Sunday, May 10, 2020

The Ignorance of Podcasters

Back in the heyday of MySpace, many authors (not this one), played current musical singles in full one their MySpace pages without paying any royalties and without seeking any kind of permission or license from the famous musicians.

MySpace, allegedly, made it possible to play John Legend (for example) on their pages, so site owners assumed that MySpace had the rights covered.

Maybe, if you are reading this and have a long-forgotten MySpace presence, you should check your old page and see if you still could be infringing a musician's rights.

Legal blogger, David Oxenford, for the Broadcast Law Blog has a couple of salutary posts that are well worth reading for podcasters and site owners.

https://www.broadcastlawblog.com/2020/05/articles/the-basics-of-music-rights-for-webcasters-and-podcasters-a-webinar-at-world-audio-day/#page=1

And
https://www.broadcastlawblog.com/2018/11/articles/podcaster-sued-for-copyright-infringement-for-using-music-without-permission-remember-ascap-bmi-and-sesac-licenses-dont-cover-all-the-rights-needed-for-podcasting/

As George Harrison sang with such prescience, but not with reference to authors and the need to create compelling and attractive promotions: "You Know It Don't Come Easy."

Meanwhile, authors on the internet should be cautious of gaining a following by saying mean things about others.
It's interesting to say mean things, of course, and may get one a following.
https://quoteinvestigator.com/tag/alice-roosevelt-longworth/
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/08/09/sit-by-me/

But, as Charlie Smith wrote recently for Straight.com, defamation suits can be profitable for the defamed, especially in the truly English speaking world (that is, not in America!)
https://www.straight.com/tech/as-bc-billionaire-proceeds-with-lawsuit-against-twitter-google-loses-defamation-case-in

Also as City News Service reports:
https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/mother-of-popular-youtube-personality-sues-instagram-account-owner-for-defamation/2349893/

Happy Mothers' Day!

Rowena Cherry 


Thursday, May 07, 2020

Urban Flight, Epidemics, and Demographic Change

In recent weeks, many people who can afford to do so have fled the congestion of cities for suburban, rural, or resort areas. Some such prized destinations have taken aggressive action to exclude non-residents:

Second Homes

It's being speculated that the flight from cities may lead to a permanent shift from urban to suburban living, for those who have the luxury of choice. The work-at-home trend may continue and accelerate after the present crisis ends. One commentator (see "Great American Migration" below) says, “You’ll still have urban centers. But they’ll be less intense and more dispersed. You’ll no longer have to choose between unaffordable, overcrowded cities and incredibly boring countryside. There will be a more attractive middle ground.”

Great American Migration

Other observers point out that the 1918 flu pandemic didn't cause the downfall of cities, and predictions that people would retreat from large urban centers after 9-11 didn't materialize. In fact, most cities have continued to gain population regardless of these and similar crises. Cities may have to adapt, but they aren't likely to empty:

Will the Pandemic Empty the Cities?

During the plagues of the past, people frightened of disease have often tried to escape the lethal overcrowding of cities. Boccaccio's 14th-century DECAMERON introduces a group of young, wealthy gentlemen and ladies who flee from the Black Death to a villa outside Florence. In antebellum New Orleans, upper-class families annually retreated from the city to country homes during "fever season." Poe's "Masque of the Red Death" portrays the gruesome fate of a prince who barricades himself and his cronies in his palace for a nonstop orgy while taking refuge from the titular epidemic.

As Arno Karlen explains in MAN AND MICROBES, his book on the evolution of infectious diseases from prehistory to the era of AIDS and Ebola, the phenomenon of epidemics began with the invention of agriculture and cities. Agriculture allowed the same land to support a much higher population than in hunter-gatherer or nomadic societies, but with negative trade-offs. People eating a monotonous diet of mostly grain tend to be less healthy than hunter-gatherers (as archaeology confirms). The resultant overall decline in health impairs the immune system. Moreover, by living in close quarters with domestic animals, they fall victim to animal diseases that mutate to prey on human hosts. With the growth of cities, for the first time in human history enough people lived together in a congested environment for epidemic diseases to flourish. Before modern sanitation and medicine, cities were deathtraps compared to the countryside (for the poor and working class at least).

We think of our contemporary world as being dominated by urbanization. Yet rural, agricultural communities still flourish, too. Herding and hunter-gatherer societies still exist, even if pushed to the margins by industrialization. Some people enjoy cutting-edge, high-tech conveniences and comforts, including smart houses, while others don't yet have indoor plumbing. This subject reminds me of a weakness in much SF that depicts contact with extrasolar planets. Too often, the alien world seems to have only one level of cultural and technological development that's uniform all over the planet, as well as one religion, a universal language, and, sometimes, a single ecology (the ice world, the desert world, the jungle world, etc.). Marion Zimmer Bradley's Darkover offers an example of doing it right; we see a variety of languages, climates, landscapes, and cultural customs on Darkover. Think of what different impressions of Earth extraterrestrial explorers would get if they landed in New York, Tokyo, Yellowstone Park, central Africa, the Australian outback, or northern Alaska and didn't bother to look any farther than their initial touchdown point.

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

Tuesday, May 05, 2020

Theme-Story Integration Part 4 Rag-Tag-Band Ensemble Story

Theme-Story Integration
Part 4
Rag-Tag-Band Ensemble Story 

Previous parts in the Theme-Story Integration Series:

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2019/04/theme-story-integration-part-1-villain.html

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2019/04/theme-story-integration-part-2-villain.html

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2019/04/theme-story-integration-part-3-sexy.html


Part 2 of this series ended off:

--------quote------

Only in children's stories or "comics" (not graphic novels) do people just suddenly, and without explanation or motivation, change into the opposite of what they've been seen to be in a plot-sequence.

So, bit by slow, detailed, bit at a time, you reveal the inner structure of your world that you built -- and make it clear how your world differs from everyday reality such that this "impossible" thing is possible.

In our Reality - "As the twig is bent; so grows the tree," is a true statement about human nature. Also the apple doesn't fall far from the tree is true of humans.

What is different about your World that makes those two statements about Human Nature false?

-----end quote------

Story-arc is the track, the because-line, parallel to Plot where Characters CHANGE because of the impact of events caused by their own decisions or actions -- or events they might never have noticed without some new level of insight triggered by an epiphany precipitated by a Plot Event.

Increased sensitivity to events is a Character Arc.

People do change, but it is rare.  More common is how people change their mind, their conclusions or opinions about something.

The "something" is derived from the Theme - the "change" is the Story.

How this can happen, when, where, why, with whom.

Without a Character Arc traced by a Story-line, a Plot just seems like a waste of time to read.

If an Arc is foreshadowed - something that could happen in a future volume, then the Arc can be the suspense-line in the Story.

All this is deep, abstract, and way too intellectual for simple entertainment.

Often people read to participate in a world where there are no coherent emotional pressures urging them to "Arc" in their own real-life world.

THE STARS BEYOND by S. K. Dunstall (the pen name for a writing team of two sisters who have written several books I enjoyed),



is an example of the "ensemble" cast, but because of the scope of the story - almost galaxy wide, many locations, many astrophysical oddities, plus an entire worldbuilding element about genetic manipulation, then adding brand new Aliens - there weren't enough pages in the book to delve into each point of view Character's Arc, Story, personal progress, and Relationships.

Each Character scintillates with possibilities, and none of them get a chance to grow before our eyes, to convince us we can become better people, and that Relationships are the key to that.  None of the Characters have enough space in the book to show-don't-tell us how LOVE CONQUERS ALL.

The book didn't set out to be a Romance.  There are Relationships, but mostly business-based, and maybe a little charity (or pity) tossed in on the side as people get their fannies caught in bear traps.

The bear traps (like losing a job, behind denied contracted bonuses) resolve way too easily, and all the main characters end up potential rich (due to a mineral discovery made because of a recovered memory.)

None of this is easy, and each step of the plot requires ferocious dedicated, disciplined, and risky actions by the Point of View Character used for a given chapter.

It paints a vast mural before our eyes, and it is a grand read.

But the "world" that is built of these pieces is more the hero of the story, not the Characters.  It is the "world" (galaxy-spanning-economy-based-on-gene-modification) that "arcs" -- this is the story of a civilization, not the individuals whose fates change that civilization's potential to survive and continue meddling with genes.

So far, there's nothing grotesque or cringe-worthy in the results of the gene modification professions.  There is a full blown healing application, but the rest is an art form that just lets individuals who can afford it become their fantasy selves.

None of the clients go into the gene-modification machines for love, or to reveal or actualize the reality of their Soul, or to venture onto planets hostile to human life.  Yet this volume introduces the potential (an unlivable planet with Aliens who also find it unlivable) for such modification.

Humans are modified, but so far there's no mention of modifying plants or food-animals to live on uninhabitable planets.

Gene modification has been strictly limited by lack of elemental resources that make it work.  The discovery made at the end of this volume teases future volumes about the impact on this disciplined civilization by unlimited access to such a natural resource.

So far, with all the male and female characters in the story, I don't see the foreshadowing of a true Romance, but this Series really needs one volume that tracks the Character Arcs of a pair becoming mates by being changed.

So writers should ponder human civilization, in whatever epoch you want to write in, and figure out the mechanism that lets one human "change" another human's mind, heart, soul -- opinions.

Part 5 of this series makes a suggestion.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Sunday, May 03, 2020

What You Don't See (May Bind You)

First there was the "fine print"; then there was the probably intentionally mind-numbing scroll of all caps print, page after page of it; then, there were sites such as EBay that forced you to join their club and agree to all their Terms (which of course meant that you held them harmless) before you could defend your copyrights; now --perhaps-- you have to agree to THE TERMS before you can read them.

Perhaps I misread this from Peloton to musicians:
"Click HERE to log into your MusicReports.com account and review the proposed license agreement. If it is acceptable to you, simply check the box to confirm you have read the agreement, then click the “I Agree” button to accept the terms. You can then download a full copy of the agreement from the “My Licenses” page in your account."

Credits to
https://thetrichordist.com/2020/04/16/is-musicreports-license-pitch-for-onepeloton-the-equivalent-of-a-poor-persons-class-action-settlement-without-court-supervision/

The tentacles of Mark Zuckerberg reach into your portfolio, and lift your copyrights, and there is nothing you can do about the filching of your photographic rights if you post a picture on Instagram.

"A New York federal district court has dismissed a photographer’s copyright infringement claims after finding that the photographer gave Instagram the right to sublicense her photograph to the accused infringer, Mashable, Inc. Mashable used the photograph at issue on its site by embedding a link to an Instagram post published on the photographer’s public Instagram profile. In Sinclair v. Ziff Davis, the court decided that, by including the photograph in a post on her public Instagram profile, the photographer had..." 

... unintentionally given Instagram a legal license to "share" her intellectual property.

Legal bloggers David W. Holt and Ryan J. Letson, writing for the law firm Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, discuss the unsuccessful copyright infringement complaint by the photographer, Stephanie Sinclair, against Mashable Inc.
https://www.bradley.com/insights/publications/2020/04/looking-for-likes-social-media-post-results-in-unintended-license-to-share-photograph

They offer great constructive advice, but the bottom line is "User Beware".

Legal bloggers Radhika K. Raman and  Jeff Van Hoosear examines the perils of snagging someone else's photograph, even if the photo is of oneself.
https://www.knobbe.com/blog/its-photo-me-celebrities-face-legal-action-unauthorized-use-images-social-media

"Social media managers, celebrities, and individuals alike should exercise caution before posting photos online for which they do not own the copyright rights. Often, a simple source attribution, or a small licensing fee, can save months of legal trouble later. While many disagree with the public policy or reasoning prohibiting celebrities from re-sharing photos of themselves..."

OR, find the photo on Instagram, and embed the link.


Mark Sableman says as much about the same Sinclair/Mashable disagreement, in his legal blog for Thomson Coburn LLP"It's not infringing if it's an authorized embedding."

https://www.thompsoncoburn.com/insights/blogs/in-focus/post/2020-04-17/it-s-not-infringing-if-it-s-an-authorized-embedding#page=1

Or
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=139cc166-c3d8-49c8-add3-1a39725d7d2d

Facebook also, somehow, can snag Zoom users' information, even if the Zoom users don't have a Facebook account, or so it is alleged, and reported by legal bloggers for Troutman Sanders LLP Anne-Marie Dao, Wynter L. Deagle, and  Yarazel Mejorado.

Allegations include:

"Zoom sending data from users of its iOS app to Facebook for advertising persons [sic], even if the user does not have a Facebook account; The Windows version of Zoom being vulnerable to attackers who could send malicious links to users’ chat interfaces and gain access to their network credentials; Zoom not requiring a user’s consent before allowing the host of the meeting to record the session; The presence of a security flaw that would enable hackers to take over a user’s Mac..."

There are some precautions that Zoom users can take.  Read more on Linked In:

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=013b92f2-4b1e-4dc9-89f4-8d78c3785a27&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2020-04-27&utm_term=

Or on the Troutman blog:
https://www.troutman.com/insights/to-zoom-or-not-to-zoomprivacy-and-cybersecurity-challenges.html


Legal bloggers Warwick Andersen, Cameron Abbott, Rob Pulham, Allison Wallace and Max Evans collectively point out not only that some have alleged that Zoom's Privacy Policy does not disclose its leaks of users' data to Facebook but also that Windows users' passwords may be snagged.

Original link:
https://www.cyberwatchaustralia.com/2020/04/zooming-in-zooms-significant-privacy-and-data-security-risks-brought-to-light-again-and-again/

Lexology link:
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=3b6d57ff-bfb4-402d-9e66-9dd03f2d8513&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2020-04-17&utm_term=

So, even if you do everything right, and read all the "agreements" and "terms" and "policies" before joining someone else's Zoom meeting as an invited guest, your privacy and more is still likely to be violated.


It's more a case of seller beware (rather than caveat emptor) when it comes to Amazon. The Authors Guild provides a  perspective on Bezos behaving badly towards publishers and authors.
https://www.authorsguild.org/where-we-stand/amazons-anticompetitive-history/

And CopyrightAlliance continues to fulminate against immense copyright infringers and the senator who shields them.
https://copyrightalliance.org/news-events/copyright-news-newsletters/internet-archive-emergency-library-harms-authors/?_zs=TqSBb&_zl=5fF52


All the best,

Rowena Cherry 

Thursday, April 30, 2020

Joanna Russ on Feminism and SF

I've been rereading TO WRITE LIKE A WOMAN: ESSAYS IN FEMINISM AND SCIENCE FICTION, by Joanna Russ. Although released in 1995, it contains many essays published earlier, as far back as the 1970s. It's still available new on Amazon, and you can view the table of contents with the "Look Inside" feature:

To Write Like a Woman

Of particular interest in reading these older works is noting how the image of women in popular fiction has changed since the 70s—as well as recognizing some problems that linger on to the present day. We can hope we've moved beyond the status quo described in "What Can a Heroine Do? or Why Women Can't Write" (1972), in which Russ argues that most of the plot and character archetypes familiar in novels written by and for men don't apply to female characters. An outcome defined as success for a man constitutes failure for a woman. A fictional woman (like career women in real life, at least at the time the essay was written) is apt to find herself stuck in a classic double bind; if she strives to fulfill her ambitions and actually succeeds, she's condemned as "unfeminine," but if she behaves the way a woman is traditionally expected to, she's viewed as weak. Consider how the history of "Alexandra the Great" would read. A female character in male-oriented fiction tends to fall into stereotypical categories such as the Bitch Goddess and the Maiden Victim. She can act as a protagonist in only one kind of story, a love story. Three principal genres are exceptions, according to Russ, giving characters true agency regardless of gender—mystery, horror, and especially science fiction.

Other essays of special interest are two pieces about all-women or women-dominated societies. "Amor Vincit Foeminam: The Battle of the Sexes in Science Fiction" (1980) surveys a batch of stories about such societies, written by men. It's amazing how silly most of them sound. Typically, the basic self-contradiction in those dystopias, which embody masculine fears about being dominated by females (in these tales, giving women equality always leads to feminine tyranny), is that women are portrayed as so powerful they can crush men completely (aside from the hero, of course), yet so weak they can be subdued and enlightened by "real" sex or even a passionate kiss. Numerous counter-examples appear in "Recent Feminist Utopias," which analyzes a selection of more nuanced, humane female-dominated societies, all but one written by women. Russ includes Marion Zimmer Bradley's THE SHATTERED CHAIN, presenting the Free Amazon subculture as one such society, even though it's embedded in the patriarchal culture of Darkover as a whole. I would have liked to see a discussion of Bradley's true feminist utopian novel, THE RUINS OF ISIS, but perhaps it hadn't been published at the time of this article.

The first three essays in the book examine science fiction as a genre and try to construct a working definition of its "aesthetic." "Someone's Trying to Kill Me, and I Think It's My Husband" provocatively analyzes the paperback Gothics so popular in the 1960s and 70s. The other pieces range over a variety of topics, including a merciless dissection of the film version of Harlan Ellison's "A Boy and His Dog." Despite the age of the material in this collection, it remains fascinating, thought-provoking, and relevant to the current status of the field. Also recommended: Russ's incisive work HOW TO SUPPRESS WOMEN'S WRITING. ("She didn't write it"; "She wrote it, but she had help"; "She wrote it, but look WHAT she wrote"; etc.)

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

Tuesday, April 28, 2020

Theme-Conflict Integration Part 7 - Romance Without Borders

Theme-Conflict Integration
Part 7
Romance Without Borders

Previous parts in Theme-Conflict Integration are indexed at:
https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2018/05/index-to-theme-conflict-integration.html

Romance, just like Science Fiction, is a genre without borders -- there is literally no story that can be told that won't be improved by adding Science and scientific thinking to a Character, and likewise, there is no story that won't be improved by Romance.

We all know what Romance is.  It is what we love to read.

And as with science fiction, thousands have tried to describe what makes a Romance novel a Romance novel -- has anyone actually succeeded and defining this human experience?

Is there anyone who can define happiness?  What is the formula for a good life?  How do you choose a mate?  By how you FEEL?  By who your parents approve of?  By whose parents your parents approve of?

Arranged marriages, usually about property, heritage, Royal Titles, or settling ancestral feuds (or wars), can actually be about the Parental generation observing details about the young adults to find which personalities blend with least friction.

Arranged marriages can be successful when the elders doing the arranging are able to see, and understand what they are seeing, the youngsters from a perspective the youngsters don't know exists.

Look around this world of today, and you will find few, very few, elders who have any idea what the marriage-age generation is about.

It's called a generation-gap for a reason.  There is simply no connection or contact across that gap because of the way young people's brains develop to process information.

This, of course, starts in infancy, or maybe even before birth, as the human brain its very plastic.  Yes, it changes a lot through experience of the world, and keeps on changing far longer than science used to believe.

So let us postulate that Romance, and the potential to experience true Romance, the potential to recognize a Soul Mate (even in an Alien from another planet), the potential to bond firmly with a mate chosen by Older And Wiser matchmakers, is rooted in the experiences of infancy.

Infancy is the root of the ability to fall in love?

Or possibly infancy is where we learn there is no such thing as a Happily Ever After.

In infancy, we experience the passage of time as a percentage of all the time we have been aware.

Thus the second day of life is 50% of all existence.

By the time a person is 20 years old, you have lived 7,300 days, so a day is about 0.01 percent of your life.

As you get older, the percent of your life that a day represents gets smaller, so the Events of a day become less and less significant.  You have good days.  You have bad days.  Nothing wallops you over backwards if it lasts only 1 day.  The things that matter are the things that have long-range (years) consequences.

So the experiences of the world that have the longest range consequences happen in infancy, toddlerhood, and yes the angst of the teen years.

A Matchmaker who knows the business will be able to match 20 year olds with a good mate for a solid marriage, a marriage that will end in Romance, not begin there.

But to pull this off, and it is chancy, the Matchmaker has to remember how the parents of the 20-year-olds were treated as infants, and how the twenty-somethings were treated by those parents all their lives.

And the Matchmaker has to know a lot of people, their biographies, and how they turned out, and what they went on to do after having their kids.  The successful matchmaker has to understand life-long trajectories, the business of living a good life.

This was possible when we all lived in villages small enough that everyone knew everyone, that children went into the same profession as the parents (blacksmithing, farming, trading, weaving, tanning, etc) or were apprenticed out to a better profession.

That much information just isn't available today, three generations into a highly mobile world where family ties to neighborhoods were broken as corporations moved workers around the country.  You had to move your family to climb the executive ladder.

Nobody, at that time, was thinking of that process in terms of how it would affect the eventual ability to experience Romance.

Let's theorize that it did.

Would that explain why we have about half the world convinced there is no such thing as a Happily Ever After in real life?

Children whose significant Relationships, at 3, 5, 10, even 14 years of age are broken may be traumatized (brain development issue, more than just emotional) in such a way that their Character is scarred.  Scars, physical scars on the skin, heal, and even disappear with the decades, so it is possible scars on the brain could likewise become invisible.

Skin scarring does retrain insensitivity for years after it becomes invisible, but healing can happen with enough time.

The brain is likewise pliable, responding to environment and experience.

Today's children are being raised "online" -- and I know some, personally, whose dear friends from Elementary School have moved away, but maintain contact via FACETIME or video-chat of some sort -- and yes, Facebook or other chat platforms.

In the 1940's only the relatively affluent had telephones at home, but by the 1950's it was common for a house or apartment to have ONE telephone.

The classic joke of the 1950's and 1960's was how Teens monopolized the single phone line (even or especially if there were "extensions" in the house) just talking snd talking to their friends about what seemed to the parents to be nothing at all important.

It was only the affluent who had extensions, and most phones were on a short wire attached to the wall.  That phone line had to be kept open for incoming "important" calls the parents wanted to be available for.

Long distance phone calls were massively expensive.

So if a child's friend moved away, to another state for example, ALL TIES were broken.

Today, even lower income households have dumb phones, if not smart phones.  But penetration is in full swing, and in 20 years or less, everyone will have a wider world to live in.

WITHOUT BORDERS is the way to think of the current generation gap.

Humans experience the "freedom" of living without borders, without having to re-establish credentials and licenses for professions (Nursing, M.D.'s, Electricians, Plumbers, Teachers, etc) by passing state tests each time you move, as a wonderful thing.

Humans experience the freedom of leaving home for college as a wonderful thing.

Humans experience the freedom of getting a driver's license and being able to borrow a parent's car as a wonderful thing.

Freedom - the ability to transgress boundaries without adverse consequences - is treasured by humans.

Happily Ever After without FREEDOM is Misery Ever After.

But Freedom is dangerous.  Give a 3 year old freedom, and he'll run out in the street and get run over, or drown in the backyard pool, or fall down a Well, or get stuck in a storm drain.  It happens.

Freedom is dangerous, but it is essential to the Happily Ever After goal.

Managing risk is the skill-set parents have to start teaching their infants on day two of life.  The mother's hands holding and feeding the newborn start the process of configuring the brain to get what you want/need within the risk-borders best chosen for the situation.

As with all primates, humans learn to parent by being parented.  How those mother's hands hold the newborn begins the process of acquiring the ability to parent.

It is a long process of acquisition and is accompanied by many other skill-sets being acquired.

But it is the parent's influence on the newborn that the matchmaker has to know.

Today, only God knows.

The chain of parenting culture/habits/practices has been broken -- in the early 1900's by the advent of experts writing books on how to parent, and in the early 2000's by the advent of email (OK, programming the VCR became the joke of the 1990's) and other online activities.  Children could do things their parents could not learn to do no matter how hard they tried.

It has always, throughout human history, been the opposite -- parents with years of experience could do things the children could only hope to master some day.

Thus we have a generation of parents who, as children long ago, escaped the "limits" -- the borders of discipline, their parents set for them.

Romeo and Juliet enshrined the archetype of children associating with people their parents disapproved of.

Children always hate, resent, and expend enormous energy beating at these borders parents put around them.

Look at the 1 year old who stands up in his crib and falls out.  Look at the 10 year old who runs away from home.  We all spend our formative years trying to escape.

Kids do that. Parents remember being like that, seeing the world as a trap, and like cows in a pasture, pushing toward the greener grass on the other side of that fence.

Parenting fashions have begun to change rapidly in the last century, as what children are capable of doing has expanded (but common sense acquisition has not), so we have new books on "how to" parent coming out every decade or two, with conflicting advice based on science.

The parents (and grand-parents) who weren't parented with strict boundaries, physical borders, psychological and sociological limits, are now raising children.  These new parents may know, but not have personal feelings and memories for, living within strict boundaries, and trusting their parents to set those boundaries appropriately.

The parenting process that might be producing the skepticism about the Happily Ever After lifestyle goal is the process of delineating borders.

Parental border setting is all about "controlling" who your child associates with.

As infants, we learn to recognize Mother's face, Father's face, and then others who provide and handle us, feed us, change diapers, put us in a playpen, allow this but not that behavior.

As we grow, our circle of recognition grows.

Good parenting consists of observing this particular child's growing ability to form and hold associations, and carefully enlarging the circle of acquaintances, managing the establishing of friends (these days through "play dates,") and adding people from this type of household but not that type.

By High School, children should have acquired the ability to assess the risks of this or that Relationship, and to understand their own sensitivity to risk, their ability to tolerate emotional impacts that come inevitably from having friends.

The problems today come at least partly from the parent's inability to teach these skills.

They can't teach them for two main reasons: A) they weren't taught, B) what they were taught, and what they learned, aren't relevant to the world today's children live in.

The generation gap caused by technology has ripped apart the parent-child relationship.

In families where that has happened, you will see a rising percentage of people who just can't see happiness as anything stable, long term.

Humans yearn for long-term as much as for freedom, so the trend will reverse.  Currently, your prime readership for Romance (teens-twenties) may be in the stage of being unable to form long-term Relationships, so "Happily" means something, but "Ever After" just does not.

Being dependent or having dependents is not a "happy" situation from the point of view of a young person who grew up as a single child, or maybe just two, possibly in a one-parent situation.  The view of life, of what it can and should be, that children with 7 or 10 siblings have is very different.  Happiness is a noisy mob, and freedom is running with that noisy mob faster than Mom can capture you.

Children raised in a noisy mob generally have parents who have many siblings, so aunts, uncles, cousins form an even noisier mob, and happiness is having them over as company -- or being over to their house to play with more cousins.

The point of getting married is to create a new noisy mob.

Children raised in a noisy mob start infancy with a much larger circle of intimates, and learn to deal with compatible and abrasive personalities very early in life.  Such children will have less trauma dealing with an ever growing circle of acquaintances, greater resistance to bullying, more tools for creating social harmony.

Today, families have shrunk, so even three generations back children don't have the noisy mob of uncles and cousins.  Where they do exist, often families just aren't in touch because they long ago moved to different places, even countries.

The parenting skill of allowing a child's number of associating children to grow at the rate that child needs is no longer being transmitted in the majority population.  For the Romance writer, this means the potential readership is thirsting for a vision of life with those skills.

Think about the popularity of the T V Series THE BRADY BUNCH.  Or consider the Cop-Family depicted in the TV Series, BLUE BLOODS (2019-2020 season is #10 in this family gritty drama series).

Or think about the work-family formed at the core of TV Series like NCIS or BONES, or the much older Series, THE WALTONS or LITTLE HOUSE ON THE PRAIRIE.

There is an audience hungering for broad group-dynamic Relationship stories -- maybe because families have shrunk and humans prefer larger families?

Romance readers will be wanting stories about large families where, right before our eyes, humans learn the art of conflict resolution via close, personal, intimate relationships that are not romantic (e.g. siblings, cousins).

It is in the larger family dynamic that humans master the tools of conflict resolution, or perhaps even conflict generation.  Ask yourself what is the optimum family size for humans -- then explore what the reproductive dynamic of your Alien species would dictate for their early life acculturation.

Themes involving deep, personal, unique and individual Relationships easily embrace the problems of having many siblings.  Humans compete with siblings (gotta kill that kid brother!) -- but do your Aliens?

Parents try to police that sibling rivalry, but do they know how if they had no siblings?

Many of the Conflicts that drive humans out into the workplace, and hurl them into love affairs, originate in early life, even infancy and toddlerhood.

The borders we internalize as our parents enlarge our circle of acquaintances, how to behave toward a friend, how to fend off attacks from an aggressor, how to accept, how to reject, how to know when to do which, are the foundation off all subsequent Romance.

How a child responds to being "socialized" with these borders around behavior shows the Matchmaker what groups to look at to find the Soul Mate.

That's what Matchmakers are supposed to do - find the Soul Mate and introduce them.

A brief introduction is all that's necessary when a Relationship can "click."

Sometimes that Soul Mate just isn't alive to be found, and then the Matchmaker's job is to find another bereft lonesome who can blend easily into a Happily Ever After life for the couple.

It can be done.  It has routinely been done throughout human history.  But today the shattered family structure has prevented the nurturing of the Matchmaker skill sets.

The internet, live video-chat, and other tools may heal the extended family and shift the cultural matrix toward the more stable "village" of associations.

In a thousand years, humanity may look back on this shattered-family period as a difficult aberration in the human search for peace.

Do we have to wait that long to open hailing frequencies with Aliens?  Are they waiting?  Or are they already here?

If an Alien was adopted into a large human family, what inevitable conflicts would develop?

THEME: humans are innately combative, competitive and hostile to anyone "different."

THEME: humans are innately gentle, curious, and loving toward all, but the animal body striving to survive in a hostile world warps these innate tendencies toward hating that which is different.

THEME: love can free such a warped human psyche to roam beyond the torturous internal borders adopted for survival.

All three of these themes can generate Romance Novels - but they are especially suited to the Second Time Around Romance, as the more mature Characters have relevant backstory that shapes their conflicts, internal and external.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Saturday, April 25, 2020

National ? "Emergency"?? Library???

The Authors Guild is asking all comers to sign a petition.
Link:
https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/sign-our-open-letter-to-internet-archive-to-shut-down-the-so-called-national-emergency-library?source=direct_link&

Here's what you can expect to see:



The excessive punctuation is mine. I apologize.

For authors, it would probably be quite effective and legitimate to use the comments box to name ones titles that have been pirated on this site.

All the best,

Rowena Cherry