Reviews 18 by Jacqueline Lichtenberg: Theirs Not To Reason Why by Jean Johnson

Reviews 18

by

Jacqueline Lichtenberg

Theirs Not To Reason Why by Jean Johnson 

The general topic of this blog is Alien Romance which means Romance between someone like you and someone very much not like you.

Perhaps the alien is a ghost, a being from another planet, a human/alien half-breed like Spock, someone from another Dimension, or as the Ancient Greeks had it, a "god" who mates with a human to produce a Hero whom they then proceed to torture with various forms of abuse.

The best science fiction takes the current bleeding edge scientific theories and applies the speculations:
A) What if ....
B) If Only ....
C) If This Goes On ...

The kind of science fiction I like best plays out those speculations against the human dimension of Relationships.

The very-very best have Human Relationships galore plus a Romantic Ignition of real Love, a Soul Mate, and a huge scientific problem that, if not solved, will destroy the Relationships and prevent the Romance from culminating in Happily Ever After.

In other words, the "stakes" in the main plot involve the HEA goal of life.

The opposition, or conflict, that causes Characters to take chances, make decisions, commit to insane courses of action, to play for high stakes in order to be able to solve the problem and attain the HEA, is Ignorance.  What you don't know can kill you.  Or worse, destroy you.

Some really great novels turn on the Ignorance of Characters where what they do not know is already known to others -- e.g. secrets, international intrigue, spying, or just the "secrets" adults keep from children.

But in science fiction the "ignorance" obstacle is about something that nobody knows, no human has ever known, that may in fact be (at this point in time) unknowable by the human brain which has yet to evolve the capacity to know it.

In order to bring the Romance to fruition, that Ignorance must be dispelled.

To live Happily Ever After in a science fiction romance novel, the Characters must discover something nobody has ever known before.

Sequels are generated as these Characters try to disseminate their new Wisdom.  They may be living the Happily Ever After life they fought to achieve, but now that they are happy, they can not endure the misery of others.

"If only everyone knew this!" then everyone would be happy like we are.  But of course, nobody will listen.

When was the last time you lost an argument and just changed your whole view of the universe to the winner's notion, changed your religion and politics, to the opposite of what they were just because someone proved you wrong?

In comics aimed at children, you often see a plot where a character just Changes from one illustrative panel of the story to the next because they learn something from another character.

In real life, we all know how stubbornly we cling to the views we have invested in emotionally, regardless of new facts uncovered.  Even when we profess to have adopted a new belief, even when we believe we have adopted a new belief -- the old belief still creeps into our behavior.  Real change takes years, even decades, to integrate into behavior and values, into emotional responses.

New science describes certain brain functions that make some people more capable of changing their minds about their beliefs than others.  Humans differ from each other, and some differences are hardwired into the brain structure, or so new science reveals.

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/05/why_doesnt_everyone_believe_in_god_the_skeptical_brain_may_hold_the_answer/

In old fashioned science fiction (published to the market of adolescent boys), new facts changed minds if only the main character could prove them.

In modern science fiction, and a lot of Fantasy, the main character has to kick butt and go their own way to save the universe.

Jean Johnson
http://jeanjohnson.net/
has given us a wonderful example of the lone woman from a tight-knit and loving family who accepts the responsibility to save the galaxy's civilization as she knows it, just because she discovers something nobody else knows.

This is the 5 book series, Theirs Not To Reason Why by Jean Johnson.  The main character is named Ia.

Here are all 5 books as a single Kindle download.

http://www.amazon.com/Theirs-Not-Reason-Why-Book/dp/B00WTIVC4E/

You can get the paper ACE Books editions, but several of them are very thick with small type.

Note the volume titled Hardship is more slender with larger type as it was split off from the 5th volume, Damnation.

The series was planned as 4 books, then the final volume split.  Hellfire is 476 pages in paper, and the type is telephone book size.

The 5 volumes tell one continuous story focused tightly on the character named Ia.  The writing cleverly allows you to enter the series at any point.

Each volume is a complete story, and the backstory is well enough sketched that everything makes sense and reads smoothly.  But the series is a series -- it's more fun in read order.

A Soldier's Duty
An Officer's Duty
Hellfire
Hardship
Damnation

Hellfire and Damnation are ship's names.  Hardship and Damnation were to be one book titled Damnation.

It is military SF set in a galactic war situation, tightly focused on the main character, a woman named Ia who enlists in the Service, does boot camp, rises from an enlisted grunt to top Admiral with a lot of power-titles bestowed on her by various allied civilizations.

The reason I enjoyed it so much is that the story is a mature, adult version of the standard "Mary Sue" fanfic that I love so much.  Then the last book in the series ends off with a surprise "reveal" that changes your perspective on whether it is a "Mary Sue"  because well, maybe it's not.

On her website http://jeanjohnson.net Jean admits she did go to professional writing after writing fanfic, and she knows the fanfic field.  I consider that a plus.

Theirs Not To Reason Why as a series, is a very well constructed multi-volume story arc, and has a standard Galactic War plot line, standard (if ridiculously successful) military career arc complete with a change in service branch.

But to this familiar structure, Jean Johnson adds the Fantasy dimension of Precognition raised to the level of science.  And that makes the rocketing rise in military grade completely plausible.

There is no explanation though for the maturity level of this 18 year old girl who over the course of a few short years becomes trusted with the destiny of the galaxy by older, wiser, heads.

Predicting the future accurately (even with a fudge factor for lesser probabilities that manifest) does not give you judgement.

So suspend disbelief and just gobble up these novels.  They comprise one huge, great read.

In the Theirs Not To Reason Why series, many people (human and otherwise) in this galactic civilization have working precognition that spans anywhere from a few minutes to maybe weeks or months.

But ONLY our Heroine, Ia, can "see" up the timestream for more than a thousand years.  Such a person was prophesied and at least one planet has believed such a person would come onto the scene.  She wins their recognition as that prophet of a thousand years.

Ia sees a galactic invasion coming, tries to find a way for her galaxy to survive it, and can see only one way through.  She knows it will cost her all hope of an HEA at the end of it all.  It will cost her every good thing that life brings -- and eventually it will cost her life itself.  But it will save the galaxy.  One life to save trillions.

The threat Ia sees coming will arrive in about 300 years.  She could choose to live out her life, claim her HEA, and a cozy familiy life.  But she can't because she can see the disaster looming via Precognition.

She tries to find another way and can't, so she launches into a career to make the reputation she needs to gain the credibility and political power necessary to save the galactic civilzation.
Her every move is guided by her Precognition.  She anticipates the results of each move everyone in a pivotal role will make and because of her accuracy in prediction, she gains support.

That's a Mary Sue premise -- that people will accept someone who is correct because they are correct.
All you have to do is prove you are right, and people will accept you even if not exactly love you.

Real life doesn't work that way, so suspend disbelief to read these novels.  Ultimately, it will be worth the effort because there's plenty here to enjoy, and Ia does take a lot of flak because she is correct which adds a dash of realism.

So with a background in fanfic, Jean Johnson grabbed my heart, and with a background in professional Romance Novels, she warmed my heart.  In July 2015, the top page of jeanjohnson.net carried some comments by Jean about Fifty Shades of Gray and where it fits into the Romance genre.

-----QUOTE from Jean Johnson  http://jeanjohnson.net ----------

It's normally considered polite to "not say anything bad" about another author's book, as a sign of professional respect...but during the recent media storm and counter-storm regarding the movie adaptation of "Fifty Shades of Gray" being released on Valentine's Day (which I will call FSoG for short), I have decided to put my reputation as an author on the line.

Now, to get this absolutely clear: I do not object to the existence of FSoG. I think it has every right to exist as a written work. Furthermore, I came from fanfiction myself; I know what gets written in fanfic genres. I know the quality of writing can also vary widely from...well, juvenile quality of the sort which most people would never dare show in public, to highly sculpted, truly beautiful prose of a level I myself am still trying to somehow magically attain (i.e. take several more years of hard work and practice). I therefore have no problems with that side of things, either. And if the novels (there are 3, fyi) were written to be, say, psychological horror stories / abuse survivor stories, I'd have no problems with the subject matter at all.

However, I do have a problem with FSoG being promoted as something good, desirable, and emulatable in a romantic relationship.

This series has been repeatedly analyzed by experts in fields of psychology, psychiatry, domestic abuse, AND the kink communities out there, as an utterly unhealthy relationship. These experts in their fields pretty much all agree that the majority of the three stories are not at all romantic, and in fact are rather alarming when considered in the light of the way FSoG and its sequels have been promoted as something which men and women should want, should aspire to, should seek out, and should emulate in their own lives. Indeed, the experts pretty much agree that the FSoG books appear to be romanticized domestic abuse.

Domestic abuse is a subject which I take very seriously. It is not romantic.
---------END QUOTE-------

I read that quote after I finished reading the novel series Theirs Not To Reason Why, so it did not color my enjoyment of the books.

I've been thinking lately that we're lacking in TV Shows, films and books that portray characters worth emulating, portray someone you want to become, or whose existence is a breath of fresh air energizing you to become a better self.  Heroes who enjoy life, challenge, risk, and throw themselves into it with zest like Star Trek's Captain Kirk seem to be missing in action.  Jean Johnson's work may change that.

These two facts obtained from her website explain exactly why I fell in love with this series.  I respect this author -- vastly, emphatically, and unshakeably.

She's got two factor identification with me -- fanfic and Abuse Is Not Romantic.

This two-factor-identification between author and reader is a point I've made in several series of writing craft posts about targeting an audience and using theme to target an audience.

Ultimately, the people who like to read your novels are people who have an affinity for something you are saying, and therefore are willing to listen to you say it if only to disagree with you and discuss that disagreement with their friends who they will insist must read your books.

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2014/07/index-to-theme-character-integration.html

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/10/index-to-targeting-readership-series-by.html

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2014/04/index-to-theme-worldbuilding.html

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2012/08/how-to-use-theme-in-writing-romance.html

There are a lot of technical craft problems with Theirs Not To Reason Why, a lot of scenes I'd have cut or condensed, many words I'd have cut, pacing that's just a bit off, characters I'd have framed differently, but there are two things Jean Johnson nailed to perfection that are worth studying:

1) Military Career (telescoped in time due to precognition, but realistic), 2) Precognition.

Johnson has postulated a theory of the nature of Time itself, and depicted it with ruthless consistency.

She has allowed for the vagueries of probability, thrown some curves at her Heroine, baited her with temptations to seek happiness instead of saving the galaxy.

This postulation of a theory of Precognition based on a concept of "Time" that holds water (well, tightly enough for fiction), makes these books "real" science fiction, not just a military action story set in space.

The presence of a Love Interest that is not allowed to blossom into full Romance because of the need to save the galaxy from invaders makes this not-quite-but-almost Romance.

The combination sets up an opening for other writers to explore.
The publishing industry is morphing and genres are being redefined.  Theirs Not To Reason Why by Jean Johnson is a pivotal, watershed work in the combining of Romance and Science Fiction.

Oh, and I forgot to mention the Alien Romance angle.  Ia, the Heroine, is only half-human --- she is half energy-creature with teleporting powers.  Her love interest is a human male.

Already a National Best Selling Author with a number of genuine Romance Novels to her credit (and more to come) Jean Johnson has our hearts in her hands and our minds in her clouds (or timestreams).

If you read nothing else the rest of this year, read Jean Johnson's Theirs Not To Reason Why series.

There are more novels set in this series universe yet to come, so you will want the series in your background.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Intellectual Property Rights, Hypocrisy, Transparency, Immorality (By Others)

I mean to write about government "consent degrees", which seems to me to be an Orwellian term for the situation where authors (whether of music or of literature) are forced to accept reduced royalties and loss of negotiating rights by the heavy hand of the government which favors Big Business political contributors, and enables these "disruptors" or exploit writers.

However, my thoughts aren't fully formed, so for now, I will post some thought-provoking links to other writers' blogs and articles in honor of Talk Like A Pirate Day, which was yesterday.

Arggggh.

(Credit and kudos for this collection goes to The Trichordist although I am re-mixing their links and adding comments of my own here and there.)

For instance, I am surprised to find myself agreeing with Robert Reich (an advocate for the redistribution of property)... or at least with his headlines. IMHO, the "sharing economy" takes from the copyright owners the right and ability to be paid --or paid fairly-- for their work.

Robert Reich: The sharing economy will be our undoing | Salon
http://www.salon.com/2015/08/25/robert_reich_the_sharing_economy_will_be_our_undoing_partner/
And
Robert Reich: Is Big Tech Too Powerful....
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/09/20/opinion/is-big-tech-too-powerful-ask-google.html?_r=0

Amazon, Facebook and Google have the same secret  | Salon
http://www.salon.com/2015/08/30/amazon_facebook_and_google_have_the_same_secret/
* Our modern tech monopolies made billions and transformed the economy in different ways, but this was the base.

This Salon article points out that Microsoft has enjoyed a monopoly because its business model is based on intellectual property.

"Apple, Oracle, Google, Facebook, Amazon) have been accused of antitrust violations. But even when the antitrust cases have gone against them, the basis of these monopolies in intellectual property has limited the effectiveness of remedies." 

Randolph May and Seth Cooper explain why the Founding Fathers valued copyright protection for creators.

Why intellectual property rights matter | The Washington Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/3/randolph-may-seth-cooper-why-intellectual-property/
* The Founders believed ownership of one’s labor is a natural right

"...a substantial amount of online piracy is attributable to the contemporary “downgrading” of IP rights by otherwise law-abiding people. With so much information so readily available on the Internet and so easily copied, distributed, recopied and redistributed, ad infinitum, many suppose online content is there for the taking."

IMHO Consent degrees suggest that a single, appointed judge in New York should decide who decides on what is a fair price for a song or for an ebook and whether or not the creator may negotiate. 

Film Producers Sue 16 Popcorn Time Users in Bid to Curb Piracy | PC Mag
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2490549,00.asp

IMHO, the suit against Popcorn Time USERS could be a turning point, because it is the viewers, rather than the piratical uploaders, who may be being pursued.

"Survivor Productions admitted that it had not personally identified the users, but had obtained IP addresses and their general location. The company also knows that they are Comcast customers and says it may be able to identify them with the provider's help."

Allegedly, Popcorn Time is "Netflix for pirated movies". Given the possibility that xfinity or u-verse service providers have the ability to help, this sort of piracy might not be worth the risk.

The MovieTube Litigation Part I: Who Needs SOPA? | Law Theories
http://lawtheories.com/?p=2269

IMHO, this doesn't sound like current, compelling reading.... but it is! Allegedly, MovieTube was a movie pirate site based in Singapore, and since the copyright owners had little chance of shutting the pirates down in Singapore, they parsed the existing DMCA (nothing to do with SOPA, which failed) and found arguments that an American court had the power to compel the American sites that made MovieTube possible (and perhaps profitable) to disable links to it.

"Nonetheless, a group of tech giants, comprised of Google, Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and Yahoo, filed an amicusbrief arguing that “the proposed injunction violates Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 and the safe-harbor provisions of the DMCA.” Specifically, the amici claim that an injunction against MovieTube couldn’t bind third parties such as themselves because Rule 65(d)(2) and Section 512(j) of the DMCA wouldn’t allow it."

IMHO, that is a weird. reading of Safe Harbor.  The tech giants weren't being fined, or anything like that. They were simply --as I understand it--being deprived of an illegal revenue source that they shouldn't have been exploiting in the first place.

This is a follow-on story:

Hollywood, Silicon Valley Sharpen Their Swords in Piracy War | Variety
http://variety.com/2015/digital/news/hollywood-silicon-valley-internet-piracy-1201572854/

Here's hypocrisy (exposed by Jonathan Lamy):

"Jonathan Lamy, spokesman for the Recording Industry Assn. of America, painted the anti-copyright forces as hypocrites. “During the SOPA debate, the common response was that existing law or agencies like the ITC were the appropriate ways to deal with overseas rogue websites,” he said. “Fast forward three years, and apparently those statements are ‘no longer operative.’ Our job is to hold them to their word.”

The Pirate Hunter | Williamette Week
http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-25279-the_pirate_hunter.html

Of hairy legs and cross-hairs....

"of Carl Crowell, a one-man police force for Hollywood studios seeking to protect the value of their movies. He’s waging a battle against a widespread belief many Internet users hold: that content should be free, regardless of who produced it or under what conditions."

Go Carl!!!

Finally, if "finally" can refer to a steam of five more urls, here are a bunch of links to very much music related stories. I include them without further comment because, IMHO, authors--even alien romance authors--should watch what happens and has happened to the intellectual property rights of songwriters.  They are probably canaries in the coal mine.

The More Money Spotify Makes, The Less Artists Get Paid | Digital Music News
http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2015/09/03/the-more-money-spotify-makes-the-less-artists-get-paid-2/

A Stream on Apple Music Pays Songwriters And Publishers 33% More Than A Stream On Spotify | Hypebot
http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2015/08/a-stream-on-apple-music-pays-songwriters-and-publishers-33-more-than-a-stream-on-spotify.html

WashingtonWatch: Pre-’72 Royalty Battle Adds Another New York Lawsuit | Grammy Pro https://www.grammypro.com/advocacy/news/washingtonwatch-pre-72-royalty-battle-adds-another-new-york-lawsuit

Radio Giants Facing Bicoastal Legal Demands to Stop Playing Pre-1972 Songs | Billboard
http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/6678790/radio-giants-facing-bicoastal-legal-demands-to-stop-playing-pre-1972-songs

What EMI’s six-month sample amnesty means for the music industry | The Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/sep/01/emi-sample-amnesty-means-for-the-music-industry

Have a profitable week,

Rowena Cherry

Dragon Life Cycles

Specifically, the reproductive and growth patterns of the dragons in Naomi Novik's wonderful alternate history Temeraire series, parts of which I've been rereading recently. In this version of our history, dragon-riding aviators fight in the Napoleonic wars. These dragons are natural, not magical, beasts, which come in numerous different breeds. They're typically at least as intelligent as human beings but with distinctly draconic personalities. They have an amazing facility with languages; a newly hatched dragon fluently speaks the language (or languages) it heard while in the egg.

In rereading the first two books, I started wondering about the creatures' life cycles. Typically, in terms of reproduction and growth organisms fall into "r-selected" and "K-selected" types. (According to Wikipedia, however, this dichotomy is now thought to be oversimplified, since some species have aspects of both.) An r-selected species chooses quantity over quality—reproducing fast, bearing large numbers of offspring, typically providing minimal or short-term parental care, and hoping a few survive. A useful mnemonic reminds us that R equals "rapid." For example, bacteria, dandelions, and most insects and rodents. K-selected species have few, widely spaced offspring, prolonged childhoods, relatively long lives, and significant parental care. They also tend to be large. Typical K-selected animals include gorillas, elephants, whales, and us.

Novik's dragons look like a typical K-selected species. If not killed by violence or disease, they far outlive a human lifespan. They're huge, most subspecies considerably bigger than elephants. On the other hand, a dragonet hatches not only talking but walking and otherwise self-reliant. And they seem to grow to adult size in a year or so. How do their K-selected traits fit with the precocity and rapid growth? Well, human babies grow faster in the first year than at any other time of life, so there's some precedent to draw upon. And, as mentioned in the Wikipedia article, some creatures (redwood trees and sea turtles are mentioned) combine elements of both reproductive strategies. In addition, Novik's dragons have one other trait that could explain their precocity: They spend a very long time in the egg, sometimes up to six years. Presumably the maturation K-selected mammals undergo after birth happens to dragons between the laying and hatching of the egg.

That hypothesis satisfies me except for one question it raises. How does the eggshell hold enough nutrients to sustain such a long period of rapid growth? Since Novik's dragons are naturally evolved creatures, we can't invoke magic as an explanation. However, the detailed world-building in these novels and the delightful personality of the dragon Temeraire (seen through the viewpoint of his human partner, Captain Laurence, a naval officer drawn, at first reluctantly, into the corps of aviators) make suspension of disbelief smooth and enjoyable.

Here's a forum on Novik's website where fans discuss the biology of dragons, the physics of flight, and other aspects of this alternate Earth:

Questions About the Series

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

Targeting a Readership Part 11 Futurology And Romance by Jacqueline Lichtenberg

Targeting a Readership Part 11 

Futurology And Romance

by

Jacqueline Lichtenberg 

Previous Parts in this Targeting a Readership series on writing craft are listed here:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/10/index-to-targeting-readership-series-by.html

Today is Rosh Hashanah the New Year 5776, so I'm writing this in advance to be auto-posted by Blogger.  The general writing craft topic today is Futurology which is an element of Science Fiction, and of Romance which is a literary genre of eternal merit.

We are right in the middle of the month when the 5 Volume work on the Tarot based on 20 Blog Posts on writing craft is being released.  A 6th, single volume, containing all 5 volumes will be released last, but can be pre-ordered now.

Those twenty posts on Tarot Just For Writers are indexed here for free reading:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/03/pausing-for-you-to-catch-up-with-me.html
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/03/pausing-for-you-to-catch-up-with-me_23.html

Here is the schedule and links to order or pre-order the Kindle-only editions as books.  The material is substantially revised.

The Not So Minor Arcana: Never Cross A Palm With Silver Aug 30, 2015 99 cents
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0108MC26O

The Not So Minor Arcana: Wands Sept. 1, 2015  99 cents
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0106RVPKU

The Not So Minor Arcana: Cups Sept. 11, 2015 99 cents
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0106SATX8

The Not So Minor Arcana: Swords  Sept. 17, 2015 99 cents
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0100RSPM2

The Not So Minor Arcana: Pentacles  Sept. 21, 2015 99 cents
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0106RVKF0

The readership targeted by these works is Intermediate Students of Tarot and Writing.  It's all about combining the mystical with the pragmatic, or "Love" with the "All" that it conquers.

This co-blog is titled Alien Romance because we focus first and foremost on the Romance novel genre, but with special attention to the admixtures with almost any other genre.

The major, envelope theme we deal with here is Love Conquers All.

In my everyday reality-life, I do generally see that theme working, though most people looking at what I'm looking at do not see it.

To learn to handle Point of View in writing craft, the principle to apply is, "That which we take for granted becomes invisible."  Characters never see the ordinary things in their lives, no matter how bizarre their world is from the point of view of the reader.  That blind spot makes Characters seem real to readers because readers know people like that -- but of course the reader herself is not at all like that.  

What the reader does not see is the core of "art."

The Talent that makes an "artist" is two-fold:

1) An artist can see what others do not
2) An artist can depict what the artist sees in such a way that those who do not see can glimpse what they were certain did not exist.

Here is the other big clue we have worked with throughout all the writing craft blog posts I've done here (search this blog for the tag "Tuesday" to find my posts) --

WRITING IS A PERFORMING ART

Just like singing, acting, stagecraft of any kind, writing is a performing art.

Writers don't write novels.  Writers PERFORM novels.

Novels have a structure, just like a symphony has a structure.  If a piece of music doesn't have the symphony structure, it is not a symphony.  "Novel" is defined by having one of several structures.

The structure the novel has determines the audience that will respond maximally to it.

The same story can be written in any of several different structures and with each structure that story will "reach" a different Readership.

Targeting a Readership is a matter of understanding which structure the readership you want to talk to prefers.  The structure does not matter to the writer trying to say something, except that the message won't "reach" the intended audience unless the writer chooses the most popular structure.

However, in publishing, structures change and shift with the wind.

So writers learn a structure, just as a pianist learns a Chopin piece.  Then the writer PERFORMS that piece, adding in their own interpretation, their body language, their emotional punch.

How does a writer create, define, distill, and express that emotional punch to a specifically chosen set of people?

Just as an artist looks at a scene, or a model posed against a background, selects certain brushes, certain pigments, certain bits of charcoal to sketch the perspective lines, a writer looks at the world, at what their readership is looking at out there in reality, sees something the readership generally is missing, and depicts that scene with the missing bits colored in.

The missing bits, the color, the suggestion of a figure hiding in the shadows of the drapes in the murder-mystery room as the body is discovered, are what the writer adds to the events "ripped from the headlines."

Then the writer "performs" the story that's been ripped out of the real world of the readership.

Another analogy is the stage play or opera.  All the productions may be using (almost) the same script, but each production is "mounted" differently.  Each director, each cast, each costume designer creates something new and different from that script.  So certain classic plays get mounted over and over, because those scripts were written to allow for other creative artists to reshape the performance, adding their own nuances for a specific intended audience.

To write a novel that lives from generation to generation, that is re-created over and over by other creative artists, the original writer must leave room, leave the texture open, to invite the readers in.

Now, this idea that writing is a performing art was taught to me by my first writing teacher, a professional writer named Alma Hill, whose workshop I joined when I was in 7th or 8th grade (yes, I'd already decided I wanted to be a science fiction writer, but I determined that I would do it or die trying only when I was 16.)

So I learned WRITING IS A PERFORMING ART when I was in elementary school, and that maxim has withstood the test of time, over and over again.  It is so incredibly true, so deep, and as difficult to understand and master as SHOW DON'T TELL.

Now I'm going to add my own extension to that maxim:  Reading Is A Performing Art.

That's another way of saying the well known observation: "The story the reader reads is not that story the writer wrote."

And in fact, that ambiguity is what writers strive for when performing a well known piece -- such as a classic Star Crossed Lovers novel.

Readers deem a book "good" if they create it for themselves, and during reading, discover something  they did not know.  The knowledge discovered is knowledge they already had but didn't know they had.  In other words, the writer only pointed out the shadowy figure behind the drapes, and the reader then saw that figure.

This artistic process of showing a customer what they hadn't noticed before is what makes a classic live from generation to generation.  It is delivering the Revelation that the customer already had and making it seem like new information.

It is already there in their world, in everyday life, but just is not noticed until an Artist points it out.

Transmission of that artist's vision happens by a process spiritually analogous to the physical process called "resonance."  When one Guitar string is plucked, and the other an octave away vibrates, that is energy transmission by resonance.  We are now moving to charging our portable devices such as cell phones by electromagnetic resonance -- induction is how those charging pads work.

Art works the same way to transmit the "Oh!!!  NOW I SEE!!!" revelatory moment to the art consumer.

You get that from songs -- popular music, folk music, classical music, dance music -- and stories, and stage plays, and opera, and movies, and TV Series, and oil paintings, and book covers, and Photoshopped images of the highly improbable.

So, our current culture does not see (is blind to) the concept that Love Conquers All.

Yet, at the end of June, 2015, the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruled 5-4 that all the states of the USA must marry Gay couples, and respect the marriage documentation from other states that marry Gay Couples.

That ruling came the day after the 6-3 ruling on Obamacare where dissenting Justice Scalia said that Obamacare is now actually SCOTUS-Care.

Most people (perhaps 75% of the US voting public) were completely oblivious to these Rulings in June when they came down.  Most didn't even know the cases were pending before the court.

Being aware of developments such as these two is the business of Artists.  Paying close attention to all the nuances, political jockeying for position, and forces moving large populations is the business of Science Fiction writers.

Understanding the invisible currents moving the visible pieces of our world around is the business of the Futurologist.

What is seen to be happening right now is important, but what is not seen by most observers is the commodity purveyed by Artists.

Artists, especially in the Performing Arts, acquire their stock-in-trade, the payload they deliver to their retail customers, by looking at what their retail customers are looking at, (SCOTUS decisions, for example) and seeing something their customers are not seeing.

This does the artist no professional good at all if the artist is unaware that their market has missed this shadow among the drapes.

So paying attention to what people know (Rasmussen Polls etc.), what they think and feel, and especially why they think and feel this and not that, is the business of the professional artist.

The professional performing artist makes their living selling people clues about what they are not-seeing, what they are missing.

The Professional Performing Artist must:
1) See something others don't see
2) Understand what others think they are seeing
3) Evaluate the difference in Vision between Artist and Customer
4) Generate an inductive current charging up the customer's night-vision-goggles

Right now, and very likely for the coming year, we have a heated, highly charged, argument going on between Heroic People Doing Good and Heroic People Doing Good.

Vast amounts of sheer human energy is pouring into achieving Good.

Both sides of this knock-down-drag-out fight are operating on the presumption that Love Conquers All.

Both sides are denying that Love Conquers All, one side more vociferously than the other.

And then there's all the people (maybe a third of the USA) who look at this with bewilderment, saying, "What are you guys fighting over?"

The Performing Artist's job is to reveal what is being fought over to those who can't see it.

Half the battle is already won with that particular readership.  They have a suspicion that they've missed something.  Many of them think the vicious fighting is over nothing-important.  Some think those suckered into fighting are just not very smart.  Others are bored by the conflict.

In previous series of posts on this blog, we've discussed in depth how Conflict is the Essence of Story, and how writers can "rip from the headlines" the raw material for dynamite best sellers.

As the SCOTUS-Care/Gay Marriage (even abortion figures in) issue erupts with volcanic fury, tearing the fabric of American Culture apart at the roots, the Performing Artist has a chance to make peace and strengthen that fabric.

At the same time, there are explosive issues coming in from abroad with the Middle East, Russia, China, (even Mexico, Central America, South America), and the U.N. all moving pieces of a huge puzzle.

By reading foreign sources for other angles on a given Event, writers can gain that perspective that allows creative Worldbuilding to flourish.  Find the truth behind Reality, step sideways into another reality where one of those Truths is not-True, and build a consistent world around that one difference.  That will give you a stage upon which to "mount" a powerful production of what seems an old-standard play.

All of these social issues have a deep connection to economic issues.  All of the corruption scandals have a tap-root into the social issues.  We are a Nation (and now a World) of one fabric.  Find the warp and woof, find the colored threads, find the design embroidered over that background, and depict what you see for your customer.

Here is an example of how to reduce this confusing mess to a simple principle you can use to charge your readers by induction.

Back in June, we got the SCOTUS ruling that the simple language of the Obamacare statue that said "established by the states" was actually "vague."  "Vague" is a legal term, and when a law is "vague" it is to be determined by non-elected regulators, by Elected executive branch officers (such as the President), and what they determine then becomes law.  That is an old, established principle.

SCOTUS ruled that clearly the Legislative Branch "intended" the Obamacare statute to function in such a way that those who had, hitherto, been unable to obtain healthcare could now have what everyone else takes for granted.

So SCOTUS upheld Obamacare (from its second major challenge) by saying the words, "by the states" didn't mean "by the states" because then the law wouldn't deliver healthcare to those it was intended to be delivered to.

Futurologists, accustomed to thinking 4 or even 5 moves ahead in Chess, will see that this ruling rewrites almost every law on the books in unpredictable ways.

But anyone living in today's world, especially those who do have decent access to healthcare, wants very much to share that wondrous marvel (modern science) with everyone.  Who would ever want to "deny" healthcare to anyone?

Providing for the least capable among us is our mandate from the provider of all, God.

So those who take their religion seriously have to be in favor of healthcare access for all.

Those who are convinced we're on our own regardless of whether God is real or not also want everyone to have access to healthcare -- for simple economic reasons.  The healthier you are the more productive you will be, even if you don't have a job.

Our economy was founded on Marriage.  A woman bore children, kept house, grew a vegetable garden, made things like clothing and blankets.  A man went out hunting, worked the fields, fought wars, defended the nation, founded companies, and decided national policy.

That's the old division of labor via sex-role.

The Futurologist can see the churn in our cultural base from the old division of labor along gender-based-rules to a new division of labor based on individual capability.

We have no advanced yet to the new position, and we have not left the old position behind.  We are in transition, and vacillating back and forth.  It is a dizzying confusion, and in one lifetime any individual may fight on various sides of this controversial process without understanding it as a thousand-year-transition-process.

Reveal the overall shape of the Division Of Labor Transition, and you'll have a best seller.

But you have to say something (make a thematic statement) that will "resonate" with the public.  That is the Performing Artist transmitting energy via Vision.

In the instance of a centuries long transition in Division of Labor, you can argue the justice of it on any side.

Marion Zimmer Bradley's Darkover Universe novels mix Science Fiction, Fantasy and Romance, even Gay Romance, and militant Feminism with sciences and economics based on Psychic Abilities (telepathy, telekinesis, trans-location, teleportation, just about everything).

Those few families that have strong enough psychic abilities are required to use them for the benefit of all.  From one point of view, it is enslavement by the majority of the minority for the benefit of the majority.  The slaves are kept in well appointed gilded cages, given wealth, prominence, respect and total control of the government.  But a few of them see the enslavement for what it is.  Thus the series of novels is a running commentary on our modern life.

Read it, and write another commentary in your own universe.

Consider this idea.  Where once, being born female relegated you to child bearing rearing and housekeeping, supporting a man who did everything else, now being born female does not determine your career opportunities.  Likewise, being born male doesn't determine that you will be drafted into the armed services before or just after college.

In fact, being born a particular gender does not irrevocably determine the gender you will live out your life within.

Today, gender is not a determinant.

Does that mean the old, tribal based, hunter-gatherer gender-based division of labor for the sake of survival now does not operate at all?

Does that mean that Division of Labor as a social principle is gone?

Perhaps not.

Perhaps, what will become the main determinant of your career potential is your Intelligence or "Talent."

Smart people (or mechanically talented, or whatever talent) work and produce all the goods and services our civilization requires, just as ALL MALES once did, and everyone else does everything else that ALL FEMALES once did.

Thus the unintelligent who can't get a job or create a business and employ themselves will do the child rearing, housekeeping, sewing, gardening, cooking, cleaning, shopping.  The intelligent of whatever gender, or shifting-gender, will provide for them.

In other words, the concept we are using now of "Welfare State" -- as an economic model for "Income Redistribution" -- will shake out into a new kind of "Marriage" of the Intelligent to the "Not-so-intelligent" which turns out to be "male-to-female" only sometimes, and by accident?

The problem with Obamacare is not that it provides healthcare to the poor, but rather in how the project is funded.  Nobody objects to providing healthcare.  Everyone objects to having their hard-earned money snatched from them against their will.

America is a charitable nation.  But people don't want charity.  They want rights.

Women arbitrarily consigned to housekeeping by gender at birth (even if they had an I.Q. of 140 and were married to a man with an I.Q. of 90), knew that their work earned them rights, that at least half if not more than half what their man was paid was actually earned by the woman's work.  The woman's work turned the man's salary into clothing, food, children, and a well ordered house.  Every morning she sent her well-rested husband off to work with a packed lunch and not a qualm or worry about whether the household would run well in his absence.

The theory in the 1930's was that a man was paid twice what a woman was paid because a woman didn't have a family to support, but a man did.  In fact, being married was a criterion by which men were hired.  It showed stability.  It showed the man was supported so he would show up every day and pay attention to his work.  And with a family to support, a man would strive harder to get his job done right.

Today, about an equal percentage of men and women are in that "employed" worker position, or running their own businesses.

We are seeing issues developing in schools with children who have both parents working, or actually have only one parent at home.

Raising children is a full-time, hands-on, undivided attention job.  Women used to be consigned to that role whether they were suited to it or not.

People forget the reason the anti-abortion laws were abolished was that we had a huge crop of "unwanted children" (even within marriages that had kids already).  Thus a big push developed out of the Love that Conquers All to avoid unwanted births because so many of those rejected children grew up to be troubled adults.  Criminal behavior was ascribed to being "unwanted" at birth.

And there was a lot of attention paid to the plight of children whose mothers were not suited to raising children.  Just because you're female at birth doesn't mean you are good mother material.

So all factions of society united behind gaining control of reproduction, and now we have the phrase "reproductive rights."

The biological fact that women get pregnant and men do not is considered the root of the social concept called, "Division of Labor."

Today, that division is no longer along gender lines.

Thus Gay Marriage seems a perfectly reasonable idea.  Who can possibly object to Love?  It does conquer all.  We all know that.  Making Love illegal just smacks of pure evil.

Gender, it turns out, (via nomadic tribal division of labor by gender) is the root of our economy.

Again, the problem with Obamacare is not that it provides for the poor (or unemployed, those knocked out of paying jobs by automation, and the unemployable because of disabilities), but rather that the way it is funded disrupts our economy.

Marriage and Healthcare are the same issue, and that issue is Economics.

An Artist can reveal that connection among three huge pillars of our lives to those who have missed it.

Division of Labor by Gender is the foundation of our economy since time immemorial.

We are in transition to a division of labor system that is not based on Gender.  What it will be based on has yet to emerge.

Intelligence/Talent might be one choice.  If that is the choice this year (the whole redistribution of wealth concept is based on division of labor by intelligence, enslaving the capable minority to feed the incapable majority), then how long will that system endure and what will replace it?

Remember, the key to answering this question is LOVE CONQUERS ALL.

There is one other principle of reality largely neglected in generating possible solutions to the problem of technological innovation disqualifying the majority of humanity from productive work.

Remember we don't define "productive work" as including "women's work."

Here's the principle.
You can't do a Good Deed by doing something Wrong.

Or put another way, "Two wrongs don't make a right."

Writers can mine all headlines, and real-life-situations for Conflict to generate story and plot by applying that principle.

In the case of Obamacare, redefining the meaning of "state" to include the Federal Government is a "wrong" even though it was done in a determined fury to do a "right" thing (provide healthcare.)

We MUST provide healthcare -- nobody disagrees with that.  The current plan though is based on a bizarre system that only enriches the accountants and invites theft because there's no way to get all that accounting done properly.

In the case of Gay Marriage, redefining the meaning of Marriage redefines the entire "division of labor" based on biology.

We MUST allow Love to bond people together.  Because of the "liberation" of women to work a man's job for a man's salary and become the main "bread-winner," we have seen a "disintegration" of the traditional family structure.

Psychological studies prove that humans need bonding with other humans.

Arranged Marriages, Marriage for Romance, Marriage for social-climbing, all the variations, all result eventually (sometimes after decades) in a sort of Bonding that is beneficial despite being strife-filled.

The objective is the Bond itself -- the strife may be the cost, but the Bond stabilizes the personality.

How can we, as a society, deny that stabilization to people who happen to be born LBGT?

But on the other hand, is "Marriage" the word that has to be redefined?

What will "Marriage" mean in the future?

Why is the definition of marriage so important to the religious segment of the population?

Is "Marriage" about Love, Bonding, Division of Labor, Reproduction, Supporting a Worker, social status, -- or is it about some mystical issue on the level of the Immortal Soul?

Is redefining "Marriage" worth the social price?

Is there another solution?  Before you go looking for another solution, look at the definition of the problem a little longer.

Apply the principle, "You can't achieve something RIGHT by doing something WRONG."

The problem is defining what is right and what is wrong.

How we "see" the difference between right and wrong, and choose what deeds, events, and ideas go into which category has to do more with what we do not see, than what we see.

People form opinions about what is "right" and what is "wrong" based on what they see, and for the most part people get it correct based on what they see.

If you knew only what they know, you'd believe what they believe.

It is the Artist's job in the social structure to Reveal what is hidden in the shadows, what the average person just does not see and thus does not know.

Given a wider vision, most people would gradually change their classification of what is "right" and what is "wrong."

It's the Artist's job to create that larger canvass and illuminate the shadows behind the curtain.

To Target a Readership, the writer has to discern what a particular readership sees, and what they do not see.  Then show the entire picture, leaving the reader to answer the questions that new information suggests.

In the case of the connection between SCOTUS-Care and Marriage Equality, the questions revolve around where the fury of technology will lead humanity in our quest to re-define Division of Labor.

Good fiction asks questions.  Good fiction does not answer questions.

Find an issue that energizes you, has you jumping up and down and screaming red-faced, then write about that one issue -- and show don't tell how exactly love conquers all.

Just don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Review: HALF A KING by Joe Abercrombie

Joe Abercrombie was one of the panelists... one of the best and most interesting panelists... at a Science Fiction and Fantasy convention that I attended this year. After hearing him, I bought HALF A KING, and finally it got to the top of my TBR pile on August 1st, so I took it by train to California where I read it on the outward trip, and --although I had read it-- I brought it back. It's a keeper.

HALF A KING is a page turner, expertly crafted, with a story arc that comes a full circle except that the plot thickens with every degree of curvature. Meanwhile, there are so many reviews that it is not easy to say something original about HALF A KING.

One of its qualities is the amazing, incredibly satisfying, utterly enjoyable "thusness" of the book. That's something a reader may not notice until the very end, which is as it should be. It would be a spoiler to say more, so I won't.

It is a intelligently written book, with nuances that may or may not have been intended to intrigue the thoughtful reader. For instance....

Fourteen- (or possibly fifteen-) year-old Prince Yarvi is the great-grandson of Angulf Clovenfoot, a mighty king known as the "Hammer of the Vanstermen" and is the bullied and scorned, younger son of the great warrior king Uthrik, who was the middle son of Brevaer.

Joe Abercrombie mentions Angulf Clovenfoot three times in "Half A King" by my count. First, from Yarvi's POV during a funeral--a dark moment and a turning point in his life of which he had no control--, second from Yarvi's POV during another dark passage, and finally at a turning point that he discerns and seizes upon, and through the voice of Yarvi's treacherous uncle Odem when Yarvi's ragtag army is massively outnumbered and a turning point is imminent.

Why "Clovenfoot"? Could it be that deformity runs in the family? Is Yarvi's birth defect a congenital abnormality.... perhaps hypophalangism (the congenital absence of one or more phalanges of a digit) ?

http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/hypophalangism 

If kings in this Viking-like world were respected for winning in hand-to-hand combat, I infer that Angulf could fight very well with "half a foot", but his great grandson could not wield two-handed weapons with "half a hand" and that made all the difference.

It's grossly unfair, of course. 

But, which family? Perhaps his mother's? Joe builds his worlds with a masterfully light touch, but it is suggested that first-cousin marriage is not uncommon in this royal family, and other forms of consanguinuity also, so either or both families may harbor a recessive gene. 

Interesting link about consanguinuity 

http://www.larasig.com/node/2020 

Moreover, if the genes are awry in one manifestation, why not in another, such as in defective reasoning? It's a very convenient explanation for pathological behavior... and thus a seeming hero can become a villain, a friend can become a mortal enemy.

Is this an "Underdog" plot? I wonder. Certainly, the hardships and difficulties and rank unfairnesses are piled on to the young and physically handicapped principle character at every stage of his saga and his journey. For those who enjoy categorizing other authors' works (grinning), I recommend Ronald Tobias's "Master Plots" book.

Additionally, as a reader of every word, I was never irritated by repetition. Most authors repeat themselves too much, because they are writing for readers with feeble attention spans, I suspect. I've mentioned that Angulf Clovenfoot was mentioned approximately three times. Another important ingredient in Yarvi's arsenal is mentioned three times, and no more (as I recollect) and I almost missed the second mention.

Finally, since I am an admirer of Survivorman, Les Stroud, and also of the Fat Guys In The Woods.... and wrote a survival-inspired novel of my own (Insufficient Mating Material)... I particularly enjoyed the winter wildeness survival chapter.

Highly recommended:  HALF A KING by Joe Abercrombie.

Rowena Cherry  

SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com/ 

Online references:

Joe Abercrombie | An Extract from Half a King

www.joeabercrombie.com/.../half-a-king/an-extract-fro...

Joe Abercrombie

Or half a king, at least. ... tall beside that of Yarvi's uncle Uthil, swallowed in a storm, and his grandfather Brevaer, and his great-grandfather Angulf Clovenfoot.

Half a King by Joe Abercrombie- Free Books Online

www.free-booksonline.com/Half_a_King/41.html

Half a King(41) .... longer within sight of the howes of my brothers Uthrik and Uthil, the howe of my grandfather Angulf Clovenfoot, hammer of the Vanstermen?”

Читать онлайн "Half a King" автора Аберкромби Джо ...

www.rulit.me/books/half-a-king-read-359923-17.html

Читать онлайн Half a King автора Аберкромби Джо - RuLit - Страница 17. ... He sang of Angulf Clovenfoot, Hammer of the Vanstermen, and did not mention ...p100 that the man was his great grandfather.

 

Distant Future Earth

I've been reading a lavishly illustrated book called THE FUTURE IS WILD: A NATURAL HISTORY OF THE FUTURE, by Dougal Dixon and John Adams. (It's a companion to a TV series I haven't seen.) It speculates about the climate, geography, and plant and animal life of our planet's vastly distant future, beginning five million years from now. The imaginary life-forms, wildly creative but based on sound evolutionary principles, could spark fantastic ideas for SF world-building. Sidebar quotes from scientists illustrate the real-world basis for the environments and creatures described in the text. Global maps illustrate the positions of the continents in the various eras being explored. The book also has a decent index and a helpful glossary.

After an introductory overview of continental drift, climate change, and the evolutionary process, the book visits Earth five million years from now, 100 million, and 200 million. Five million years hence, these authors assume humanity will have long since gone extinct. At the peak of a prolonged ice age, Earth has become cold and dry. The Mediterranean Sea is now the Mediterranean Basin. Most of Europe is covered with ice, and North America is mostly desert. At 100 million years, sea levels have risen, and a humid, hothouse climate has replaced the cold phase. The authors postulate a mass extinction of 95 percent of Earth's species at the end of this period. At 200 million years, the continent of Pangaea has re-formed, one single land mass in the midst of a global ocean.

I do have reservations about the extinction of the human species in only five million years. After all, our ancestors survived a previous ice age without the advantages of our technology. A graphic timeline from the Precambrian Era to the future 200 million years hence shows mammals vanishing by the end of the "Hothouse Earth" period. Many exotic creatures are imagined to replace them, though.

Some of the imagined future life-forms, which are often shown alongside contemporary animals with similar features: Scrofas, similar to wild boars, their omnivorous diet including fringed lizards called cryptiles. Babookaris, baboon-like inhabitants of the Amazon grasslands, clever enough to weave fish nets from grasses. The armor-plated rattleback. The ocean phantom of the Shallow Seas, a colony organism modeled on the Portuguese man-of-war, its upper surface covered by algae. Sea spiders called spindletroopers. The swampus, descended from the octopus but able to survive on land for brief periods. Toratons, vaguely tortoise-shaped giant reptiles, bigger than the largest dinosaurs. A four-winged bird, the Great Blue Windrunner. Mound-building insects evolved from termites and growing their own food in the form of green algae. The slickribbon, a three-foot-long, cave-dwelling millipede. The most incredible creature is the squibbon, a huge, land-dwelling, arboreal squid with intelligence equivalent to that of chimpanzees or maybe a bit higher. Many of these animals might as well be inhabitants of alien planets; indeed, the Earth envisioned in the second and third eras has become radically alien to the world we know.

This book is worth checking out for the pictures alone.

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

Tarot Just For (Romance) Writers Now On Kindle by Jacqueline Lichtenberg

Tarot Just For (Romance) Writers Now On Kindle
 by
 Jacqueline Lichtenberg

This month is seeing the Kindle-only release of a compilation and substantial revision of the 20 blog posts so popular on this blog about how to use Tarot in writing Romance genre, and all its spinoffs.

Below you will find links to the Amazon pages where these 5 volumes and the compilation of all 5 in one volume are available.

Here is some of the story behind these new releases of non-fiction books started in 1996, volumes that contain thinking dating to back 1972.

While we're waiting on release of the Sime~Gen Anthology, FEAR AND COURAGE, with stories by 14 new Sime~Gen contributors (beyond Jean Lorrah and me) and while we're waiting on completion of the Sime~Gen Concordance, I've crammed another project into this time-slot.

That project is the series of volumes on the Tarot that was originally contracted to Belfry Books in 1997.  The first volume was published as The Biblical Tarot: Never Cross A Palm With Silver.

My original series title, now in use on Kindle exclusive editions is The Not So Minor Arcana.

Look at the end of this post for links to pre-order of the volumes on Kindle, or if you're reading this after September 2015, you can download them immediately.

Right after publication of NEVER CROSS A PALM WITH SILVER, Belfry Books went out of business due to the collapse of the Book Distribution business before the next 2 volumes, Wands and Cups, could be published.

I had written the volumes on Wands and Cups, working against the established deadline in the contract, and was ready to deliver them when Belfry Books announced they were out of business.

I retrieved my rights and set the project aside until, in 2006,  Rowena Cherry​ asked me to join this Alien Romance co-blog she had just started.

I'd never blogged, was just barely thinking about doing that, and so of course I said yes!  I love to do new things!

So when I hit on the idea of finishing the set of Tarot Books with a blog post per chapter, I didn't expect anyone to read it.  It's dense, abstract, off-topic, meta-thinking of little interest to anyone.

The blog was about Alien Romance Novels, Science Fiction Romance sub-genre, Paranormal and Futuristic Romance readers, but I wrote specifically for the writers, not the readers, of Romance.
The first two volumes, Wands and Cups, are very abstract, theoretical, written for the Intermediate Tarot student.

The second two, written for this blog on Romance is aimed at the advanced student of Romance Writing looking to add Fantasy and/or Science Fiction elements.  Tarot provides a worldbuilding template that all readers understand without having it explained to them, thus cutting out the deadly Expository Lump.

Here are links to the 10 posts on Swords and the 10 posts on Pentacles.

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/03/pausing-for-you-to-catch-up-with-me_23.html

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/03/pausing-for-you-to-catch-up-with-me_23.html

The Kindle versions on Amazon are re-edited and expanded, substantially revised.

This is difficult material to place with a publisher because my take on Tarot is the opposite of what the market for such books wants.  My thesis is that Tarot is of no use whatsoever for "foretelling" the future.  It won't give you magical power, or any other competitive edge of any kind.

The Volumes are very short, about 30,000 words, too short to publish as a stand alone paper book, and they contradict common beliefs on every page.

In other words, these 5 volumes are of use to science fiction romance writers, fantasy writers, creators and purveyors of imaginary fun.  It's a how-to manual on fiction writing, and a non-fiction presentation of how I created and wrote Sime~Gen and most all my other novels.

These volumes contain the world-building I did as I created Sime~Gen, and some of the other universes, like Molt Brother and City of a Million Legends as well as the Dushau Trilogy (remember Dushau won the first Romantic Times Award for Science Fiction - so long ago, the award is not listed in the online compilation though I still have the little statue), Dushau, Farfetch, Outreach.

Oh, yes, and my Vampire novels Those of My Blood and Dreamspy.  Especially, Dreamspy.  Are based in the paradigm I extracted from Tarot.

These non-fiction books contain what is behind that which is behind the underpinnings behind my worldbuilding.  This behind-behind structure, 4-layers deep at least, is why you can't read the novels and spot the mechanism that generated them.

Because these volumes on Tarot are so short, they could not be released economically through a publisher such as Wildside, which does not have any New Age imprint.

The complete, compiled 5 books together are too big to be released as one, certainly not in a print version.

Compile the 5 volumes into 1, then cut that 1 in half, and any abstract meaning someone might glean would be lost.  The 5 volumes are in fact a single structure, built to a point.

Kindle comes to the rescue with their somewhat new arrangement allowing authors to release titles for 99 cents.  And that's about what these little volumes are worth to readers.  Released through a publisher, they would be $4.50 or so apiece, minimum, which is way too much for what you get.

As we have been working on the Sime~Gen titles and then the video game for several years, I have had no time to take Karen L. MacLeod​ 's edited version of the Tarot books and reformat it for Kindle posting (no small feat; a bizarre process indeed!)

After we sent in to Wildside Press Sime~Gen Vol. 13 (Fear And Courage), and while Zoe Farris​ was polishing up the Concordance Manuscript for me to prepare to send to Wildside, I put the Tarot books together in Kindle format.

Now 6 volumes in The Not So Minor Arcana Series are coming available throughout September 2015.  You can order or pre-order.  If you pre-order, Amazon will deliver the books to your Kindle or whatever device you have chosen for your Kindle books.

There are 5 small, separate volumes, plus one huge all-5-volumes together (which is over a meg of download).  If download size is an issue for you, choose the individual books.

I'd like to know if these books turn up being pitched to you by Amazon.

I hope to make these available free for a time toward the end of the year but I don't know when or if I'll have time to do that.

You can pre-order or order at these web-pages now.

The combined volume is cheaper for you than buying each separately.

The Not So Minor Arcana: Never Cross A Palm With Silver Aug 30, 2015 99 cents
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0108MC26O

The Not So Minor Arcana: Wands Sept. 1, 2015  99 cents
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0106RVPKU

The Not So Minor Arcana: Cups Sept. 11, 2015 99 cents
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0106SATX8

The Not So Minor Arcana: Swords  Sept. 17, 2015 99 cents
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0100RSPM2

The Not So Minor Arcana: Pentacles  Sept. 21, 2015 99 cents
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0106RVKF0

The Not So Minor Arcana: Books 1-5 combined Sept. 24, 2015 $3.25
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B010E4WAOU

These books can all be "borrowed" on the Amazon Unlimited program for free, as can Dushau, Farfetch and Outreach.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Artificial Intelligence and Sentience

The September-October issue of SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN MIND includes an article titled, "When Computers Surpass Us." The new generation of AI differs from computers such as Deep Blue, the famous IBM chess-playing machine, in the way the software learns. These computers are taught by trial and error, similar to the learning processes of human and other organic brains. This method leads logically to the familiar SF prospect of machines with the ability to "self-improve by trial and error and by reprogramming their own code." Nick Bostrom, author of SUPERINTELLIGENCE: PATHS, DANGERS, STRATEGIES, contends that there is no reason why computer AI shouldn't eventually surpass human intelligence.

AI can be divided into "weak" or "narrow" and "strong" or general. Our technology has already achieved dazzling progress in narrow AI, computers "able to replicate specific human tasks," such as driverless cars and facial identification software. Some futurists, including Bostrom, believe we'll produce general AI, with the versatility, language comprehension, and learning capacity of a typical human brain, before the end of this century.

We might ask why we'd want to create a computer that thinks exactly like a human being, except as a research project. We already have a planet full of human thinkers. The advantage of computer intelligence is its ability to do things we can do only with difficulty or not at all, such as lightning-fast mathematical calculations or analysis of vast, complicated systems. Even if or when superintelligent computers are built or evolve, thinking like human beings but on a far higher level, would they be likely to threaten us? Presumably the original AI minds from which all others descend will be designed with some version of Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics. Machine intelligences, having no emotions, wouldn't experience greed, ambition, or hate unless programmed to have those drives.

Of course, as the SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN MIND article discusses, an AI constructed with completely benign motivations could still be dangerous, even a "weak" or "narrow" one. A narrow AI tasked with "maximizing return on investments" might decide a national or worldwide disaster would be the most efficient method of increasing the earnings of its designated businesses. A computer ordered to make people happy might fulfill that command by implanting electrodes in the pleasure centers of their brains. A "strong" or "general" AI single-mindedly motivated to maximize human welfare might accomplish that goal by reshaping the world in directions we don't expect or want. Remember Jack Williamson's novel about the robotic overlords who decided the optimal way to preserve human safety and happiness was to prevent human beings from doing much of anything?

Asimov's Three Laws can't solve the problem by themselves, since they're subject to complex difficulties of interpretation. The definitions of "human" and "harm" contain potential minefields. A robot must not harm a human being or allow a human being to come to harm through inaction. Suppose the only way to protect one person from harm is to hurt another, such as saving the victim of a would-be mugger? A robot must obey the orders of human beings (subject to the limitations of the first law). Does a robot have to obey a small child, a mentally disabled or deranged person, or a convicted criminal? Ambiguities such as these are why, in many of Asimov's stories, use of robots on Earth is forbidden, their employment being restricted to controlled environments. In one story, two superintelligent robots analyze the meaning of "humanity" and decide it should be defined by mental capacity, not physical form. Therefore, they conclude the two of them are the most "human" entities they know, and hence they don't have to obey anyone else.

Would a computer whose intelligence surpasses ours necessarily become conscious? Heinlein assumes so in works such as THE MOON IS A HARSH MISTRESS, with the self-aware lunar-wide computer system, Mike, and in TIME ENOUGH FOR LOVE, where the self-aware computer Minerva decides to have her consciousness transferred into a flesh body (as much as will fit in a human brain, anyway) so she can experience love.

Another SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN article, "Intelligence Without Sentience," addresses this question:

Intelligence Without Sentience

The author maintains that our assumption of an intrinsic connection between high intelligence and consciousness isn't valid. The AI systems described in this essay are intelligent in the sense that they learn and remember, yet they "have none of the behaviors we associate with consciousness." He bluntly declares, "They are zombies, acting in the world but doing so without any feeling, displaying a limited form of alien, cold intelligence." Many people might argue that this behavior is by definition not intelligent, simply automatic. That would be circular reasoning, though, since if we include awareness as part of the definition of intelligence, the question implied in the article's title has no meaning. The prospect of a superintelligent but non-sentient AI doesn't seem as dire to me as this author hints. Without self-awareness, the computer wouldn't have any selfish motives or irrational emotions to prevent it from acting in humanity's best interests.

With the reservation, again, that an AI might view our best interests quite differently from the way we do.

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

Marketing Fiction In A changing World Part 14 -- Analysis Of 2015 Fiction Market

Marketing Fiction In A changing World
Part 14

Analysis Of 2015 Fiction Market

Here is the index to the previous 13 posts on this topic:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2014/05/index-to-marketing-fiction-in-changing.html

Understanding the turning of generations is how great classics become great classics.

There are Eternal Truths -- but there's always a new way of expressing or explaining in terms of the experiences of the current readers. 

At some point in life, a generation turns to "seeking" eternal truths, but most of the time humans are too busy to be bothered by eternity.  Now is all that counts -- a little bit like sex.  NOW!!! 

But as a writer, your primary skill set is based on the ability to view any situation from multiple viewpoints at once.  In this case, the viewpoints to master are the classics of the distant past (Shakespeare, the Greek Plays, the Bible), the classics of the recent past (anything written in the 1900's), and the current classics in the making ( written since 2000). 

That encompasses three disparate points of view on the Human Condition.  Three points give you a "line" or curve along which to extrapolate into the future -- writing the novels that will become "Classics" 40 years hence.

I do highly recommend reading back-lists -- yes, and my own back-list as well -- as research for how to create the effects you aim for in your readers.

You want to know how to worldbuild around a theme to punch a wordless emotional message through to a certain reader looking for a certain experience.

Not every book will "work" for every reader.  Not every content will overwhelm all readers with tears, laughter or personal exoneration from guilt of wrongdoing.

Very often in life, everyone you know turns against you, blasting you with excoriation, destroying your sense of self-confidence, -- basically grandstanding to puff themselves up, but that isn't how it feels to the target being vivisected in public.

Back-list titles (especially in Romance which were written for a pre-Fem-Lib audience) don't "work" for millennials.  The emotional punch is invisible to those raised in a new world.

However, if you are learning to write, studying something that does not "move" you as the author intended  can unlock the clues you need to learn how to construct an emotional punch for your modern audience.

It is a "connect the dots" exercise.  Pick up the "line" of development from decades ago, follow the statistics of significant changes summarized, then contrast/compare then vs. now.

Flipboard.com is an amazing new thing, (actually probably going to be bought out by something huge because it is so neat, and so successful). 

Here is where to subscribe to my Magazines on Flipboard, where you can see what I consider significant developments in terms of audience composition, beliefs, tastes, opinions, and conceptions or misconceptions about science.  The Sime~Gen Futurology magazine is a collection of new discoveries about Space, Galaxies, Stars, and Time itself. 

https://flipboard.com/@jacquelinelhmqg

Flipboard is a "news aggregator."  You set up an account, then sign up to "follow" various newspapers, magazines (all the expensive big names, plus a lot of the best ones from around the world), and you can follow topics, too.  It produces a rich stream of professional articles you can save into "Magazines" of your own to read later, or share.

I'm using this post to share with you one of the most data-dense, richly enlightening articles I've found in 2015.

I have not checked the data, the statistics, and the sources cited in this Powerpoint Presentation, slide by slide.  But the graphs, curves and slopes seem about right to me.  I think it's close enough to let you grasp the Market you are trying to hit, and why you need to hit that market.

Here's a slide about millennial coming to dominate the work force.  You need to aim for "the workforce" because they are the ones with the disposable income to buy books.  TV Series aim for that market as to films.  You want to write novels that can be made into films.  If you get lucky, you cash in big time.