won’t quit and are good to the last bite.  When Human Wave characters whines about how rough their life is, that’s when they’re getting ready to take on the world and deliver a mouthful of kick.

Friends, you won’t find yourself looking around for the Tobasco when you put Human Wave on your menu, it needs no special sauces to let you know there’s something on your plate.  Human Wave takes the cooking secrets of old masters, guys and gals who really knew how to cook up a tale, and serves it up with modern style and contemporary flavours.

Human Wave gives you plenty of zest and plenty of substance, leaving you fit to take on the world.  Human Wave takes techniques from Asimov to Zelazny, takes the best of Heinlein, Sturgeon, Tolkein, Simak, , Bradbury, Piper and Laumer, among others, and serves them up with a side of Campbell and a shot of undiluted Boucher, Human Wave Fiction will put hair on your chest (except for the ladies, who are guaranteed to look like they’ve added a full cup size) and fire in your belly.

Human Wave combines the best of the old ingredients with the latest cooking techniques, giving you the best, most satisfying, most nutritious stories you could want.  They have the satisfyingly full flavours you’ve been missing and the substance you need.  Human Wave will remind you of the comfort food you read as a kid, the kind of stories that left you feeling satisfied at story’s end yet still hungry for more.  You get undiluted plots and characters who know what they want and why they want it.  Human Wave is the good old stuff reborn for modern tastes, with all the goodness still intact.  Human Wave contains no filler, no pablum, no political correctness, nor any grey goo.

*              *              *

It has been months since the discussion of Human Wave SF began, and it seems a good time to revisit some of the ideas underlying that movement.

For quite some time a persisting theme in SF has been “Humans/Men/European Culture is harmful.”  Almost as soon as you open a book you can tell who will be the “hero”, who the “villain” and what sins will be perpetrated, and just about as easily as watching an old movie Western and noting whose hats are black, whose are white.

Such tales are predictable, therefore boring.  Even when they don’t bore, the reader has to make an effort to overlook his brain being run through the rinse cycle by such manipulation.

Of course, in that bad old world a reader’s choices were limited to what publishers thought was good for him.  A few writers seemed to think that technological man wasn’t entirely bad, but that was mostly because he accepted the burden of the sins committed against the planet, against the universe, against “others” by his species.

Any publisher who didn’t advance these enlightened views was sneered at by other publishers, no matter (in fact, inversely proportional) to the popularity of their wares.  Authors who failed to toe the line were routinely tasked to rewrite their work, eliminating offensive elements in order to produce a publishable tale or, if they slipped through the filters and became best sellers they were disdained as populist, as pandering to the masses.  Their books could count on being slammed on Amazon as racist, sexist, reactionary and an affront to the noble trees whose lives had been sacrificed in order to publish such hate-mongery.  Sometimes there even existed the possibility that the reviewer had actually read the book before damning it.

Readers who craved good books, tales of humans surmounting barriers and overcoming challenges through grit, determination, pluck and seizing opportunities found themselves mostly reading (and rereading) older books, “Golden Age” SF.  Often they found themselves simply not reading SF at all.

A lot of readers (and authors, too – and even a few editors) longed for books where the race/gender/sexual orientation of a character was not relevant to the actions they took, the role they played in the drama.  Most of us know people of all races/genders/sexual orientation who not only encompass the full range of human behaviour but whose “identity” did not seem to predetermine their integrity, their nobility, their bravery nor the challenges they faced as they traversed this Earthly vale.

A lot of readers (and authors, too – and even a few editors) longed for books where the heroes were heroic, too.  We longed for books whose characters we identified with, in a positive way.  We longed for books whose characters we identified with because they emulated character traits we admired and desired to emulate in our own lives.

We also longed for books where “good guys” would win, or at the very least would go down fighting.  We desired books with characters who would inspire us to dream impossible dreams, not books which lampooned their characters dreams, pegged the dreamers as suckers.  We tired of books which portraying success as a matter of luck or connections rather than effort and skill and determination.

We longed for books in which even flawed people pursuing a flawed dream could achieve something great, books which inspire us rather than leaving us depressed.

We longed for books which said that the individual counted for something, that a person is more than a component of a group identity, more than the “hat” they wear.  We don’t care what identity group a main character belongs to, we see complexity in all individuals whatever their race, creed, sex or who they long to kiss.  We are indifferent to those aspects of the characters, that is not why we read, that is not why we buy a book.  That is not why we thrust a book into the hands of friends, relatives, strangers in line at the grocery store.

What we want are tales about people, people who act to improve their worlds, who assert human dignity as an individual quality, who defend their beliefs and who are unashamed to be human.  We don’t need our heroes to be perfect, but we want them to strive to be better, to improve themselves and their lot in life.  We aren’t interested in them bending the knee, accepting their limitations and knowing their place in the world.

We want tales that challenge our ways of thinking, our ways of doing things, not by shaming us, by telling us we have been bad, greedy, wasteful intolerant.  We want tales that inspire us, encourage us, show us there are different ways of thinking about the Universe and what we can achieve in it.  We want books that, once we put them down we are eager to pick them up again and read more.  And when we have finished them we want to be full of energy, ready to address our own lives reinvigorated.

We are entering a world wherein publishers and booksellers no longer dictate what our book choices are.  Writers no longer need to sublimate their ideas, their craft, their art to what some editor is willing to buy.  Gatekeepers may still man the gates of the publishing industry, but their walls are a tumbling down, and more choices are available in the marketplace of ideas.  Readers are free to exercise their low, plebian, uneducated tastes – we can read what we like and like what we read.

Tell us stories about adventures, great and small.  Tell us stories about dreams and what people will do to achieve them.  Write about wishes come true – and the regrets they cause.  Give us heroes willing to stand upon principle, no matter the cost – and be honest about those costs.  Examine the costs of being human and show us the nobility of accepting those costs.

Write about the great complexity of human existence without submitting to the vision of existential meaninglessness.  Give us a vision of the world as it is, warts and all, but give us a true vision.  Above all, give us tales about those who can see a world better than the one they are in, about people who force change upon their world, even about those who force their worlds to crush them but who, in being crushed, remain defiant.

Readers need to support stories of grandeur, of inspiration.  We need to express our appreciation, enthusiasm and support for these types of tales in the only manners which matter: our buying and recommending habits.  We must not accept stories which depress us, which bury us in the grey goo of existential ennui.  Do not accept boredom as a badge of literary merit; do not accept clever phrase making in exchange for plots that make sense.

Above all, pick tales that stand for something admirable, that espouse virtues rather than values.  Our heroes can be flawed because we know humans are, but we want heroes who rise above their flaws to spit in the eye of Fate.  In time we are all doomed, so why go gentle into that good night?  More importantly: why write about, why read about heroes going quietly rather than gesturing their defiance until the last moment and even after?

The Human Wave is a gesture made with one hand or two (or even four, if that’s the type human you are) it is defiance personified, a refusal to bow the knee. In Britain it requires two fingers per hand, in America it needs but one; but throughout the universe it stands for the same thing, always: You’re not the boss of me!

Ladies, Gentlemen and Dragons

Right now, Where Horse And Hero Fell is free on Amazon. 

Also, I’ve put up two collections of five short stories each for 4.99 a piece, which makes them 99c a story again.

They are Five Future Tales and Five From Magic.

And, in your strange news of the week, I inexplicably, find myself in the running for conservative blogress diva over at Gay Patriot.  (Diva me?  Well, okay, maybe.)  So weird for someone who only came out of the “conservative” — libertarian is conservative right? — closet about two years ago!