Books:

**** Mythago Wood by Robert Holdstock


Stories:

****"Amabit Sapiens" by Craig DeLancey
***"Foreign Exchange" by Jerry Oltion
**** "Tetris Dooms Itself" by Meghan McCarron
*** "I'm Alive, I Love You, I'll See You in Reno" by Vylar Kaftan
*** "Thanksgiving Day" by Jay Werkheiser
**** "Joan" by John G. Henry
**** "Blue Ink" by Yoon Ha Lee
***** "My Father's Singularity" by Brenda Cooper
*** "A Lovely Little Christmas Fire" by Jeff Carlson
**** "As Women Fight" by Sara Genge


QuickTakes:

Mythago Wood by Robert Holdstock: another classic I've just gotten around to reading. Wonderfully atmospheric tale of an ancient forest where myths and racial memories come to life.

"Amabit Sapiens" by Craig DeLancey (Analog): a gene that makes people care as much about the future as they do about the present...

"Foreign Exchange" by Jerry Oltion (Analog): playful comedy of errors about a Mars mission gone awry

"Joan" by John G. Henry (Analog): surprisingly satisfying story of a woman obsessed with Joan of Arc who travels back in time to save from execution



My ratings:
*****excellent: memorable, satisfying, a pleasure to read
**** very good: well written, good read
*** good: readable, engaging, but not very memorable or exciting for me
** sub-par: a rough read, I found it flawed or just uninteresting to me
* huh? someone published this?

My ratings are part objective appraisal of the writing, part unapologetic personal preference (certain subjects and subgenres just don't appeal tome as much as others)

        

Set in New Mexico two centuries from now, "Chlorophyll" tells the story of a young woman who carries a gene for making chloroplasts - she's green and doesn't need to eat. In this post-apocalyptic anti-science Earth, however, she is an object of fear and resentment. It's told from the point of view of her boyfriend, torn between his love for her and the approval of his community. About 7800 words.

        

Reading has taken a back seat to gardening this month. Still...


Stories:

***** "Stonefather" by Orson Scott Card
** "Wrenning Day" by Andrew Bryant
*** "Too Climb a Flat Mountain" by G. David Nordley
*** "Summer in Paris, Light from the Sky" by Ken Scholes


QuickTakes:

"Stonefather" by Orson Scott Card (Wizards): a novella-length appetizer for Card's Mithermages series; exemplary world-building turns this adolescent-comes-into-his power story into something special

"Too Climb a Flat Mountain" (Analog): first part of readable but pretty routine marooned-on-an-alien planet novella. The interest comes almost entirely from the planet itself, which was constructed in the shape of a cube, presumably by some advanced alien species. (An homage to Ringworld, perhaps?)


My ratings:
***** excellent: memorable, satisfying, a pleasure to read
**** very good: well written, good read
*** good: readable, engaging, but not very memorable or exciting for me
** sub-par: a rough read, I found it flawed or just uninteresting to me
* huh? someone published this?

My ratings are part objective appraisal of the writing, part unapologetic personal preference (certain subjects and subgenres just don't appeal to me as much as others)

        

Stories:

**** "The Magikkers" by Terry Dowling
*** "The Sea of Dreams" by William Barton
**** "From the Sea" by Brent Knowles
*** "Hope for the Dawn" by Catherine Soto
*** "Scam Artistry" by Mercedes Lackey and Elisabeth Waters
** "Every Witch Way" by Joanna M. Weston
*** "Favourite" by Dave Cherniak
**** "The Magic Animal" by Gene Wolfe
*** "Aconite and Rue" by Amanda Downum
***** "Julia" by Erin Thomas


Quick Takes:

"The Magic Animal" by Gene Wolfe (Wizards): a clever and intriguing take on the Matter of Britain

"Julia" by Erin Thomas (On Spec): poignantly disturbing story of a future world will children are produced in multiples, with the duplicates destined to serve as organ donors for the primary child.


My ratings:

***** excellent: memorable, satisfying, a pleasure to read
**** very good: well written, good read
*** good: readable, engaging, but not very memorable or exciting for me
** sub-par: a rough read, I found it flawed or just uninteresting to me
* huh? someone published this?

My ratings are part objective appraisal of the writing, part unapologetic personal preference (certain subjects and subgenres just don't appeal to me as much as others)

        

In an earlier post, I commented on the way The Lord of the Rings has dominated the course of the fantasy genre for decades, and how its presence presents special challenges for the aspiring writer of fantasy. Is there anything similar in the world of science fiction? I think the answer is no, not really. There are certainly a suite of overused ideas, and classics that everyone knows (or at least knows about), but no one single book that every science fiction writer must inevitably come to terms with.

However, I have a personal elephant in the room when it comes to science fiction: Star Trek. I was born in 1961, so the original series was airing for the first time when I was at a very formative age. It's hard to imagine now how special those shows seemed at the time. They were about the future, about space travel (and sometimes time travel), and they occasionally went beyond the basic action plot to say something interesting about society, science, or human nature. And, unlike other science-fictiony shows of the time, Star Trek seemed to take itself seriously as a projection of humanity's future.

Add to this that I grew up in a family that respected science and upheld the scientific world view, and you can imagine how Star Trek became my default science fictional universe. Surely, the future was bound to be something like this, in broad strokes if not in minute detail. Much of the written sf that I began to read a few years later fit in: Asimov's robots and galactic empire, Arthur C. Clarke's enigmatic encounters with alien civilizations, and most certainly Larry Niven's Known Space stories, which had the advantage of aliens that were (marginally) more exotic than the actors-in-makeup Star Trek set.

Star Trek has been (rightly) criticized by discerning science fiction readers as being unsophisticated space opera, pulled along by catch-phrase characters and familiar action-adventure tropes. Nevertheless, from time to time some interesting science fiction would actually sneak in. There was Harlan Ellison's intense "City on the Edge of Forever", which actually coaxed a moving performance out of William Shatner, there was Spock's spiritual revelation from contact with V-ger in Star Trek: The Motion Picture, and numerious occasions in all the series where a science fictional idea was used to good story-telling effect.

But my interest is not really to assess the merits of Star Trek as science fiction, but to acknowledge and manage its influence on how I understand the genre. I remain somewhat caught up in a vision of the future wherein humanity solves most of its problems and expands into the universe to seek out those new worlds and new civilizations. I never quite accepted the gritty post-apocalyptic and cyberpunk futures that became popular as the space program waned. And Star Wars was too blatantly fantasy to really impinge on my inner science fictional esthetic.

And, truth be told, I think that deep down I share much of Gene Roddenberry's optimism toward humanity, its potential and future. I like characters who struggle with life's issues and somehow end up a little wiser than they began. The goody-goody world of Star Trek: The Next Generation is a perennial seduction for me.

So what to do? I've injected some seminal shifts into my vision of the future to help it stay clear of the tempting clichés of the Star Trek future. I look ahead to the near collapse of life on Earth, with humanity surviving mostly in the asteroid belt in isolated worlds entrenched in their separated insular cultures. No United Federation of Planets here. And there's no faster-than-light travel. These choices nip the whole space opera temptation in the bud, and open the door to the cultural and interpersonal complexities that I prefer to focus my fiction on. And it's a future with lots of ordinary people in it, trying to work and raise families, not heroes exploring the universe a planet each week.

        

Books:

**** Speculations on Speculation: Theories of Science Fiction (edited by James Gunn and Matthew Candelaria)


Stories:

**** "Blood Dauber" by  Ted Kosmatka and Michael Poore
*** "Where the Time Goes" by Heather Lindsley
*** "Wife-Stealing Time" by R. Garcia y Robertson
**** "Flowers of Asphodel" by Damien Broderick
** "Erosion" by Ian Creasey
***** "Flotsam" by Elissa Malcohn
*** "Zinder" by Tanith Lee
** "Billy and the Wizard" by Terry Bisson
***** "Before My Last Breath" by Robert Reed
***** "The Ghost Hunter's Beautiful Daughter" by Christopher Barzak
***** "Deadly Sins" by Nancy Kress


Quick Takes:

Speculations on Speculation: Theories of Science Fiction (edited by James Gunn and Matthew Candelaria): an excellent collection of essays from the 1970s to the present on the nature and potential of science fiction, covering many of the pivotal voices in the ongoing conversation about the essence of the genre. A great way to get "plugged in" to central ideas in sf criticicm

"Wife-Stealing Time" by R. Garcia y Robertson (Asimov's): another romp across Barsoom with SinBad the sand sailor.

"Flotsam" by Elissa Malcohn (Asimov's): not your average mermaid story, deals with issues of economic and social justice in a fresh way.

"Before My Last Breath" by Robert Reed (Asimov's): splendidly crafted story of aliens who came to Earth in prehistoric times, slicing briefly through the lives of different people.

"The Ghost Hunter's Beautiful Daughter" by Christopher Barzak (Asimov's): beautifully written coming-of-age story


My ratings:
***** excellent: memorable, satisfying, a pleasure to read
**** very good: well written, good read
*** good: readable, engaging, but not very memorable or exciting for me
** sub-par: a rough read, I found it flawed or just uninteresting to me
* huh? someone published this?

My ratings are part objective appraisal of the writing, part unapologetic personal preference (certain subjects and subgenres just don't appeal to me as much as others)

        

Peszali, runeworker living in self-imposed exile in the Greenhall's northern tundra, encounters a creature out of ancient legends: a giant. Armed with the runes and the spirit of the bear, she prepares the working that can save herself from the monstrous interloper, with unexpected results.

About 3000 words. Submitted to Fantasy & Science Fiction, 3/12/2010.

        

Books:

**** Historical Atlas of the Celtic World by John Haywood


Stories:

** "Black Magic" by Resa Nelson
** "Logicist" by Carol Emshwiller
**** "Blocked" by Geoff Ryman
*** "The Language of the Whirlwind" by Lavie Tidhar
*** "The Sky is Large and the Earth is Small" by Chris Roberson
*** "Through the Blood" by Mette Ivie Harrison
**** "Gizzard Stones" by Garth Upshaw
**** "Shatterach Gates" by Paul Daly
**** "Stone Man" by Nancy Kress
**** "Halloween Town" by Lucius Shepard
*** "Mermaid" by Robert Reed
*** "Remembering" by Deborah J. Ross
*** "Never Blood Enough" by Joe Haldeman
**** "I Waltzed with a Zombie" by Ron Goulart
**** "Orm the Beautiful" by Elizabeth Bear
**** "The Manticore Spell" by Jeffrey Ford
***** "The President's Book Tour" by M. Rickert
*** "Through Time and Space with Ferdinand Feghoot—LXXI" by Ron Partridge
*** "Squirrel Errant" by Michael H. Payne
***** "Another Life" by Charles Oberndorf
**** "Shadows on the Wall of the Cave" by Kate Wilhelm
**** "The Constable of Abal" by Kelly Link


Quick Takes:

Historical Atlas of the Celtic World by John Haywood: not just maps (although it includes many excellent ones), but a series of short, readable essays on different phases of the Celtic world from prehistory to present day, thorough and historically sound.

"Gizzard Stones" by Garth Upshaw (Beneath Ceaseless Skies): Exciting, engaging tale for goblin lovers everywhere. Nice world-building.

"Halloween Town" by Lucius Shepard (F&SF): very entertaining novella that may be fantasy, or sf, or perhaps just bizarre. Think Twin Peaks meets The Island of Dr. Moreau.

"Orm the Beautiful" by Elizabeth Bear (Best SF & Fantasy of the Year, v2): a beautifully written and genuinely original dragon story.

"Another Life" by Charles Oberndorf (F&SF): compelling and thought-provoking story of a time when people are reborn in new bodies, but with memories only up to the time of their last 'backup'.

"The Constable of Abal" by Kelly Link (Best SF & Fantasy of the Year, v2): intriguing and inventive fantasy involving ghosts, gods, and witchcraft.


My ratings:
***** excellent: memorable, satisfying, a pleasure to read
**** very good: well written, good read
*** good: readable, engaging, but not very memorable or exciting for me
** sub-par: a rough read, I found it flawed or just uninteresting to me
* huh? someone published this?

My ratings are part objective appraisal of the writing, part unapologetic personal preference (certain subjects and subgenres just don't appeal to me as much as others)

        

This story takes place in a Slavic-inspired corner of my Greenhall world, where it is believed that the spirits of the ancestors watch over and protect the living. But how do the ancestors feel about that arrangement? About 5300 words.

        

The Lord of the Rings became my favorite book the first time I read it, and has remained so, despite the fact that age and maturity have made me more sensitive to its shortcomings.

Tolkien's work redefined the ground rules for future generations of fantasists, chiefly by virtue of the depth and tone of his world-building. Before Tolkien, fantasy typically required apology of some sort, a gimmick to explain why anyone would tell a story about the unreal. The fantasy world might be a dream, a moralizing parable, a self-conscious artificial fairy tale. Tolkien changed all that by insisting that his world of Middle-Earth stand on its own terms, requiring no explanation or authorial wink. All the languages, histories, genealogies, maps, and tales-within-a-tale that Tolkien crafted so laboriously contribute to the autonomy of his creation. This is a self-explaining world, a world greater and older than the stories that take place within it.

Readers who loved the sense of total immersion that Middle-Earth provided naturally wanted more. By the 1970s, the imitations were proliferating. Before long, there was a whole new generation of readers for whom the generic "fantasyland" of the Tolkien clones and Dungeons & Dragons was simply a given. Ironically, the very essence of the fantastic, subverting the rules of reality, was betrayed by this trend. Generic fantasyland became a completely known quanitity, whose basic rules were seldom questioned. At most, some writer would tweak a detail or two in the interests of originality.

Here's a partial list of fantasyland clichés:

• elves, dwarves (especially when spelled thus), goblins/orcs, little people, wizards, dragons
• magical artifacts that can save/destroy the world
• quests into danger, especially involving a small company of characters of different race/profession
• lofty, archaic-sounding language
• names that sound like Tolkien's Elvish names
• Invented languages
• maps, especially ones with mountains and forests indicated as Tolkien did
• lots of walking in wilderness landscapes, especially forests
• good vs. evil
• feudal kingdoms and isolated communal enclaves as the only political structures
• lost heir to the throne
• color coding (the character of creatures/people and of landscape features is shown by their physical appearance)
• technology stuck c. 1000 CE
• immersive, secondary world
• trilogy/series books

The more of these features a piece of fantasy writing has, the more likely it is to be quickly dismissed as yet another generic Tolkien clone. That's not good news for writers who actually like some of these things (I adore maps and languages, myself.) Some writers are so leery of this stigma that they avoid the entire European mythos, or work in different subgenres, such as urban fantasy and dark fantasy, that have more or less escaped the taint.

My own approach to finding a spot outside Tolkien's shadow is more subtle, but perhaps also more fundamental. I focus on making my characters very organic, people who (like us) make their way uncertainly through an unscripted life, driven by subtle complexities of character. Tolkien's characters all serve his cosmology, and this, perhaps, lies behind many of the items listed above.

Although most of my fantasy stories are set in a European-style milieu, I think they are basically a different kind of story than The Lord of the Rings or its imitators. They are about people who are not icons of anything, people who do not make history (except, perhaps, in a very fitful and accidental fashion). At least, that is my intention. I can only hope that it comes through in my writing.