-------------
But first --
A word about the Galaxy Express contest. At the right sidebar, you see a column of book covers. Enter by commenting on the announcement post here below and one person wins them all. If you win, and have already read the book I put up there, Dushau, you can switch to one of its sequels or one of the other titles at http://www.jacquelinelichtenberg.com
----------------
Now to the BEAT SHEET, a mysterious screenwriting term that is the major key to success in text-fiction writing today.
The "Beat Sheet" we'll discuss is the one featured in the "Save The Cat" series of screenwriting techniques by the late Blake Snyder. A pdf copy can be downloaded at
http://www.blakesnyder.com/tools/
Get it, print it out, puzzle over it a few minutes. The names of the beats are all interpreted and explained with examples in Blake Snyder's books.
On that website you'll also find a film or two analyzed by the beat sheet, and at the top of the page there's a list of all the films mentioned in Snyder's book, grouped by the "Genre" signatures he has extracted empirically from a plethora of blockbuster films.
Look over that list of films and you'll see from the ones you're familiar with just what his concept of "genre" does for understanding story structure, and what his beat sheet does for understanding plot structure. All this is free. The books are available on Amazon.
Snyder's concept works proportionately for shorter screenplays, say for TV for example, and you can calculate the page numbers for each beat of a shorter work at:
http://www.rareform.com/screenplay-editor/beats.php
Try it for novel length works and see how the proportions fall. Check those proportions against your favorite books.
-----------------------
This blog post you are now reading is actually Part 8 in the Astrology Just For Writers series.
The previous post in this series
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2009/11/astrology-just-for-writers-part-6.html
Was named Part 6 by accident, but was actually part 7.
The real Part 6 is
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2009/10/astrology-just-for-writers-pt-6.html
Now, in Part 8, we are blending bits and pieces of writing craft techniques we've discussed in some depth both in these Astrology posts and in the 20 posts on Tarot I did in 2007 into an orchestrated performance.
Here's the final Tarot post with links back to the previous ones.
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2007/12/10-pentacles-cake-comes-out-of-oven.html
So Astrology Part 6 was ALSO Part 2 of Targeting a Readership.
Astrology Part 7 was ALSO Part 3 of Targeting a Readership.
Using Astrology as a plotting tool is kind of like learning Quadratic Equations in Algebra. Up to now everything has been Freshman algebra, pretty simple, one thing at a time, take the lesson, practice it as a single thing, master it, move on.
Now however, we're learning cross-terms, integration, powers and factoring. Now we're starting to "solve" real life (actually writing a novel or screenplay) problems.
Yeah, now we get to "word problems."
This "Astrology Just For Writers" is a non-technical discussion of how a writer who knows no astrology (and doesn't want to learn) can apply basic principles from astrology to infuse their writing with verisimilitude.
Most people, when they hear I teach writing via Tarot and Astrology instantly think "cast a chart for the main characters" or "a character does a Tarot reading that predicts whatever and the story is how it works out against fate."
That, however, is what Hollywood screenwriters call "on the nose" and is in fact a highly inept and ineffective writing tool for most writing projects (worked gangbusters for Piers Anthony though).
Besides being "on the nose", inserting Tarot readings or doing a natal chart for a character requires expertise you can't fake by reading interpretations from books and planting them in your story.
I know because when I set out with a collaborator to create a TV series based on a group of Astrologers solving mysteries using astrology, it took me only a few hours work before I picked up the phone and called one of the biggest name Astrologers -- possibly in the whole world -- Noel Tyl.
Noel Tyl's books on Amazon
He worked with us for about 6 weeks creating the ensemble characters natal charts and charting The Event they had to dig into and solve with their individual specialties in astrology. The resulting script would pass muster with any astrologer, but didn't sell because it was too farfetched.
The Event we chose was 9/11 (written about 6 years prior), and we wrote it a lot (I mean a LOT) smaller and more trivial to make it believable and small enough to fit a TV budget, and we set it in Los Angeles.
I had done birth charts for various cities for an anthology of non-fiction on Astrology and thus knew which cities the planetary alignment in effect at that time would hit (a transit that doesn't connect with the natal chart will not manifest anything). We chose Los Angeles because it would be cheaper to do location filming there.
It was a very "on the nose" presentation of astrology, but done for the non-technical general audience who wouldn't believe it at all.
Lesson: stay off the nose. That means don't say what you mean; let the reader figure it out from their own knowledge of life in general.
Astrology and Tarot can be useful to a writer by objectively delineating the underlying patterns in life that everyone knows but can't actually see.
Astrology and Tarot reveal the poetry of life. Most writers already "see" that poetry in motion in lives around them and that's why they want to "become" writers. They want to make everyone see what they see. But others with dynamite stories to tell can't quite make sense of the way readers see life, and so can't communicate their visions.
Just a cursory glance at the body of ancient wisdom called Astrology will reveal to the writer how the world looks to readers, and allow the writer to present their unique vision in terms the reader (and editor with money to pay) will understand.
This Astrology Just For Writers series of posts is likewise useful to readers who want to become insightful and popular reviewers, but general readers may be happier not knowing the tricks of the writer's trade.
Knowing these tricks, a reviewer can assess whether the writer applied them well enough to please certain readers even though the work doesn't particularly please that reviewer.
-------------------------------------
I have 4 issues to discuss about The Beat Sheet here:
1) The Beat Sheet (go get it at the link above, read discussion below)
2) Why Astrology Does Not "Work"
3) The power of Astrology as a plotting tool
4) A Question about identifying, concocting and placing the CATALYST (Blake Snyder's term) or Inciting Incident (general screenwriting term) or Springboard (general TV writing term) from the beat sheet into your story.
1)What is Blake Snyder's Beat Sheet?
It is a list of generic types of events that have to happen in any screenplay, in that order, at those precisely proportioned intervals.
The "beats" are EVENTS -- so they are plot.
However the "beats" can be EMOTIONALLY LOADED INFORMATION revealed to the audience, so beats carry the story forward.
Ideally, in a great work of art, the emotionally loaded information is revealed via Events, a story told in pictures.
Plot and story are welded so close the viewer/reader can't tell them apart. Telling them apart is the writer's craft. The less the readers know about that craft, the more they enjoy the work of art.
It's like watching a stage magician. "How did he do that?"
Well, the point is that magicians never tell.
If we don't tell, how do we pass it down to the next generation?
As the writers who founded the art of the "motion" picture, and the "talkie" began to die off, their secrets were being lost. But in the meantime, the artform had evolved with the ever increasing sophistication of movie goers -- and of course, TV educated moreviewers in childhood, shaping new tastes.
So the artform evolved with growing frustration among producers who couldn't get the material they needed from new writers, and new writers with great ideas who couldn't sell their stuff to the moneyed producers.
Along came Blake Snyder, second generation film family (read his bio in his books and on his website).
He was a film addict and when he became filled up with films, he began to notice what made a good film, and what made a great film.
Meanwhile, he was "on the inside" working with studios and producers to get scripts whipped into usable shape.
Using "The Board" (a visual display of the beats of a script) to reveal the problems with the script and also the solutions to those problems in visual terms (film people are very visual), Blake gestalted an underlying truth that had escaped previous formulators of "how to write a screenplay."
The producers want "the same but different."
The writers want to be different - unique.
Writers get accepted for being unique, but rejected for being "too unique" which is bewildering. Writers understand "different" -- but not "the same."
Viewers, meanwhile, reject films and TV shows that are too predictable. But viewers reject films that aren't predictable enough as "making no sense."
A very rare few writers understood "the same but different" on a non-verbal, intuitive level and took Hollywood by storm. Others, with grand stories to tell, couldn't "break in." But with the internet, inexpensive computerized video recording equipment, and leaps and bounds in communications, The Independent Film Producer burst on the scene just as the Self-Published and then E-Book Publisher burst on the text scene.
And guess what? To make a great film with no budget to speak of, you need a writer who has a complete grasp of The Same But Different.
Blake Snyder's beat sheet clarified all this fog.
Today prize winning Independent films have Blake Snyder's Beat Sheet visible to the trained eye, shaping the filmed events, however cheaply produced.
What's different about Snyder's beat sheet?
It has 15 beats. It fills in the GAPS in the usual screenwriting course's beat sheet with something a writer can grab hold of and use.
Naturally, since Blake revealed this years ago, today you see the 15 beat shape everywhere, not just in the blockbusters.
In the traditional beat sheet for a film, the beat called "Inciting Incident" was formulated to be one specific kind of dramatic event.
Blake renamed it CATALYST, which broadens the application of this beat's underlying concept and allowed Blake to formulate a series of types of stories he called "genres" which define stories and group them in a different way.
All these "genres" have the same 15 beat structure.
See my review of SAVE THE CAT! on Amazon.
Save The Cat! The Last Book on Screenwriting You'll Ever Need
And Save The Cat Goes To The Movies!
Save the Cat! Goes to the Movies: The Screenwriter's Guide to Every Story Ever Told
And the new, 3rd book in the series pub'd Nov 2009:
Save the Cat!® Strikes Back: More Trouble for Screenwriters to Get Into... and Out Of
Many commentators on Amazon were deriding SAVE THE CAT! as being too restrictive, too formulaic, too stultifying to writer-artists creativity. I pointed out that this series of books on screenwriting are about OPENS EVERYWHERE films, not Art House or "Opens Near You" films.
This is the beat sheet to use if you want to shoot for the Big Budget Producers (or big publicity publishers) looking for the next Batman franchise. It'll work to win film festivals, but very likely won't win film festivals focused on the leading edge of the evolution of filmed story telling.
Save The Cat! is billed as the last book on screenwriting you'll need, but that's the point. It is the last not the first. But it does reveal the connection between the screenplay market and the novel market, and how and why they are converging as they are, and how to write a novel for this new market.
Save The Cat! is not about evolving or changing or leading the film industry. It's about making money at screenwriting.
But there is ONE BEAT that appears in every single form of film, avante guarde or cliche-ridden ho-hum, in every novel and every other sort of story I've ever run across.
Every film, every story, every plot, every novel, has a CATALYST BEAT.
The CATALYST BEAT inciting me to write this blog entry was the Question by a writer who asked me to explain the Catalyst beat in depth.
The Question has 2 parts, "Beat" and "Catalyst" or "Incite."
But we are not mechanics. We are artists. Worse, yet, we are performing artists (as I was taught by Alma Hill).
Our artistic medium is not paint pigments, or sound, or woven textiles, or paper mache, or embroidery thread or city planning.
Our artistic medium is the emotions of our readers/viewers. We cause our reader/viewers to dance to our music, internally.
I should point out here that "reader" does not mean someone who can sound-out the words. This is something very frustrating and unfortunate in our world.
You can't make a 40 year old "literate" by teaching him to read. He's missed 35 years of reading thousands of books, and there's no way to replace those years or catch up.
Remedial literacy training is of course invaluable, a "Catalyst Beat" in a life that changes everything. But the later in life you "learn" to read, the less facile your brain will be at making the cold text disappear from before your eyes so you can walk into the story as a character, live their experiences, and learn vicariously.
A reader who learns at 3 or 4 to decipher words, and goes on to devour every book their parents allow (and some they don't) has learned how to make the written text on the page disappear from before their eyes and to see and experience what the characters do.
A viewer has learned to make the actors and sets (a feat in live stage) disappear and immerse themselves in the reality of the story, but that story lacks dimensions of intimacy and immediacy that can be achieved only by text (so far in our world's technology -- another Catalyst Beat would be the advent of such a new technology of storytelling.)
The writer's "craft" is the mastery of the entire set of tools designed to help readers and viewers make those concrete symbols disappear so they can live the story the writer is performing before them.
The STORY is the sequence of emotions the character experiences.
The "science" of emotions is "psychology" -- but some people can take any number of psychology courses in college, read self-help books until they're eyes cross, and still not understand what motivates people, or what shapes lives, well enough to connect with readers/viewers.
Some people need a model of the universe which includes a spiritual dimension but does not depend on spiritual awareness.
Some writing students need to learn (a very little bit) of Astrology in order to master the Beat Sheet.
--------------------
2) Why Astrology Does Not Work
I recently posted a link to an article mentioning astrology onto my facebook page ( http://facebook.com/jacqueline.lichtenberg ), and a comment popped up dripping scorn, insisting that Astrology Does Not Work -- and therefore, that's the end of the matter.
Well, of course astrology does not "work!" I never said it did.
But that doesn't mean it's not useful to an artist.
Why would such superstitious nonsense, such snake-oil-salesman fodder, such flimflammery as astrology be any kind of artistic tool?
Astronomy "works" -- it's real.
And astronomy is revealing some very important things about the universe and its structure. But it's still a work in progress.
Likewise, so is astrology a work in progress.
The advent of computers has helped both investigations.
So why is astrology being left in the dust?
Because Astrology has become (like Tarot) the tool of the grifters, snake-oil-salesmen, confidence men/women, bunko artists.
There is something in human nature that is absolutely convinced that knowing "the" future will fix everything that's wrong with a person's life.
That's one reason I love the new TV show FLASHFORWARD -- knowing a snatch of the future is more trouble than it's worth. The CATALYST moment for that show was the moment that almost everyone in the world experienced a flash of a future event in their personal life. It's also the concept. The economy of that is what makes it art.
The rest of the episodes deal with the following set of attributes of general human nature.
There is greed for power (over self, and others).
There is greed for free money (just send me $10 and I'll tell you your lucky day or what lottery numbers to play).
There is greed for love (free and otherwise). ($15 and you can make her love you)
There is greed for success. ($20 to learn where to move to get a job or better job).
There is greed for sex. ($25 for a charm to attract "women" (plural))
There is greed for good health (which is much harder to sneer at).
There is greed for alleviating anxiety.
There are 12 signs in the zodiac, each with a greed, and 10 "planets" or moving points, each with a greed. Greeds come in mixed shades and are sometimes hard to recognize as such.
Somewhere, symbolized by the placement of one or another point in your natal chart, you have a "greed point" -- almost everyone has something they can't get enough of; an emotional black hole, a neurotic need.
These "black holes" are also our greatest strengths.
In astrology, every sign and every planet and every "house" in a chart has a "positive" manifestation as a strength, and a "negative" manifestation, a malfunction, turning what is a shining WHITE HOLE into a bottomless BLACK HOLE (or vice versa) according to how the Soul incarnated to live that life uses those resources.
The Soul is here, on life's journey (the Hero's Journey) to transform the power represented by the natal chart points into positive or virtuous manifestations.
Power is very hard to handle. Each point in the natal chart describes a type of power available in this life, and how well the Soul has mastered handling that power in previous lives, and what is to learned in this life.
During the life, the planets continue to move, triggering off spurts of power from the stationary natal points. In other worse "live and learn." (I'm leaving out Solar Arcs and Progressions because I promised this wouldn't be technical. Use what you know, nevermind what I leave out.)
Some regard those spurts of power entering the life as "lessons" and others as "tests." Every religion has a different explanation for how life goes. If it's not a religion you grew up with, the explanations can seem confusing or ridiculous. But most religions seem to accept that there is some kind of purpose in life, some reason for our vicissitudes.
Astrologers look at life's patterns as just pure energy blasting into lives and either being handled by the Soul living the life, or not. And so sometimes the symbolism expresses itself as a vice (someone becomes an addict at a certain transit) or as a virtue (same transit, someone else becomes a doctor). Sometimes both doctor and addict result.
The virtues and vices of these symbols were described in detail by the famous astrology writer Grant Lewi, but that book is out of print.
Our shared instinct, assumption or neurosis is that if we could just fill that black hole UP once and for all, we could solve all our problems. After several failures at filling their black hole, most people are willing to listen to bunko artists who will "sell" them the promise or hope of filling that hole.
That's how bunko works. Every "mark" targeted in every scam (and the art in bunko is figuring which scam to run on which mark) is manipulated by the mark's greed.
If you have no greed in you, you are absolutely safe from ever being targeted as a "Mark" -- or if some beginner grifter tries a scam on you, you'll see right through it, or just turn and walk away because they can't get their hooks into your subconscious (where your greed lies).
That greed is just POWER entering your life at a time determined at birth when your life's clock began running. Think of a fire hose with water gushing out full strength. It takes a lot of strength, determination, cooperation with fellows, and discipline to keep that power pointed at the problem (fire). It could break the neighboring house's windows if it gets out of control.
"Well governed" = manifesting as the "virtue."
"Ill governed" = manifesting as the "vice."
It's the Soul that has to "govern" the power gushing into our lives.
But when it comes to our black holes, to our greedy spots, to our lazy spots, to our neuroses, to our simple one-step solution to all our problems by getting something for nothing, by finding the easy way out, by just saying you're sorry and starting over, by doing the sin planning to confess, or by offering the politically correct excuse "I'm sorry, Ma'am but I'm doing all I can," which simply means you refuse to expand your capabilities in order to do your job, when it comes to our black holes we are all absolutely convinced there's someone somewhere who knows the answer to all our problems.
And that's what the grifters are selling. Answers. The promise of filling the black hole.
Some grifters use astrology itself as the scam. Some use Tarot. Some use legitimate religion (or spinoff cults), or drugs, or "I'll make you a star," or self-publishing, or "post your script here for $50 and big production companies will read it," or whatever seems to fit the greed of the mark.
Each astrological symbol (planet, sign, house) represents a FORCE. It's just plain power.
Each soul acts as a conduit for the power they have at birth.
That life's pattern of power is described in the natal chart, and the bursts of power strewn throughout life are described via transits to those activated natal points.
The Soul funnels that plain, raw power into the world of manifestation, coloring and shaping it into objects, or events, via the four-step transformer process I described in detail in my 20 posts on the Tarot.
Those 20 posts describe the function of "Jacob's Ladder" -- the Wheatstone Bridge of the Spirit.
Here's the final post in the series, with links to work backwards through all 20.
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2007/12/10-pentacles-cake-comes-out-of-oven.html
The reason Astrology does not "work" is very simple.
Astrology is just a CLOCK. It tells you what time you were born, and thus what time it is "now."
Astrology can tell you that you have an appointment with the dentist, but it can not tell you that you will be there in time (or at all), or which dentist, or whether you have a cavity, or even whether you'll have any teeth left by the time the dentist appointment comes around.
Each astrological symbol and combination of symbols represents an infinite range of different possible manifestations.
Like the symbol X in algebra can have an assigned value, a calculated value, or a range of values - a different value in each equation - the astrological symbols are likewise "unknowns" until a specific Soul "lets them equal."
That variance in "value" does not make X useless in algebra.
That variance in "value" does not make Mars useless in astrology.
The astrological symbol does not contain any information about how any given set of energies WILL manifest.
Grifters try to convince you that they can tell you how energy will manifest in your life. Since astrology has been adopted as a grifter's tool, and since almost everyone who has fallen for that scam has been disappointed, therefore astrology has the reputation of "not working."
Well, it doesn't work (and can't and never was intended to "work") to foretell "the" future, or your future.
That's why it doesn't "work" -- it doesn't do what "they" say it will do.
But what it does do, it does superlatively, and everyone knows that in their heart of hearts just as anyone who's had to balance a checkbook knows how useful X is even in the simplest equation.
You don't need an astrologer to tell you what transit you're under or what it's good for.
Your BONES know. You feel it. Your soul knows.
You may not believe your soul when it yells at you, but you HEAR that still small voice inside repeating what the higher powers have sent you still small voice within when it tells you what the higher powers sent here to do. Or what you sent you here to do.
Everyone has this inner access. Everyone has this experience. We are all "the same." We have something inside that reads our astrology to us.
Astrology is about timing the events of life. Astrology is the beat-sheet of your life. You know those beats as well as you know the beats of your favorite TV show.
Astrology is the objective structure behind your life.
Your life has a genre, just like Blake Snyder's SAVE THE CAT! genres.
Life has a plot and a story that belong to the genre of your life.
As Shakespear pointed out we are all actors on a stage with our exits and entrances, and we each play many parts, trying to fill our black holes until we discover that "filling" doesn't get rid of black holes.
Very spiritually advanced, incredibly "together" people don't have this black hole because they've learned that filling doesn't work.
But we don't write stories about them because they have no INTERNAL CONFLICT, which is an essential ingredient in a protagonist and antagonist (the two characters the story is "about"). Sometimes a guru or tsadik may be an ancillary character in a story, but not the protagonist or antagonist who must learn the lessons the guru already knows but can't teach.
Such spiritually advanced folks (there's maybe a few dozen in the world at any time) have spent lifetimes mastering every sort of energy coming into life from every possible direction, made all the mistakes we're currently making, and mastered it all. They're here only to show us that "it" (whatever it is that's bugging you) can in fact be mastered.
They can't do it for us. And they can't teach us. They can only assure us that it's possible and ignite aspiration. Meeting such a character can be the Catalyst Beat (that's a transit to a Node or a Solar Arc to a mid-point involving the Nodes usually).
And you won't find those extremely advanced folks practicing "Astrology" as a means for foretelling your future or solving your problems for you. More likely they'll be trying to convince you that you should stand on your own feet.
Because, you see, "Astrology" actually does NOT WORK.
It is not a tool for foretelling "the" future or even "a" future. It can't solve your problems for you any more than Tarot can.
Astrology can't tell you anything you don't already know. But it can show you what other people know that you can use to tell them stories.
Just like Tarot, Astrology does not tell us how we're different from each other, which is all that really interests us.
When you're just trying to live your life (as opposed to writing stories for general audiences) you're not looking for the connections among all things, and the general solution to life for everyone.
All you want is to solve your own life.
It makes a difference to you whether you get the job, or not; whether you live or die; whether you get cancer or not; whether you become crippled in a car accident or not.
Astrology though can't tell the difference among these manifestations which is the only difference that matters to us. And so Astrology "does not work."
An astrological natal chart can't distinguish male from female or living from dead. Massive fame, fortune and success have the same signature as chronic spectacular failure, dramatic improbable accidents, and a woebegone pillar to post existence.
3) The power of Astrology as a plotting tool
Astrology's inability to distinguish between what seems to us living folks as polar opposites is what makes it useful to a writer.
Another attribute that makes Astrology useful to writers is the deep, innate, instinctual, subliminal awareness every human being has of the "beats" of his own life being tapped out by the transits of planets to the natal points in his chart.
Astrology describes what we have in common with each other, and how come it seems like we're all such unique individuals yet at the same time we're really all the same.
The same, but different.
Sound familiar?
That's the call that all big budget film producers send out every day. "I want something the same as (whatever), but DIFFERENT."
What are they saying, really?
Human nature, as described by Astrological natal charts, is all "the same, but different."
That's why we are willing to pay for entertainment that's "the same, but different" -- why we want permutations and variations on a single theme until it bores us to death.
Our natal chart is the "beat sheet" of our lives. We see it in ourselves and we see it in others we know personally, or even just read about in celebrity magazines.
"That's life," is a philosophical shrug for a reason.
We choose friends and life-partners -- or shun others -- because we can see the "shape" of their life in the series of events we know they've lived through. We know how they've handled certain energies, and therefore predict they will continue to handle such challenges that way. Therefore, we either throw in our lot with them, or shun them.
Because "that's life."
Learning a little astrology can help clarify these half-intuited patterns behind "life."
Bad luck comes in threes. The outer planets often transit a given point once in your lifetime -- but do it 3 times (because of retrogradation which is an optical illusion visible only from Earth's surface.)
Everyone knows the principles of astrology even if they've never heard the word astrology.
If you've read a lot of biographies, you know all you need to know about astrology. Or not. Some people need to have it quantified, laid out mathematically, clear and concise.
Astrology assembles and organizes "life's lessons" into a drumbeat that all readers and viewers will recognize.
Waltzes have a rhythm. Tango has a rhythm. Fox Trot has a rhythm.
The backbone of music is rhythm. The backbone of dance, ice dancing, synchronized swimming, ballet, every artform in motion has a rhythm.
A Life has a rhythm.
Life in general has multitudinous rhythms simultaneously. 12 Signs in the zodiac, 10 moving points, 12 Houses in each individual chart. Multiply it out factorial. All of this going on simultaneously. It's white noise.
But as I've said I learned early, the writer is a performing artist, an ARTIST first and foremost.
The job of the artist is to discern patterns invisible to others and portray those patterns to the audience in such a way as to increase the audience's understanding of what they can not see for themselves.
The artist brings out Eternal Truths and particularizes them to the current life-situation of the audience.
A writer can take one natal chart, create a character to live that chart's most prominent life-lesson, and walk that character through learning that lesson in such a way that a reader who has not lived that lesson can understand the lesson.
The reader may know other people who have lived or are living that lesson -- or perhaps have only heard of such a person. The reader will recognize this lesson and the lesson's BEATS.
Sometimes, a reader will actually learn a life-lesson from a story because in a past life they learned that lesson by dying for it, and here they can acquire the lesson vicariously. Reading such a novel that makes such an impression can be a CATALYST beat for a character's life.
If the writer gets the astrology correct, the very largest possible audience will be able to relate to that lesson as something familiar.
And that's another reason not to "cast" a natal chart for your characters. To grab the widest audience, you need to write about "Mr. Everyman." He may have Sun in Leo (as Gene Roddenberry did), but your character might need to have characteristics of Moon in several signs to connect with a broad audience.
If you specify too much, fewer and fewer people will believe the character or see his actions as plausible. So you scatter hints that some readers will see as Moon in Cancer and others will see as Moon in Aquarius, etc. If you hint broadly enough, any given reader can interpret the hint to make the character real to themselves.
So some characteristics have to be loud and clear, and very specific. Those are the ones that the story is about, the lesson being learned, and the tools to use to learn that lesson. Everything else has to be kept vague enough to let all the readers in.
That's what Leonard Nimoy taught us (while we were interviewing for the Bantam Paperback STAR TREK LIVES!) that actors call "open texture."
Think of DANCE.
If you know how to fox-trot, and someone invites you to dance to a tune you've never heard before -- but you recognize the fox-trot rhythm and you know the steps, you can spin right out onto the floor with a strange dance partner and fox-trot away. Or Mambo. Or Samba.
The fox-trot is a rhythm. The tune, the band, the singer, the dance floor's polish, the colored-light ambiance, the acoustics, the open ballroom doors, the cold breeze, the red velvet curtains, and the bar tender are all there making the experience unique. But it's a pleasant experience because YOU KNOW THE RHYTHM and that rhythm is not broken.
"Not broken" means your partner does not step on your toes. It also means the writer doesn't step on the reader's toes.
So a book or a movie is an artistic rendition of LIFE with a recognizable rhythm and a unique ambiance. The same, but different.
The reader only sees the details of the ambiance. The writer knows the whole thing "works" as art because of (and only because of) the rhythm being exactly on beat.
There are a lot of rhythms in music and in life.
There is one life rhythm that the pioneer astrologer Grant Lewi singled out and became famous for revealing in the early 20th century.
His books Heaven Knows What and Astrology for the Millions made him ultra-famous outside Astrologer's circles because they can "prove" to people who flat out disbelieve in astrology that astrology is REAL (not that "it works" because it doesn't, but that it relates to your own personal life in a spooky-unique way only you yourself can recognize).
The ability to absorb the proof that Grant Lewi offers depends on how self-honest you are, how self-aware.
There are times in life when you protect yourself against these hard truths because they would destroy you. So don't go around trying to "prove" astrology to anyone. When it's time, they'll find it and their own use for it (which is minimal unless they're artists).
So the one life-rhythm that Grant Lewi wrote an entire book about is the Saturn Cycle. Read that book, you'll recognize it in your own life and in the lives of people you know.
You could write thirty novels where the protagonist lives through the lessons of the Saturn cycle, and never repeat yourself and never bore your readers. (one I wrote is titled UNTO ZEOR, FOREVER)
But there's also Uranus.
And as I've mentioned so many times on this blog, there's NEPTUNE.
Neptune transits produce all the variants on "falling in love" (and out of it) that is the foundation of the entire Romance Genre and all its subgenres (including my own favorite SFR).
Where you are in your Saturn cycle when a Neptune transit hits can determine the flow of that romance.
Then Uranus (freedom; Aquarius) can operate at the same time. You get the cheating-on-the-wife syndrome mixed with cheating-on-the-mistress, and the wife running around on the side. If you can jump double-dutch, you can write these novels, and right in the middle of the mess the Soul Mate turns up which of course doesn't solve the problem.
Soul Mate turning up can be a Catalyst Beat.
Request for Divorce can be a Catalyst Beat.
Spouse dying can be a Catalyst Beat.
Being deployed to Afghanistan 2 months before the baby is due can be a Catalyst Beat.
Catalyst Beat material is made from transits of the slow moving outer planets to the inner Natal Planets or angles. These are great, common events everyone knows and understands given a unique personal dimension by the character to whom they happen.
Think of the woman who was being deployed to Afghanistan but had a 2 year old, and her backup plan for childcare fell through so she refused to go with her unit -- and got arrested for it and made national headlines. Catalyst Beat for some, crushing blow for others.
If your novel is about the Lawyer who handles the case and becomes famous because of it, the catalyst beat in his life is when he first hears of the case. The "debate" beat is whether he should take it. The Break Into Two beat is accepting the case. The Fun And Games beat is putting the case together. The Break Into Three is the courtroom scene.
See? You can already see the movie.
Each thread of life's beats is governed by a particular planet and moves with its own rhythm. Mercury and Venus go around the Sun every year, Mars about every 1.88 years, Jupiter 12 years, Saturn 28, Uranus about 84 years plus or minus, and the Neptune and Pluto probably won't make it in your lifetime. Think about that. Hear the beats. That's the beat that governs the music of the spheres.
You can make up interesting rhythms, and make up new ones nobody ever heard of. You can create new rhythms, and they will "reach" audiences just the way any new musical rhythm will.
If you want to reach a very wide audience very quickly and get your byline memorized, use a tried and true, old as the hills, rhythm.
It's the beat, man, it's the beat.
It tells you what options suddenly open before a particular kind of character at what age.
The "character" is the life + the soul, and the lessons the soul has already learned from living this life and maybe previous ones (how Wise is your character?).
The beat of life is the astrological natal chart. The soul is the entire orchestra playing a NEW SONG to that beat, and with most souls some of the instruments are playing a tad flat (the black hole; the weakness).
So now we know what a beat-sheet is, and can see how Astrology describes (as many other disciplines describe) the beat-sheet of a character's life.
We know that the "beat" underlying a story has to be recognizable and familiar (i.e. "the same") to the reader while the tune and the instruments can be experimental and unique, totally unfamiliar to the reader (i.e. "but different").
Or the tune and instruments may also be "familiar" (i.e. belonging to a certain well defined genre such as Romance, Horror, SF, Adventure, Western).
Characters fall into cliche's but are usable with a twist. The Hero. The Grifter. The Town Drunk. The Techie. The Wastrel. The Guru.
These become archetypes -- blank templates into which the writer pours original distinguishing characteristics.
Creating these variations is an art in itself.
4) A Question about identifying, concocting and placing the CATALYST (Blake Snyder's term) or Inciting Incident (general screenwriting term) or Springboard (TV writing term) from the beat sheet into your story.
OK, now to the point of this post.
The writer asked me how to concoct the CATALYST for a story.
How do you know what it is and where it happens in the character's life and where to put it in your story?
We know it happens on page 12 of a 110 page screenplay.
We know what it does. It changes EVERYTHING in that character's life that the character thought could never change.
The cheap-cheesy way to do it is to make the catalyst a threat to the protag's security. Some genres require that. "Women in Jeopardy" for example.
If you know enough technical astrology, you can see why certain genres become popular with certain age-groups at certain times. People gravitate toward permutations and combinations of themes because of the real life issues highlighted by their natal chart and transits, whether their own soul is living that issue or not. Their contemporaries are, and that makes it a concern.
I did a post on how Pluto has influenced mass tastes over generations. It's here:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2009/11/astrology-just-for-writers-part-6.html
And this one is the sequel misnamed - it's actually part 7
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2009/10/astrology-just-for-writers-pt-6.html
The general solution to finding the Catalyst Beat is that the catalyst is the first contact the protagonist has with the antagonist, the first moment the CONFLICT that will be resolved at THE END emerges and is defined for the audience/readership.
In ROMANCE, it's the point at which the two who will fall in love first meet or become aware of each other.
We all know that can result in love-at-first-sight, or hate-at-first-sight or even one or the other or both being totally oblivious.
In Mystery, it's the moment the first corpse is discovered. In open form Mystery, that's after the murder is watched by the reader/viewer. In closed form, that's the opening scene or chapter. We get a little introduction of the Detective whose problem it will be, sketching why this particular crime might mean something to him/her, then BOOM corpse-call.
As I've detailed in a number of other posts here on craft, you find the BEGINNING by finding the point at which the two forces that will conflict to a resolution in this story first come in contact.
That contact is the inciting incident, the Catalyst, the Springboard, the event which subsequently CAUSES everything else that HAPPENS. (things that happen are the plot; things characters learn because of what happens is the story; "because" provides motivation.
Here's where art gets involved.
In a short story, or even a TV show premise, the catalyst can take place BEFORE the story begins.
Take the TV series BURN NOTICE, and listen to the premise stated before each show. The main protagonist is a spy who has been "burned" - his records have been burned; he has no identity, no job, no money, and only whatever friends are still speaking to him to rely on. He does whatever job comes his way, even if it involves helping his mother's friends.
The show is about him trying to get reinstated.
The Catalyst is that he was burned. We never see that happen.
In the Action genre (which editors insist Sf is part of, but we all know it's not), the writer is supposed to open page 1 on ACTION, dive right into the middle of the story.
A good example of opening on combat as the CATALYST for a story is Marion Zimmer Bradley's Spellsword of Darkover which opens on a sword fight in which the protag's side is defeated and he, last standing, runs away -- the rest of the book is about dealing with the shame of that act of fleeing the battlefield.
More usually the action starts after the inciting incident, after the catalyst. The usual definition of catalyst is that NOTHING IS HAPPENING -- all's quiet on the western front -- silence, life is stagnated. BOOM something enters the life from outside, and catalyzes or incites the protagonist to action. In a film, we get 12 minutes (screenplays are rated at 1 page per minute of viewing) to figure out who the protag is and what their problem is (where the black hole in that character resides). Then on page 12 the Catalyst arrives.
I think the reason Snyder used the term CATALYST for this beat is that a catalyst does not participate in the chemical reaction but only provides the environment which makes the reaction inevitable.
So a "catalyst beat" can involve a character or event that really is "outside" the character's life or personality. The catalyst may not be affected by the protagonist's "reaction." It's a broader definition from "Inciting Incident." "Incident" however does imply that it is an event which is off the plot-line.
So after the catalysis, events are exploding, and the protagonist has to scramble to figure out what's going on while trying not to get killed by it.
In the modern Romance, the catalyst can happen before the opening, and the two already can know each other in some context. Now another catalyst drives the relationship in a new direction.
The catalyst should "incite" the protagonist to a) debate b) consult someone (B-story) c) launch into half-assed attempts to cope d) get scragged by the bad guys e) learn his lesson f) take correct definitive action and g) win (or not).
So the catalyst's first effect is to make the protag DOUBT what he knows to be true, what he has rested his whole life on with total tranquility (my Dad will never get old; my Dad doesn't have Alzheimer's).
The story is about re-orienting the character to his new world. Once that's done the story is over.
OK, which catalyst can blast which protag out of which mire in life?
How do you concoct an event that will affect THIS CHARACTER by addressing THAT conflict?
Remember, the Character is the Soul -- all the things that make him/her different from everyone else.
The plot is the NATAL CHART, the beat sheet of his life, that makes his experience of life the same as everyone else's.
Everyone in your readership or audience KNOWS the rhythm of the life-lesson this protag is going to fight his way through.
If you use the Saturn rhythm to teach a Neptune lesson, nobody will believe your story. It'll be tagged implausible.
If you concoct a Neptune (Romance) driven opening event to a Uranus (science) driven plot resolution, nobody will believe the story. That's not a "twist" but a violation of the fox-trot rhythm.
So you have to figure out which life-lesson you're teaching this character, and what the corresponding symbolism is. (Many writers can't do this consciously. But you can program your subconscious to concoct stories with this shape by consciously studying these disciplines and doing writing exercises using them. That's why I always suggest practicing on material that has no commercial value.)
So as you're outlining your story, you can pick from the menu of Vices or Virtues, the plethora of different sorts of manifestations of that planet's symbolism during such-and-so a transit.
But you can't pick at random. You have to take into account the Soul of this character -- what does the Soul know, what has the Soul mastered already, what lesson is this Soul resisting hard?
You can have 2 manifestations of the same transit at once.
Take Pluto transits conjunct the Natal Sun. The protag might be undergoing sanctification as a priest (I'm thinking of Katherine Kurtz's short story The Priesting of Arrilan), and at the same time be attacked violently because of some long-buried crime he committed (or sexual indiscretion).
The question to ask yourself when concocting the plot of a story you have had "an idea" for is, "I know this Soul - so what is the very WORST thing that can happen to him/her?"
Think of the most diabolical, test to destruction, event, and hurl that at the character as a Catalyst. Then find something even worse for the next event.
Find the character's "black hole" -- his weakness, his greed, his need, his torment. Find the Catalyst that awakens that greed and incites the character to reach out and grasp that hope. Once he's hooked, pull him through the story one agonizing inch at a time.
Remember, you can't "fill" a black hole. The life-lesson the protag undergoes has to turn that black hole "vice" (greed for example) into a white hole "virtue" (generosity for example).
The protag has to learn to take the incoming raw energy his natal chart diagrams and "ground it" in reality, create with it, make the world a better place with it.
So, to find a set of classic stories in archetypal form read Grant Lewi's classic pair of books, HEAVEN KNOWS WHAT and ASTROLOGY FOR THE MILLIONS which outline the natal resources typical of various sun/moon combinations, and how the Saturn cycle (and Uranus cycle) works the same for everyone, but always looks different depending on the Sun/Moon blend.
Heaven Knows What (Llewellyn's Popular Astrology Series)
But apparently ASTROLOGY FOR THE MILLIONS (with the Saturn cycle described) is out of print right now. So here's Amazon's Grant Lewi page
Grant Lewi's books
You won't find the treasure-trove of usable writer's plots and life-beat-sheets in just any other Astrology books, but many of them do have useful summaries. Linda Goodman's Sun Signs is another good one.
I'm citing Grant Lewi because his explanations are very SIMPLE and aimed at non-astrologers. I wouldn't want you to have to learn astrology in order to do this simple bit of writing craft.
Also Grant Lewi wasn't a grifter selling astrology as snake-oil. His work, is, however maddeningly sexist and infuriatingly obsolete. For a writer those two traits can be a big plus!
Astrology is the beat sheet of life.
Grant Lewi's work shows how that can be useful to a writer in a unique way (I own a lot of astrology books. Lewi is cited by many but paralleled by none). Noel Tyl's work is way too technical for this.
Astrology can tell you what the lessons to be learned are, and at what age those lessons will be driven home by events (i.e. what the timing of a catalyst event for a particular person would be and what sort of energy would carry that event into the life's pattern).
Mark Schulman's Karmic Astrology series gives very neat life-plots that will ring-true to any reader who walks a mile in your character's moccasins. My favorite is The Moon's Nodes and Reincarnation:
Karmic Astrology, Volume 1: The Moon's Nodes and Reincarnation (Karmic Astrology)
It doesn't matter whether you "believe" in astrology or any of this. The summations of life-stories have been compiled over thousands of years, sifted, refined, distilled into patterns, archetypes, that any reader of your books will instantly RECOGNIZE as "real" -- and therefore be able to suspend disbelief about the rest of your fantasy world.
Using astrology in this "off the nose" way provides verisimilitude, yes, and plausibility. In professorial circles that's called an "objective correlative" -- a character the reader can become, identify with, and aspire to be, pretend to be, or really enjoy hating.
Using astrology this way allows your reader to experience what it feels like to have their black-hole shrunk if not vanquished. Of course, as I've said many times, astrology isn't the only study that can help a writer create this effect. In fact, it's likely the least used of all such tools. But there's a reason there are so many astrologers and Tarot readers in Hollywood.
Astrology and Tarot are about the art of life, not life itself. It's about the art of living, not living itself.
Astrology can not tell you what the events of a life actually are or how any given type of person will respond to a given challenge.
For example: some people respond to a given 6th House transit by attaining employment success, and others respond to the same transit by becoming critically ill. Still others respond by experiencing both these events simultaneously (they make great protagonists; Harry Dresden of THE DRESDEN FILES is that kind of character).
The part of your destiny that matters to you is not written in the stars. The part of the story that engages the reader is not written in the stars.
The part that is written in the stars is the rhythm, rhyme and REASON.
The part that's written in the stars is the part the reader (just like real people living real lives) will never know is there (if you do it right). The part that's written in the stars is the poetry. It makes your bone marrow shiver to apprehend this simple fact.
People who know Astrology is bunkum know that bad luck comes in threes, and that age 29 is a bear to live through. They know that Lady Luck (Jupiter) is fickle. They know that people commit crimes of passion (Mars and Pluto) and it's a once-in-a-lifetime event. But of course, astrology is bunk and if you use the word, everything you say is invalidated. Still they know the happiest year of their life (Solar Arc Venus to the Natal Sun -- the movie DIRTY DANCING) was unique.
Do you as a writer really want your readers to know what astrology is really good for?
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
Tuesday, December 08, 2009
Astrology Just For Writers Part 8: The Beat Sheet
Labels:
astrology,
Beat Sheet,
Blake Snyder,
Catalyst Beat,
Flashforward,
Marion Zimmer Bradley,
screenwriting,
Tarot,
The Dresden Files,
Tuesday
Monday, December 07, 2009
Settings, SFR, and Spiffyness
I've been absolutely thrilled to see the responses to The Galaxy Express' SFR Holiday Blitz. I've also been absolutely slammed with computer troubles and flu/cold/bronchitis, which is why you've not seen me here in a good while (all this befalling me, yes, after a triple-deadline). Bronchitis I'm rather used it--it's something that's plagued me (pun intended) since I've been in my twenties. More than twenty years ago. Computers invaded my life at about the same time (hmmm, wonder if there's a correlation?) but those troubles have become worse with age, while the bronchitis has rolled merrily along without much change.
I sometimes wonder if the computer troubles I face aren't yet more fodder for my plots and characters. As one reviewer said about my Finders Keepers:
This latest crash (maybe the motherboard--we're still not sure) resulted in a computer that refused to function under Windows XP but is chugging along nicely (so far) under Windows 7. I can't believe it's solely because Mr. Gates needed my $300 last week.
But I digress. I wanted to touch on settings in SFR because of a blog Heather from The Galaxy Express noted a week or so back, in which several readers commented on why they did--or didn't--read SFR. One poster noted that in reading the opening chapter of my Shades of Dark, she found technology was far too evident and took up much descriptive space.
Which, of course, made me sit back with my usual WTF? I wanted to post and ask her--I didn't, for a variety of reasons, two being bronchitis and limping computer--if she would have been equally as disconcerted by the description of the castle in a medieval romance, or the scent of leather and the snuffle of horses in a western romance? If she reads chick-lit, would an opening scene listing the character's designer shoes overflowing her closet bother her? If she reads mystery, would she prefer the details of the murder scene to be left out?
In SFR, the description of a ship's bridge or command consoles are my character's closet full of Gucci and Prada products, they are the flickering torches set into the rusty metal sconces angling out from the moss-covered stone wall.
Here's the opening paragraph from the prologue in Mary Jo Putney's Silk and Secrets:
As I've also often noted, I still haven't a clue in a bucket how to pronounce reticule. But it doesn't stop me from reading historicals and I don't ask the author to replace it with the word pocketbook.
Someone enlighten me as to why muzzein is acceptable and GA-7 beacon isn't. Please.
~Linnea
Linnea Sinclair
// Interstellar Adventure Infused with Romance//
Available Now from Bantam: Hope's Folly, Book 3 in the Dock Five Universe
Coming March 2010: Rebels and Lovers (Book 4)
http://www.linneasinclair.com/
I sometimes wonder if the computer troubles I face aren't yet more fodder for my plots and characters. As one reviewer said about my Finders Keepers:
[T]he vast majority of this novel is classic space opera, the sort of story in which rough-hewn pilots of either gender chug along space lanes in rickety old ships held together with duct tape, and sinister galactic empires plot against all and sundry for power. Not for Linnea Sinclair the spiffy, cutting edge man-machine futures of Ken MacLeod, Greg Egan or Charles Stross.Maybe one of the reasons I don't do spiffy is that I've yet to meet a chunk of technology that permits me to experience spiffy. I have no faith that any universe--future or otherwise--with be trouble-free when it comes to technology. Okay, I'll 'fess up. I do have things break down on board the ships in my books because it ramps up the conflict. But I also have them break down because I'm fairly confident that's an event to which most of my readers can relate. (If you've never had a computer melt-down, please tell me where you live so I can move next door to you. Which means one of two things will then happen: either my computers will work flawlessly from that point, or yours will crash with gleeful regularity.)
This latest crash (maybe the motherboard--we're still not sure) resulted in a computer that refused to function under Windows XP but is chugging along nicely (so far) under Windows 7. I can't believe it's solely because Mr. Gates needed my $300 last week.
But I digress. I wanted to touch on settings in SFR because of a blog Heather from The Galaxy Express noted a week or so back, in which several readers commented on why they did--or didn't--read SFR. One poster noted that in reading the opening chapter of my Shades of Dark, she found technology was far too evident and took up much descriptive space.
Which, of course, made me sit back with my usual WTF? I wanted to post and ask her--I didn't, for a variety of reasons, two being bronchitis and limping computer--if she would have been equally as disconcerted by the description of the castle in a medieval romance, or the scent of leather and the snuffle of horses in a western romance? If she reads chick-lit, would an opening scene listing the character's designer shoes overflowing her closet bother her? If she reads mystery, would she prefer the details of the murder scene to be left out?
In SFR, the description of a ship's bridge or command consoles are my character's closet full of Gucci and Prada products, they are the flickering torches set into the rusty metal sconces angling out from the moss-covered stone wall.
Here's the opening paragraph from the prologue in Mary Jo Putney's Silk and Secrets:
Prologue
Autumn 1840
Night was falling rapidly, and a slim crescent moon hung low in the cloudless indigo sky. In the village the muezzin called the faithful to prayers, and the haunting notes twined with the tantalizing aroma of baking bread and the more acrid scent of smoke. It was a homey, peaceful scene such as the woman had observed countless times before, yet as she paused by the window, she experienced a curious moment of dislocation, an inability to accept the strange fate that had led her to this alien land.
Now, Putney is not only one lovely and classy lady, she's one helluva fabulous and well-known author. She writes--among other genres--historical romances. If she puts in the cloudless indigo sky, the tantalizing aroma of baking bread, and the acrid scent of smoke, it's because these details are not only important, they're expected.
Why, then, the problem with:
A stream of red data on a blue-tinged screen to my left snagged my attention. We were on the outer fringes of an Imperial GA-7's signal—a data relay drone normally not accessible to renegade ships like the Karn, and definitely not at this distance. But this was the Karn, Sully's ghost ship that routinely defied government regulations and just as routinely ignored ship's specs. So I slipped into the vacant seat at communications and executed the grab filter with an ease that even Sully would have been proud of.Okay, maybe you've never seen a GA-7 beacon. But I've never seen a muezzin. So therein resides my rationale behind my usual WTF when I read comments that "SFR terms are too confusing."
Captain Chasidah Bergren. One-time pride of the Sixth Fleet and staunch defender of the Empire, illegally hacking into a GA-7 beacon.
As I've also often noted, I still haven't a clue in a bucket how to pronounce reticule. But it doesn't stop me from reading historicals and I don't ask the author to replace it with the word pocketbook.
Someone enlighten me as to why muzzein is acceptable and GA-7 beacon isn't. Please.
~Linnea
Linnea Sinclair
// Interstellar Adventure Infused with Romance//
Available Now from Bantam: Hope's Folly, Book 3 in the Dock Five Universe
Coming March 2010: Rebels and Lovers (Book 4)
http://www.linneasinclair.com/
Labels:
craft of fiction writing,
linnea sinclair,
science fiction romance,
shades of dark,
world building
Sunday, December 06, 2009
Alien Romances Is Part Of The Galaxy Express's SFR Holiday Blitz
THOSE WHO WISH TO BE ENTERED IN THE SFR HOLIDAY BLITZ SHOULD ADD A COMMENT TO THIS POST.
See the sidebar for cover art of the prizes to be won in the SFR Holiday Blitz on this blog.
*****
The Galaxy Express streaked onto my radar with Heather's very first post on May 19th, 2008 which was titled "All Aboard -- We're Ready To Launch", had witty subheadings such as "It Takes A Village To Maintain A Lunar Outpost" and "A Wormhole By Any Other Name..."
I did enjoy Heather's scholarly nod to "Romeo and Juliet"!
The Wormhole paragraph included a live link to this alien romances blog, which was very courteous and kind of Heather, and which resulted in a Google Alert.
I also rather enjoyed thinking about the village. Does anyone else remember a rock group called "The Global Village Trucking Company"?
Moreover, my favorite novel by Isaac Asimov is "The Gods Themselves" and one of the three parts involves a love story on a lunar outpost. What was yours?
How did you discover The Galaxy Express ?
Do you remember which of Heather's posts set fire to your imagination? If so, please tell the story in the comments here, below the official contest announcement which I quote:
Other blogs:
The Galaxy Express (which started the phenomenon, and could entertain you for hours!)
http://www.thegalaxyexpress.net
Dirty Sexy Books
You are here:
Alien Romances http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com
Visitors can also see almost all the books that have been donated in the "Biggest Bang" "Listmania" on Amazon... We'd really appreciate some "Helpful" votes.
Moreover, if any science-fiction-romance lovers who are signed in to their Amazon accounts click through to the book pages to read the reviews, excerpts, and what-have-you, we'd very much appreciate it if readers would either check or write in tags such as "sfr" or "science fiction romance" to help other readers find great examples of this subgenre.
Thank you for your visit, your comments, and your support of SFR.
Rowena Cherry
SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com/
on behalf of the alien romances authors
See the sidebar for cover art of the prizes to be won in the SFR Holiday Blitz on this blog.
*****
The Galaxy Express streaked onto my radar with Heather's very first post on May 19th, 2008 which was titled "All Aboard -- We're Ready To Launch", had witty subheadings such as "It Takes A Village To Maintain A Lunar Outpost" and "A Wormhole By Any Other Name..."
I did enjoy Heather's scholarly nod to "Romeo and Juliet"!
The Wormhole paragraph included a live link to this alien romances blog, which was very courteous and kind of Heather, and which resulted in a Google Alert.
I also rather enjoyed thinking about the village. Does anyone else remember a rock group called "The Global Village Trucking Company"?
Moreover, my favorite novel by Isaac Asimov is "The Gods Themselves" and one of the three parts involves a love story on a lunar outpost. What was yours?
How did you discover The Galaxy Express ?
Do you remember which of Heather's posts set fire to your imagination? If so, please tell the story in the comments here, below the official contest announcement which I quote:
The holiday season upon us, and that means 2010 is simmering just below the horizon. Start your New Year off right with a chance to score a free read in one of the hottest up and coming genres around—Science Fiction Romance!Here’s the scoop: 12 bloggers have teamed up with 17 authors for your chance to win over 30 SFR books. Whether you’re new to the genre, or a fan looking to add to her collection, this event is for you.Best of all, it’s dead simple to enter: There are no quizzes to answer, no hoops to jump.For your chance to win all of the books listed in the sidebar by Jacqueline Lichtenberg, Linnea Sinclair, Susan Sizemore, Margaret L Carter, Susan Kearney, and Rowena Cherry all you have to do is leave a comment for this post.Print book prizes are limited to U.S. residents unless otherwise stated.The deadline to enter is midnight on Friday, December 11, 2009. The winner will be announced on Saturday, December 12, 2009.But don’t stop here! Increase your chances of winning even more books by visiting all of the participating blogs.
It’s easy: Just click on one of the links to the participating bloggers below. Make sure to leave a comment on the post titled “SFR Holiday Blitz.” From there, you can then jump to the next blog. There’s a wide variety of books to win so why miss out?
Other blogs:
The Galaxy Express (which started the phenomenon, and could entertain you for hours!)
http://www.thegalaxyexpress.net
Dirty Sexy Books
Ella Drake http://elladrake.blogspot.com
Enduring Romance http://enduringromance.blogspot.com
Flying Whale Productions http://maryfitz.typepad.com/my_weblog
Lisa Paitz Spindler http://www.lisapaitzspindler.com/blog
Love Romance Passion http://www.loveromancepassion.com
SciFiGuy http://www.scifiguy.ca
Spacefreighters Lounge http://spacefreighters.blogspot.com
Take It To The Stars http://takeittothestars.blogspot.com
Queen of the Frozen North http://www.cathypegau.blogspot.com
You are here:
Alien Romances http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com
Visitors can also see almost all the books that have been donated in the "Biggest Bang" "Listmania" on Amazon... We'd really appreciate some "Helpful" votes.
Moreover, if any science-fiction-romance lovers who are signed in to their Amazon accounts click through to the book pages to read the reviews, excerpts, and what-have-you, we'd very much appreciate it if readers would either check or write in tags such as "sfr" or "science fiction romance" to help other readers find great examples of this subgenre.
Thank you for your visit, your comments, and your support of SFR.
Rowena Cherry
SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com/
on behalf of the alien romances authors
Thursday, December 03, 2009
Darkover
Over Thanksgiving weekend, Friday through Sunday, we attended the Darkover Grand Council north of Baltimore. It’s a small con, just a few hundred people, slanted heavily toward panels of interest to writers. Some topics this year included “Writing and Editing: Can (or Should) You Do Both?”, “What Do Authors Owe to Their Readers?”, and “Ultimate Evil,” as well as the usual sessions on food in fantasy, religion in fantasy, and research. The musical track has thinned somewhat in recent years, but there are still several regular performers singing throughout the weekend as well as the big Clam Chowder concert on Saturday night. Clam Chowder also leads a group sing of the Hallelujah Chorus in the hotel atrium at midnight on Saturday. We could see and hear them from our room. Sadly, competition in the costume contest has shrunk so much in recent years that it was discontinued. The Friday night substitute was a “costume optional” ball that, for the few minutes I looked in on it, didn’t draw many participants.
I participated in two sessions on vampires. With Scott MacMillan, I took part in a discussion of whether vampires can be good. Several people in the audience maintained that a vampire’s superiority over and distance from human beings, even if the vampire started out human, would inevitably lead him to think of us as mere prey animals. I tried to uphold a more optimistic viewpoint, especially in opposition to the implication that because they belong to a higher species, it’s OKAY for vampires to use us however they want. Would we consider a more advanced extraterrestrial species justified in treating us that way? Would most of us think it’s all right to eat dolphins if it’s eventually proven that dolphins have intelligence and self-awareness equal to ours?
My other panel was a group discussion on “The Twilight Phenomenon.” The panelists and most of the people in the audience agreed that there are lots better samples of vampire fiction (and vampire romance) out there but discussed reasons why this particular series has such a powerful appeal to its target readership. I’m still a bit bemused by the phenomenon; the Twilight series caught on with readers under its own power, not (originally) by way of publisher hype. Yet there are equally good (or better) YA vampire series that haven’t enjoyed such mega-popularity. L. J. Smith’s Vampire Diaries series, for instance, has been around a long time but didn’t get its well-deserved acclaim from the general public, including a prime-time TV show, until the Twilight craze paved the way.
Margaret L. Carter
Carter's Crypt
I participated in two sessions on vampires. With Scott MacMillan, I took part in a discussion of whether vampires can be good. Several people in the audience maintained that a vampire’s superiority over and distance from human beings, even if the vampire started out human, would inevitably lead him to think of us as mere prey animals. I tried to uphold a more optimistic viewpoint, especially in opposition to the implication that because they belong to a higher species, it’s OKAY for vampires to use us however they want. Would we consider a more advanced extraterrestrial species justified in treating us that way? Would most of us think it’s all right to eat dolphins if it’s eventually proven that dolphins have intelligence and self-awareness equal to ours?
My other panel was a group discussion on “The Twilight Phenomenon.” The panelists and most of the people in the audience agreed that there are lots better samples of vampire fiction (and vampire romance) out there but discussed reasons why this particular series has such a powerful appeal to its target readership. I’m still a bit bemused by the phenomenon; the Twilight series caught on with readers under its own power, not (originally) by way of publisher hype. Yet there are equally good (or better) YA vampire series that haven’t enjoyed such mega-popularity. L. J. Smith’s Vampire Diaries series, for instance, has been around a long time but didn’t get its well-deserved acclaim from the general public, including a prime-time TV show, until the Twilight craze paved the way.
Margaret L. Carter
Carter's Crypt
Wednesday, December 02, 2009
Rion is out in stores
Hi Everyone,
RION is out in stores now. And I'm pleased to say they are now in Targets, too. But if you can't find a copy, you can always order on line.
I'm pleased to announce that the book is getting excellent reviews. So please pick up a copy and if you missed LUCAN, it's still available, both in stores and online.
POWER IN THEIR PASSIONN
Marisa Rourke is a beautiful, fearless telepath who tames dragonshapers on Earth. Rion is a tall, dark, and sexy space explorer whose home planet is a galaxy away. The attraction between them is undeniable, but Rion is hiding a desperate secret that will change Marisa’s life forever.
DANGER IN THEIR TOUCH
Marisa’s gift is the only way Rion can communicate with his people, enslaved by a powerful enemy. He knows that kidnapping her is wrong, but saving his planet is worth sparking the fiery clairvoyant’s fury. Yet hotter—and more explosive—is the psychic bond growing between Marisa and Rion. Could their passion be the key to freeing Rion’s people? Only if he and Marisa can discover how to channel their desire . . . before a vicious enemy destroys them all.
Read more at my web site www.susankearney.com
Tuesday, December 01, 2009
Glimpse of a Reviewer's Life
On Amazon, you'll see the little VINE VOICE icon by my reviews because I'm in the program where they offer (by an email list) books and other things to reviewers, free, and in turn the reviewer has to review 75% of what they get.
So far I've been lucky and could review 100% of what I've chosen from their list.
I'm also the Science Fiction and Fantasy reviewer for a paper magazine, and do a monthly column with a New Age slant -- so some Paranormal Romances and Historicals with magic fit into the column.
Lots of paper publishers send me ARCs (advance reading copies -- a bound POD printout with typos glaring and no cover art), and Hardcovers and Mass Market paperbacks - and even Trade Paperbacks.
There's no way any reviewer can possibly read every book that's published! So we specialize.
Now I'm not complaining here. We're talking the joy of a pig in mud, a puppy scratched behind the ears, a ghost discovering a way to talk to the living!
This part of my life is currently pure ecstacy.
But -- isn't there always a but? That's what makes stories, you know.
BUT!!!
As sales volume goes down, the number of titles in each category has been going up. Worse yet, as genre walls dissolve, bits and pieces of what I specialize in (impossible Relationships that change reality) are now turning up in several genres -- where numbers of titles proliferate.
With the addition of small press, epublishers, and self-publishers, it is a total explosion of titles to read.
I try to give authors who send me copies direct, editors who send ARCs for cover quotes, and general ARCs preference, but titles I really REALLY want to read are piling up.
Here's a picture of 6 months of pile-up -- (this does not include all the stacks and stacks of books I have read, some of which are already reviewed on http://www.simegen.com/reviews/rereadablebooks/ PLUS a 3 ft. stack of to-review books I've already read not shown here)
But my "beat" also includes SF/F on TV and film.
Have you noticed how many "impossible relationship" driven TV shows there are this year?
The last few years I could watch everything (Except for Buffy and Angel, pretty much only on the scifi channel which is now gone, renamed syfy and just not the same). I only watch 6 hours of TV shows a week. That's all the time I have, and it's usually while doing something else because I really don't have six hours a week to myself.
Suddenly, I'm recording about 10 hours of TV every week, and still only watching 6, so my DVR has overflowed and started not-recording shows on my scheduled recordings.
And that's not counting FILMS.
I know there are things I'm missing, important things. I scan goodreads.com and amazon.com Communities, facebook, and twitter for a perspective on trends and look for how trends in fiction mirror trends in our real-world problems (and I find a lot I haven't space to discuss even on this blog).
Trends are my main focus, the big picture, the hidden significance of the microscopic. An obscure book here, a self-published book there, an Independent film, a story in Variety, a headline in the New York Times, a tidbit from Locus, a sudden best seller, or a prize winner that didn't sell so well being made into a TV Show (can you name 3 such shows on TV this year? Include cable channels.)
There is something going on now that needs further analysis. I believe what we're seeing in today's fiction has significance on a scale of thousands of years of human history - perhaps tens of thousands.
There are huge problems facing us, like Global Warming (is it real? Should we do anything about it? If so, what? Is anyone lying or fudging the data? What does it really mean? Who's hiding what from whom? Or "never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.")
There's the increasing pace of epidemics bursting across species lines.
There's the species die-off that so many heroic people are trying to slow or prevent.
Perhaps there are new species evolving that haven't made headlines yet.
There's the threat of nuclear war again.
There's the increasing UV concentrations, rainfall shifts, and infectious plant diseases, diseases of the bee populations, all limiting the tons per acre of food we can produce. There's food supply contamination. There's pesticide and fertilizer chemical contamination affecting the fertility of animals, plants and people. There's food-distribution methods leaching nutrients from warehoused food. And there's hitting the global limit on how much more farmland we can put into service, plus the problem of CO2 emissions as we increase acreage cultivated.
And then there is the ever increasing power supply requirements of our ever-increasing global population.
Back in the 1950's there was a rash of SF stories about how civilization would collapse - giving rise to the genre called "post-apocalyptic" -- of which my Sime~Gen universe is an example, though of the more optimistic variety. Sime~Gen stories generally focus on a thousand years later, and humans of good spirit and good will put together a viable civilization again. Against all odds, they succeed, overcome, thrive and prosper because of love. They do more than restore lost civilization. They advance humankind.
Star Trek, too, is post-apocalyptic and optimistic -- for in Star Trek, Earth's history includes a vicious breakdown of civilization in the 1990's called The Genetic Wars. But everything comes out OK.(except for Ricardo Mantalban ).
Today the biggest trend is Urban Fantasy (turning up in every genre from Mystery to Historical) showing contemporary culture oblivious to the magical threats seething below the surface. Our Hero has to protect us from those threats and keep us oblivious.
It's not about "rebuilding" civilization, winning against odds, advancing where No One Has Gone Before. It's about preventing catastrophe, holding the status quo.
And that may be the view of an entire generation currently growing up, that all the problems that beset our world are inherently unsolvable even by the best science there is (maybe because scientists lie; they know something important they're not telling us? Secrets. Conspiracies. Darkness.).
Holding the status quo seems to me at the moment, the single biggest trend in fiction, a trend that is so big we (who absorb fiction one novel, series, or TV show at a time) can't see it as a pattern.
If the best we can hope for is holding the status quo, then we're living in a horror film. The Horror Genre definition is "the hero can't win - a draw is the best you can expect."
The Star Trek universe conception was that humanity not only can win, but WILL.
Today our world concept seems to be "hold on tight or we'll slip backwards."
If we don't change that attitude, it could become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Consider how the USA (yes, I know some readers of this blog aren't in the USA) is handling Iraq and Afghanistan - Israel and the Palestinians. Consider the issues fueling those controversies and parse them into the paradigm of "hold on tight or we'll slip backwards."
Which way is "forwards?" Point me at a novel or TV show that blazes a trail "forwards."
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
So far I've been lucky and could review 100% of what I've chosen from their list.
I'm also the Science Fiction and Fantasy reviewer for a paper magazine, and do a monthly column with a New Age slant -- so some Paranormal Romances and Historicals with magic fit into the column.
Lots of paper publishers send me ARCs (advance reading copies -- a bound POD printout with typos glaring and no cover art), and Hardcovers and Mass Market paperbacks - and even Trade Paperbacks.
There's no way any reviewer can possibly read every book that's published! So we specialize.
Now I'm not complaining here. We're talking the joy of a pig in mud, a puppy scratched behind the ears, a ghost discovering a way to talk to the living!
This part of my life is currently pure ecstacy.
But -- isn't there always a but? That's what makes stories, you know.
BUT!!!
As sales volume goes down, the number of titles in each category has been going up. Worse yet, as genre walls dissolve, bits and pieces of what I specialize in (impossible Relationships that change reality) are now turning up in several genres -- where numbers of titles proliferate.
With the addition of small press, epublishers, and self-publishers, it is a total explosion of titles to read.
I try to give authors who send me copies direct, editors who send ARCs for cover quotes, and general ARCs preference, but titles I really REALLY want to read are piling up.
Here's a picture of 6 months of pile-up -- (this does not include all the stacks and stacks of books I have read, some of which are already reviewed on http://www.simegen.com/reviews/rereadablebooks/ PLUS a 3 ft. stack of to-review books I've already read not shown here)
But my "beat" also includes SF/F on TV and film.
Have you noticed how many "impossible relationship" driven TV shows there are this year?
The last few years I could watch everything (Except for Buffy and Angel, pretty much only on the scifi channel which is now gone, renamed syfy and just not the same). I only watch 6 hours of TV shows a week. That's all the time I have, and it's usually while doing something else because I really don't have six hours a week to myself.
Suddenly, I'm recording about 10 hours of TV every week, and still only watching 6, so my DVR has overflowed and started not-recording shows on my scheduled recordings.
And that's not counting FILMS.
I know there are things I'm missing, important things. I scan goodreads.com and amazon.com Communities, facebook, and twitter for a perspective on trends and look for how trends in fiction mirror trends in our real-world problems (and I find a lot I haven't space to discuss even on this blog).
Trends are my main focus, the big picture, the hidden significance of the microscopic. An obscure book here, a self-published book there, an Independent film, a story in Variety, a headline in the New York Times, a tidbit from Locus, a sudden best seller, or a prize winner that didn't sell so well being made into a TV Show (can you name 3 such shows on TV this year? Include cable channels.)
There is something going on now that needs further analysis. I believe what we're seeing in today's fiction has significance on a scale of thousands of years of human history - perhaps tens of thousands.
There are huge problems facing us, like Global Warming (is it real? Should we do anything about it? If so, what? Is anyone lying or fudging the data? What does it really mean? Who's hiding what from whom? Or "never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.")
There's the increasing pace of epidemics bursting across species lines.
There's the species die-off that so many heroic people are trying to slow or prevent.
Perhaps there are new species evolving that haven't made headlines yet.
There's the threat of nuclear war again.
There's the increasing UV concentrations, rainfall shifts, and infectious plant diseases, diseases of the bee populations, all limiting the tons per acre of food we can produce. There's food supply contamination. There's pesticide and fertilizer chemical contamination affecting the fertility of animals, plants and people. There's food-distribution methods leaching nutrients from warehoused food. And there's hitting the global limit on how much more farmland we can put into service, plus the problem of CO2 emissions as we increase acreage cultivated.
And then there is the ever increasing power supply requirements of our ever-increasing global population.
Back in the 1950's there was a rash of SF stories about how civilization would collapse - giving rise to the genre called "post-apocalyptic" -- of which my Sime~Gen universe is an example, though of the more optimistic variety. Sime~Gen stories generally focus on a thousand years later, and humans of good spirit and good will put together a viable civilization again. Against all odds, they succeed, overcome, thrive and prosper because of love. They do more than restore lost civilization. They advance humankind.
Star Trek, too, is post-apocalyptic and optimistic -- for in Star Trek, Earth's history includes a vicious breakdown of civilization in the 1990's called The Genetic Wars. But everything comes out OK.(except for Ricardo Mantalban ).
Today the biggest trend is Urban Fantasy (turning up in every genre from Mystery to Historical) showing contemporary culture oblivious to the magical threats seething below the surface. Our Hero has to protect us from those threats and keep us oblivious.
It's not about "rebuilding" civilization, winning against odds, advancing where No One Has Gone Before. It's about preventing catastrophe, holding the status quo.
And that may be the view of an entire generation currently growing up, that all the problems that beset our world are inherently unsolvable even by the best science there is (maybe because scientists lie; they know something important they're not telling us? Secrets. Conspiracies. Darkness.).
Holding the status quo seems to me at the moment, the single biggest trend in fiction, a trend that is so big we (who absorb fiction one novel, series, or TV show at a time) can't see it as a pattern.
If the best we can hope for is holding the status quo, then we're living in a horror film. The Horror Genre definition is "the hero can't win - a draw is the best you can expect."
The Star Trek universe conception was that humanity not only can win, but WILL.
Today our world concept seems to be "hold on tight or we'll slip backwards."
If we don't change that attitude, it could become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Consider how the USA (yes, I know some readers of this blog aren't in the USA) is handling Iraq and Afghanistan - Israel and the Palestinians. Consider the issues fueling those controversies and parse them into the paradigm of "hold on tight or we'll slip backwards."
Which way is "forwards?" Point me at a novel or TV show that blazes a trail "forwards."
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
Labels:
fantasy,
Jacqueline Lichtenberg,
Paranormal Romance,
science fiction,
Sime~Gen Book Reviews,
Tuesday
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Science Fiction Romance and The Comedy Of Manners
Almost any plot or subgenre of literature can be reinvigorated as science fiction.
Westerns are a natural. You simply give black hats to some of your fellow Space-Ark-mates, or colonists and substitute aliens for the gentlemen in war bonnets.
Better still, make the alien equivalents of Native Americans the heroes. Or, make all of humankind walk in the shoes of all the aboriginal peoples our own colonists have wronged in the past, and present the incoming aliens as pilgrim fathers or conquistadors. Ah, but that isn't the stuff of Romance. Moreover, the natives win in "Independence Day".
You can have Quest plots (The Holy Grail in outer space... and very often, as with the Da Vinci Code, the holy grail in sfr is a fertile, pure young woman), Discovery plots, Adventure plots, Pursuit plots, Rescue plots, Mysteries (including murder mysteries), Rivalry plots, Revenge plots, Underdog plots, Transformation and/or Metamorphosis Plots, Beauty and the Beast, Coming Of Age, Who's Coming For Dinner (prejudice/forbidden love)....
The one plot that may not translate so well into an alien romance is The Comedy Of Manners... which in turn might be described as a highly entertaining, watered down Morality Play. (Erring protagonists don't die, they just end up married till death do them part.)
Yes, I watched "Sense And Sensibility" last night, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. The cast included Emma Thompson, Tim Rickman, and a rather hunched Hugh Grant. I wonder how long it will be before Emma Thompson does us (us Romantics) a huge favor and makes movies of some of the Georgette Heyer novels.
The trouble with Jane Austen and Georgette Heyer --when it comes to space travel-- is that their plots and heroines don't kick butt. They are rewarded for not kicking butts, nuts, or giving tongue lashings to anyone. Heyer heroines, actually, are more dynamic. Some of them do have violent tempers, like Leonie, and they shoot men (or want very much to do so) and fight with swords, and cross dress (like Viola and a few other Shakespearean heroines), and drive racy vehicles too fast.
A Comedy Of Manners depends on the heroine wanting to marry a gentleman, but not being able to tell him so. She is too well-mannered, and he requires more encouragement than she offers.
Usually, she has a sister (possibly multiple sisters) who is/are man magnets, often for the wrong sort of man, and who behave like the sort of woman/women a chap would take as his mistress, but would never marry. Villainy in a man could mean that he has sex with a virtuous young woman (or tries to do so, or promises to do so within marriage) and then leaves her.
Imagine! James T Kirk would be the worst of villains in a Comedy Of Manners. The continent Spock would be the hero.... which he was for most of us, anyway.
In science fiction romance, our heroines have to be in greater physical danger than losing their reputations (ie being suspected of not being quite virginal). Unless they are Queens or Empresses married to a Henry VIII type, and likely to be subjected to a show trial and executed. But that is a different sort of plot. The archetypical Sir Jasper does not cut the mustard as a sfr villain. He'd have to want her world as well as her body.
Our heroines in futuristic settings are expected to be sexually liberated, to have smashed the glass ceiling, to hold their own and often their hero's (blaster or equivalent weapon). They have to rock. And multi-task. They cannot sit around, being nice and proper.
By rights, Eleanor ought to have ended up with Colonel Brandon. We saw much more of the Colonel. He was by far the most heroic. However, he did not want Eleanor. He was doggedly determined to love Marianne... and Marianne was the stock "silly girl" whom (in my opinion) we see far too often, setting themselves up as role models for our impressionable daughters in endless sit coms, Disney movies for teens, and high school dramas.
Eleanor got the man she wanted, but only because of the perfidy of Miss Steele. Colonel Brandon's patience was rewarded... but in sfr, does any hero or heroine worth his or her salt settle for being second best?
Rowena Cherry
SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com/
Westerns are a natural. You simply give black hats to some of your fellow Space-Ark-mates, or colonists and substitute aliens for the gentlemen in war bonnets.
Better still, make the alien equivalents of Native Americans the heroes. Or, make all of humankind walk in the shoes of all the aboriginal peoples our own colonists have wronged in the past, and present the incoming aliens as pilgrim fathers or conquistadors. Ah, but that isn't the stuff of Romance. Moreover, the natives win in "Independence Day".
You can have Quest plots (The Holy Grail in outer space... and very often, as with the Da Vinci Code, the holy grail in sfr is a fertile, pure young woman), Discovery plots, Adventure plots, Pursuit plots, Rescue plots, Mysteries (including murder mysteries), Rivalry plots, Revenge plots, Underdog plots, Transformation and/or Metamorphosis Plots, Beauty and the Beast, Coming Of Age, Who's Coming For Dinner (prejudice/forbidden love)....
The one plot that may not translate so well into an alien romance is The Comedy Of Manners... which in turn might be described as a highly entertaining, watered down Morality Play. (Erring protagonists don't die, they just end up married till death do them part.)
Yes, I watched "Sense And Sensibility" last night, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. The cast included Emma Thompson, Tim Rickman, and a rather hunched Hugh Grant. I wonder how long it will be before Emma Thompson does us (us Romantics) a huge favor and makes movies of some of the Georgette Heyer novels.
The trouble with Jane Austen and Georgette Heyer --when it comes to space travel-- is that their plots and heroines don't kick butt. They are rewarded for not kicking butts, nuts, or giving tongue lashings to anyone. Heyer heroines, actually, are more dynamic. Some of them do have violent tempers, like Leonie, and they shoot men (or want very much to do so) and fight with swords, and cross dress (like Viola and a few other Shakespearean heroines), and drive racy vehicles too fast.
A Comedy Of Manners depends on the heroine wanting to marry a gentleman, but not being able to tell him so. She is too well-mannered, and he requires more encouragement than she offers.
Usually, she has a sister (possibly multiple sisters) who is/are man magnets, often for the wrong sort of man, and who behave like the sort of woman/women a chap would take as his mistress, but would never marry. Villainy in a man could mean that he has sex with a virtuous young woman (or tries to do so, or promises to do so within marriage) and then leaves her.
Imagine! James T Kirk would be the worst of villains in a Comedy Of Manners. The continent Spock would be the hero.... which he was for most of us, anyway.
In science fiction romance, our heroines have to be in greater physical danger than losing their reputations (ie being suspected of not being quite virginal). Unless they are Queens or Empresses married to a Henry VIII type, and likely to be subjected to a show trial and executed. But that is a different sort of plot. The archetypical Sir Jasper does not cut the mustard as a sfr villain. He'd have to want her world as well as her body.
Our heroines in futuristic settings are expected to be sexually liberated, to have smashed the glass ceiling, to hold their own and often their hero's (blaster or equivalent weapon). They have to rock. And multi-task. They cannot sit around, being nice and proper.
By rights, Eleanor ought to have ended up with Colonel Brandon. We saw much more of the Colonel. He was by far the most heroic. However, he did not want Eleanor. He was doggedly determined to love Marianne... and Marianne was the stock "silly girl" whom (in my opinion) we see far too often, setting themselves up as role models for our impressionable daughters in endless sit coms, Disney movies for teens, and high school dramas.
Eleanor got the man she wanted, but only because of the perfidy of Miss Steele. Colonel Brandon's patience was rewarded... but in sfr, does any hero or heroine worth his or her salt settle for being second best?
Rowena Cherry
SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com/
Labels:
alien romance,
Comedy of Manners,
marriage,
Morality Play,
science fiction romance,
Sense and Sensibility,
SFR
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Happy Thanksgiving!
Happy Thanksgiving to all our U.S. readers. Over the weekend, as usual, we'll be going to the Darkover convention just north of Baltimore. I'll be on two panels about vampires.
Margaret L. Carter
Carter's Crypt
Margaret L. Carter
Carter's Crypt
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Rion-dragons
Hi Everyone,
It's that time again. My new book RION is about to hit the stores shelves. So please check out the book and the fabulous ecard my publisher created for me. You can read an excerpt on my web site www.susankearney.com
Best,
Susan Kearney
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Harlequin Horizons & RWA, MWA, SFWA, EPIC
I have an anecdote to tell you regarding a power-lunch with the head of Harlequin that happened years ago, but seems to be finally percolating to the top where the world can see effects. Of course, there's no way to trace what we see today to my influence, and what we are seeing today would be the biggest embarrassment of my life should it turn out to be connected to anything I ever said anywhere!
If you haven't heard the Harlequin flap by now, here's the scoop. Skip to the section break if you know all this.
Harlequin publishers which has grown to own many imprints, some of which you may recognize but not know Harlequin is the company behind them, has felt the pinch all publishers are feeling.
And they have responded by partnering with a vanity publisher.
Vanity = they charge the author to "publish" the book, do no editing, do little or no "promotion" (their idea of promotion is not an author's idea of promotion) and dump some copies on the author. If the book is successful by the efforts of the lone author, they take the lion's share of the profit, or maybe all of it.
Self-publishing means you become a "publisher" doing all the steps, work of several departments, dealing with many companies to assemble components, do all the marketing, do all the publicity, do all the promotion (all different things requiring different sorts of mental acuity and intelligence, plus training and talent), but if successful you keep all the profit (except for taxes which can be complex).
E-publishers are publishers. They do all that stuff except maybe the lion's share of the publicity, and still manage to pay the author a goodly cut of any profit. They're "real" businesses, as is a self-publishing author who actually does it all (or knows who to hire -- Mass Market publishers hire lots of sub-contractors.).
Harlequin recently announced they were entering into a venture with a known vanity publisher. The few clues in their announcement all pointed toward standard vanity publisher rip-off, with the one tiny detail that they "intended" to watch for successful books and offer those authors contracts for a Harlequin colophon bearing edition.
Here's Harlequin's Press Release.
http://press.eharlequin.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=107&Itemid=
----------------Section Break-------------
OK, so now that Romance Writers of America, Science Fiction Writers of America, Mystery Writers of America, and even EPIC (ebook writers and publishing professionals), and many others have weighed in on this controversy, we should look at it from several different angles.
Here's the SFWA statement:
http://www.sfwa.org/2009/11/sfwa-statement-on-harlequins-self-publishing-imprint/
Here's a bit about the whole flap involving other writer's organizations.
http://www.booktrade.info/index.php/showarticle/24433
And isn't it interesting that READERS don't have an official organization to post a position white paper on this subject?
Writers and readers need to pay attention because we are in a topsy-turvey revolution in the Fiction Delivery System which is part of the revolution in industry caused by the Web and especially Web 2.0 where customers of all businesses can find and talk to each other directly.
In the pre-Web world, two people in different countries who bought the same brand of canned peaches would never be able to FIND each other, never mind talk about how good or bad those peaches were. Today the web connects users of a product and even translates (sort of - it's getting better).
I am ever so grateful to people who post their experiences with appliances, bed sheets, and other expensive things I buy seldom. User comments are what count for me these days, not advertising.
In today's world, word of toxic peaches would flash around the entire world in 15 seconds because of Twitter. The blogosphere would ignite with warnings, and facebook would be alive with URLs.
I read a blog comment yesterday where someone said, "make one mistake and you're a hashtag on twitter." (a hashtag is written like so on twitter #NewMoon -- that's the hashtag for the Twilight film New Moon, but you also see it as #newmoon and other variants)
Twitter surfaces "trending topics" by searching for keywords in the 140 character posts. If a few hundred people start relaying posts about say, Heinz Peaches, suddenly #HeinzPeaches would become a "hashtag" and within a few minutes probably surface as a trending topic.
People love to talk about the mistakes corporations make, but rarely gossip about the perfect, easy, convenient, no-hassle service they get from a corporation.
Nobody I've found yet has said "do something perfectly and become a hashtag on twitter."
With novels or films, though, it's often the other way around. People chatter incessantly about what they liked, but have little to say about what they didn't like except "it's bad."
So there's been a lot of talk on Amazon Communities and on Goodreads.com about Romances of various flavors. People like their fiction separated by flavor, aroma, mood, color -- all neatly categorized so they spend money only on what they're in the mood for.
Good books get talked about at length and in detail, the characters, backgrounds, backstories, relationships, speculation about their futures.
Books people don't like get "It was bad." "I didn't like it." "This author just doesn't deliver."
The characters don't get analyzed, the background visuals don't get discussed in terms of how they do not explicate the theme, the motivations don't get sliced and diced, the story doesn't even get retold in reviews. All a "reader" knows is that the BOOK is no good, and if they haven't studied writing, they really think the problem is inside the book, or the writer, not in themselves.
Readers who are only readers rarely comment "I just wasn't in the mood for a sappy romance." Or "I got bored by all the action scenes and skipped them - I probably missed something important and that's why the ending made no sense." "It fell flat for me because I was still bummed by being jilted by my boyfriend."
We've studied reader tastes on this blog in some detail. If you're interested in how to account for taste, you might want to read my blog entry:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2009/10/7-proofing-steps-for-quality-writing.html
And follow the links in there back to some of the deeper explorations of how to account for the tastes of whole generations of readers.
The more educated a reader is in the art of writing, the more able that reader is to wade into the vast volume of self-published work and pick out the books that will, for her, be superior to anything the traditional publishers can ever produce for Mass Market distribution.
After the "quality" editing run suggested in that last link above has been done by the author and others knowledgeable in the craft, all books are equal.
The only remaining point is "market" -- or whether you as a reader are in need of reading this book.
With experience, a reader may trust an author, or a colophon (because for several years at a stretch a colophon will have been "edited by" the same person) or even a whole publisher like Harlequin to produce more of whatever they liked in the previous book.
Likewise with small publishers, ebook and/or POD publishers. With a few free samples, and a little trust, readers may part with money to read a series that they don't buy in a Brick-n-Mortar store or at Wal-Mart.
This was the theory behind my first non-fiction paperback, STAR TREK LIVES! What is specifically aimed at your taste and mood-of-the-moment will seem to be of "higher quality" than anything aimed at a mass market that only includes you.
And that's why the Star Trek fanzine fiction took off in a blaze of glory that literally changed publishing forever.
Prior to Star Trek fans pouring out millions (maybe billions by now) of words of fan fiction, Science Fiction fanzines carried pretty much only non-fiction -- any fiction was just sendups, short humor, amateurishness for its own sake.
It wasn't Star Trek that changed our world so much, it was fanfic.
Star Trek fanfic started out on two levels at the same time.
Devra Langsam (a professional librarian) and some librarian friends of hers started the first Star Trek fanzine called Spockanalia - focused on the phenomenon they called Spock Shock. That's the impact of the ALIEN on women that produced ALIEN ROMANCE; or more specifically alien sex, infatuation, crushes, etc.
Spockanlia was printed mimeograph on high-acid (cheap) paper that has deteriorated. But the writing was professional level because the editors were librarians and knew from good craftsmanship, because-lines and themes, and foreshadowing and character motivation, as well as the importance of expunging typos.
Just after Spockanalia appeared, some industrious individuals began their own Star Trek fanzines with stories they wrote themselves, often published on spirit duplicator, or even just by typing a few carbon copies in a typewriter and circulating the paper copies. (really! by snailmail!)
Soon though others with wordsmith skills began producing fanzines that they invited authors to contribute to. Then the 'zines began to compete on editing. Before long, the field diversified into 'zines specializing in certain types of stories, and Star Trek 'zine genres emerged complete with names the readers understood.
There was still the occasional self-published 'zine, but even then only teenagers skipped the step of getting the work really edited before offering it for sale. Lack of editing produced scornful reviews and readers shunned the 'zine. Kids lost a lot of money as the editing standards increased. I know one self-publisher who did novel after novel of her own and each one pristine -- because each got edited by other eyes.
STAR TREK LIVES! blew the lid on this secret, underground publishing venue and exposed it to newspaper and TV attention, attracting thousands and thousands more writers, editors, publishers of the do-it-yourself generation. The field of 'zines exploded as the word 'zine short for fanzine (coined in SF fandom in the 1940's) became a newspaper term that didn't need explanation each time it was used.
So what has this to do with Harlequin?
Have you figured it out yet? Think hard.
SELF-PUBLISHING is fanzine publishing.
In self-publishing, editing is seen as optional. From the outside, that is.
Today, the online posting sites for fanfic demand beta-readers sift the stories before posting for free reading. Some beta-readers rise to the top because they actually edit (why did Stephen bite Rosemary's neck?)
People shun wasting their reading time on un-edited work.
Self-publishing is considered "un-edited" by almost all the professional organizations, so they are stomping on Harlequin for launching a vanity-press.
The new Harlequin Horizons imprint is an imprint for self-publishing authors.
A colophon is the graphic squiggle that labels an imprint. A colophon would be like a Vampire Romance and a stylized V dripping blood, the Imprint would be Stefan's Vampire Romances.
Harlequin said that Horizons won't offer professional editing by their own (rather sharp) editors. Harlequin will point authors rejected by their slush pile readers to the self-publishing operation as a "viable" alternative.
Those are the two points that have all the professional writers' organizations miffed.
Harlequin (nowadays a respected name though it hasn't always been so) is using marketing techniques to the disadvantage of beginning writers who don't know what's being done to them.
Harlequin (as any professional writer's organization knows) stands to make a hefty profit from the new writers (over and over again) because their new Harlequin Horizons imprint will not be geared up to teach these new writers why their work was rejected by Harlequin.
So new writers will continue to make the same anti-commercial "mistakes."
What's the difference between a vanity press and self-publishing?
A vanity press panders to the writer's ego and charges big bucks for the service.
Self-publishing is a job that smashes your ego down into a micro-dot.
SFWA says Harlequin's retraction of the announcement of the name on the new imprint (Harlequin Horizons) isn't enough.
The first uproar was targeted at the idea of putting the rather prestigious name Harlequin on what would be mostly a product that does not meet Harlequin's publishing standards.
So it seems it should be enough to name the venture something else.
But SFWA (rightly, I think) is still shunning the entire concept of a major publisher with known precision standards owning and operating a self-publishing operation that is marketed to their slush pile rejects on a distant promise of "if the book does well, we will consider..."
The writer's organizations discount all efforts made through self-publishing operations, vanity press or hard working self-published authors -- even most epublishers are excluded from qualifying a writer for membership because they don't pay advances against royalties.
Professional writer's organizations sift the publishing world on how the writer gets paid.
It's professional. We do it for a living. People who don't do it for a living aren't qualified to become members. It's an attitude that unites professionals in all fields, and divides them from amateurs and wannabees.
Those who have been in the publishing business since before the Internet became a publishing venue have their understanding of what is actually happening (and why Harlequin decided to launch this venture) conditioned by a vision of the industrial world that is in fact no longer exactly true -- though it may become true again, as we work through this turbulence.
I've talked a lot about the business of publishing in prior posts here. You might want to check:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2009/09/marketing-via-social-networking.html
Harlequin made a business decision based on an assessment of where the world is going with book publishing and what they could do to position the company to make a profit in that new world.
The people I knew at the helm of Harlequin years ago are long gone, and I expect their corporate culture legacy is long gone too.
But I see the Harlequin Horizons venture as if it were actually on the because-line of a novel that started at the power-lunch I mentioned at the beginning of this post.
Some trickle-down of the legacy of that lunch discussion, a bit of dust on a wall, a flake of paint here and there, some trace of something may have remained in the air at Harlequin and led somehow to this decision. (I can hope not, of course, because this decision is potentially very harmful to the very people I treasure most - the beginning writers.)
Here's what happened.
One day, I got a phone call from a secretary at Harlequin's Canadian HQ who said her boss (CEO) was going to be in New York (where I lived at the time) and would like to have lunch with me.
Huh? I mean REALLY!
She eventually convinced me it wasn't a hoax, and I made the appointment to meet him in New York at a very expensive, posh, hotel restaurant.
It turned into a six martini lunch for him. I talked his ear off.
Subject of his questions?
You won't believe this.
STAR TREK FANZINES.
That's what he wanted to talk about. And of course, at that time if you started probing Star Trek fan activity from any end of the spectrum, you would end up talking to me on the phone (pre-email).
It seems that the press had convinced this mover and shaker of the publishing industry that women were the market for STAR TREK fanzines and those women were into the exact kind of story that Harlequin published, except with science fiction and aliens emphasized.
You have no idea how bizarre that concept was at the time.
So I spent over 5 hours explaining self-publishing, fanzine publishing, Star Trek publishing, emerging genres, trends, economics of fanzine publishing, content of the stories, target audiences, editing quality, prices readers were willing to pay ($20 for an amount of words Harlequin sold for $2.50 ) to get those particular stories.
This "lunch" lasted so long that we were the last people in the place as they were closing and retooling for dinner. The staff had prepared all the other tables before one very obsequious manager crept up to softly suggest we might like to leave now. (what an experience! I've been thrown out of places coast to coast for being too talkative past closing time. Politeness was beyond comprehension -- I mean this was New York!)
This CEO asked questions and made comments and comparisons that convinced me he understood what I had said. That was the truly astonishing part. I was actually able to communicate these ideas to someone in a position to take the entire Star Trek fanzine phenomenon to the next level, Science Fiction Romance!!!
Not STAR TREK ROMANCE -- that was owned by Paramount -- but rather the underlying abstract concept of how sexy a smart non-human could be in a story.
I did convince him there was a future for science fiction about romantic relationships (totally insane and ridiculous concept but he believed me).
In fact, another such power lunch conversation resulted, where I was invited to Washington DC (had to take the plane shuttle and the train downtown, then back in the same day) for lunch at a really exclusive club -- the kind of place that's members only; all posh silence and exquisite service once you're through the security. The drapes in that place cost more than my house.
I was invited to a place like that in San Francisco, too, a Yacht club. They don't put a bill on the table when you're done. It's in the membership fee.
And that DC "lunch" too became a six martini lunch (not for me; I don't drink much) that left us the only two people in the place as it closed to retool for dinner. But lunch with a CEO that lasts about 6 hours is an experience and a half, especially when the talk really is all business. Lunch with editors isn't quite in the same category as lunch with the boss of the boss of the boss of the editor. How many writers get to bend the ear of the actual decision makers?
But nothing ever came of all that talking, that I know of.
I do know that for a while, the person at the helm of Harlequin understood fanzines, self-publishing, fanzine editing, and most importantly how very desperate the readership was for more SFR.
I had such high hopes.
But no.
It never happened. None of the programs he was meditating on ever materialized. He could see my vision and share it, but there was no way to make it materialize in the Mass Market Publishing world.
So I forged ahead and wrote the DUSHAU TRILOGY for mass market paperback and it won the first Romantic Times Award for SF, and other such SFR works with the R part disguised as plot driver. (see http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com for free chapters of that and my Hardcover efforts to make this point.)
Now Harlequin Horizons appears out of nowhere.
Vanity Press!!!
Monday, Nov 23rd, one of the Agents I most respect, Agent Kristin, posted the following on her blog:
-------quote---------
Today, Thomas Nelson Publishers joins the Harlequin hoopla in a ridiculous blog post. Ashley and Carolyn Grayson posted their response—to which I whole heartedly agree. I find it laughable that Hyatt believes that agents are speaking out against the ripping off of writers via vanity publishing arms because we see “self-publishing” as a threat.
As many commenters have already noted in my blog comments section, vanity publishing and self publishing are not the same. A distinction that Hyatt does not seem to understand. I suppose he also believes that venerated writing organizations such as RWA, MWA, and SFWA, all of which have a long tradition of helping and protecting writers, are similarly trying to keep the status quo by vehemently speaking out against such blatant ripping off of writers.
I also want to make this distinction.
----------end quote-------------
And there's lots more she has to say. See Agent Kristin's post for the links inserted in the above quote:
http://pubrants.blogspot.com/2009/11/horizons-is-not-remotely-like-harper.html
I really hope there's no connection with me because this is about the opposite of what I was saying to that CEO about the potential for SFR. But this is the very first time since then that Harlequin has made a business move even remotely flavored with that conversation's content.
I'm not sure I'm flat out against Harlequin Horizons (just against the proposed method of doing business).
If the operation is smooth and high quality ( Vanity presses are famous for not-being high quality!), it's possible Harlequin Horizons might take us the next step beyond the tizzy publishing is in right now.
What I envision is packagers. Independent editors who select and edit novels in a specific narrow category, then when the novels are at the highest quality level, though aimed at some specialty audience, the packager uses an outfit like Harlequin Horizons to publish the work with the packager's colophon (not Harlequin Horizon's colophon). The packager's colophon would then become trusted by readers.
Readers are the key element being ignored here.
All the professional writers organizations have spoken. Where are the readers?
A trusted colophon could become acknowledged by writers' organizations like SFWA, RWA, MWA, EPIC, etc. It could qualify the work for award consideration and as a membership qualification, in a defined category.
But I suspect long before that could happen, we will have a series of Awards created by various organizations for works in these nooks and crannies of reader taste. We already have the very respected EPPIES (which have been renamed) which have so many categories I can't count them.
As Alvin Toffler pointed out in his book Future Shock, the computer revolution, the information age, allows for customization of products that the industrial revolution handled as Mass Market.
The days of the mass market may be numbered.
The inflection point in history where that numbering may have begun would be the 1970's explosion of Star Trek fanzines that has continued into e-publishing on the web and overflowed into the universes of every other TV show you can think of (SF TV led the way, but today it's everywhere).
But economies of scale have not yet hit the niche markets.
It's still too expensive to self-publish, e-publishers are struggling with narrow margins, and the only solution business school graduates know is to reach a wider market.
But art aimed at a wider market leaves the various narrow markets luke-warm rather than ignited in passion for more-more-more at any price, as Star Trek Fanzines did.
We might view Harlequin's move to vanity or subsidy press as an act of desperation as their mass market readership evaporates beneath them, and they need another source of revenue so they're setting up to fleece beginning writers who don't know that they don't know what they need to know.
Publishers have to learn that the future of the fiction delivery system lies in the micro-market not the mass-market.
Or am I wrong? What am I missing here?
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
If you haven't heard the Harlequin flap by now, here's the scoop. Skip to the section break if you know all this.
Harlequin publishers which has grown to own many imprints, some of which you may recognize but not know Harlequin is the company behind them, has felt the pinch all publishers are feeling.
And they have responded by partnering with a vanity publisher.
Vanity = they charge the author to "publish" the book, do no editing, do little or no "promotion" (their idea of promotion is not an author's idea of promotion) and dump some copies on the author. If the book is successful by the efforts of the lone author, they take the lion's share of the profit, or maybe all of it.
Self-publishing means you become a "publisher" doing all the steps, work of several departments, dealing with many companies to assemble components, do all the marketing, do all the publicity, do all the promotion (all different things requiring different sorts of mental acuity and intelligence, plus training and talent), but if successful you keep all the profit (except for taxes which can be complex).
E-publishers are publishers. They do all that stuff except maybe the lion's share of the publicity, and still manage to pay the author a goodly cut of any profit. They're "real" businesses, as is a self-publishing author who actually does it all (or knows who to hire -- Mass Market publishers hire lots of sub-contractors.).
Harlequin recently announced they were entering into a venture with a known vanity publisher. The few clues in their announcement all pointed toward standard vanity publisher rip-off, with the one tiny detail that they "intended" to watch for successful books and offer those authors contracts for a Harlequin colophon bearing edition.
Here's Harlequin's Press Release.
http://press.eharlequin.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=107&Itemid=
----------------Section Break-------------
OK, so now that Romance Writers of America, Science Fiction Writers of America, Mystery Writers of America, and even EPIC (ebook writers and publishing professionals), and many others have weighed in on this controversy, we should look at it from several different angles.
Here's the SFWA statement:
http://www.sfwa.org/2009/11/sfwa-statement-on-harlequins-self-publishing-imprint/
Here's a bit about the whole flap involving other writer's organizations.
http://www.booktrade.info/index.php/showarticle/24433
And isn't it interesting that READERS don't have an official organization to post a position white paper on this subject?
Writers and readers need to pay attention because we are in a topsy-turvey revolution in the Fiction Delivery System which is part of the revolution in industry caused by the Web and especially Web 2.0 where customers of all businesses can find and talk to each other directly.
In the pre-Web world, two people in different countries who bought the same brand of canned peaches would never be able to FIND each other, never mind talk about how good or bad those peaches were. Today the web connects users of a product and even translates (sort of - it's getting better).
I am ever so grateful to people who post their experiences with appliances, bed sheets, and other expensive things I buy seldom. User comments are what count for me these days, not advertising.
In today's world, word of toxic peaches would flash around the entire world in 15 seconds because of Twitter. The blogosphere would ignite with warnings, and facebook would be alive with URLs.
I read a blog comment yesterday where someone said, "make one mistake and you're a hashtag on twitter." (a hashtag is written like so on twitter #NewMoon -- that's the hashtag for the Twilight film New Moon, but you also see it as #newmoon and other variants)
Twitter surfaces "trending topics" by searching for keywords in the 140 character posts. If a few hundred people start relaying posts about say, Heinz Peaches, suddenly #HeinzPeaches would become a "hashtag" and within a few minutes probably surface as a trending topic.
People love to talk about the mistakes corporations make, but rarely gossip about the perfect, easy, convenient, no-hassle service they get from a corporation.
Nobody I've found yet has said "do something perfectly and become a hashtag on twitter."
With novels or films, though, it's often the other way around. People chatter incessantly about what they liked, but have little to say about what they didn't like except "it's bad."
So there's been a lot of talk on Amazon Communities and on Goodreads.com about Romances of various flavors. People like their fiction separated by flavor, aroma, mood, color -- all neatly categorized so they spend money only on what they're in the mood for.
Good books get talked about at length and in detail, the characters, backgrounds, backstories, relationships, speculation about their futures.
Books people don't like get "It was bad." "I didn't like it." "This author just doesn't deliver."
The characters don't get analyzed, the background visuals don't get discussed in terms of how they do not explicate the theme, the motivations don't get sliced and diced, the story doesn't even get retold in reviews. All a "reader" knows is that the BOOK is no good, and if they haven't studied writing, they really think the problem is inside the book, or the writer, not in themselves.
Readers who are only readers rarely comment "I just wasn't in the mood for a sappy romance." Or "I got bored by all the action scenes and skipped them - I probably missed something important and that's why the ending made no sense." "It fell flat for me because I was still bummed by being jilted by my boyfriend."
We've studied reader tastes on this blog in some detail. If you're interested in how to account for taste, you might want to read my blog entry:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2009/10/7-proofing-steps-for-quality-writing.html
And follow the links in there back to some of the deeper explorations of how to account for the tastes of whole generations of readers.
The more educated a reader is in the art of writing, the more able that reader is to wade into the vast volume of self-published work and pick out the books that will, for her, be superior to anything the traditional publishers can ever produce for Mass Market distribution.
After the "quality" editing run suggested in that last link above has been done by the author and others knowledgeable in the craft, all books are equal.
The only remaining point is "market" -- or whether you as a reader are in need of reading this book.
With experience, a reader may trust an author, or a colophon (because for several years at a stretch a colophon will have been "edited by" the same person) or even a whole publisher like Harlequin to produce more of whatever they liked in the previous book.
Likewise with small publishers, ebook and/or POD publishers. With a few free samples, and a little trust, readers may part with money to read a series that they don't buy in a Brick-n-Mortar store or at Wal-Mart.
This was the theory behind my first non-fiction paperback, STAR TREK LIVES! What is specifically aimed at your taste and mood-of-the-moment will seem to be of "higher quality" than anything aimed at a mass market that only includes you.
And that's why the Star Trek fanzine fiction took off in a blaze of glory that literally changed publishing forever.
Prior to Star Trek fans pouring out millions (maybe billions by now) of words of fan fiction, Science Fiction fanzines carried pretty much only non-fiction -- any fiction was just sendups, short humor, amateurishness for its own sake.
It wasn't Star Trek that changed our world so much, it was fanfic.
Star Trek fanfic started out on two levels at the same time.
Devra Langsam (a professional librarian) and some librarian friends of hers started the first Star Trek fanzine called Spockanalia - focused on the phenomenon they called Spock Shock. That's the impact of the ALIEN on women that produced ALIEN ROMANCE; or more specifically alien sex, infatuation, crushes, etc.
Spockanlia was printed mimeograph on high-acid (cheap) paper that has deteriorated. But the writing was professional level because the editors were librarians and knew from good craftsmanship, because-lines and themes, and foreshadowing and character motivation, as well as the importance of expunging typos.
Just after Spockanalia appeared, some industrious individuals began their own Star Trek fanzines with stories they wrote themselves, often published on spirit duplicator, or even just by typing a few carbon copies in a typewriter and circulating the paper copies. (really! by snailmail!)
Soon though others with wordsmith skills began producing fanzines that they invited authors to contribute to. Then the 'zines began to compete on editing. Before long, the field diversified into 'zines specializing in certain types of stories, and Star Trek 'zine genres emerged complete with names the readers understood.
There was still the occasional self-published 'zine, but even then only teenagers skipped the step of getting the work really edited before offering it for sale. Lack of editing produced scornful reviews and readers shunned the 'zine. Kids lost a lot of money as the editing standards increased. I know one self-publisher who did novel after novel of her own and each one pristine -- because each got edited by other eyes.
STAR TREK LIVES! blew the lid on this secret, underground publishing venue and exposed it to newspaper and TV attention, attracting thousands and thousands more writers, editors, publishers of the do-it-yourself generation. The field of 'zines exploded as the word 'zine short for fanzine (coined in SF fandom in the 1940's) became a newspaper term that didn't need explanation each time it was used.
So what has this to do with Harlequin?
Have you figured it out yet? Think hard.
SELF-PUBLISHING is fanzine publishing.
In self-publishing, editing is seen as optional. From the outside, that is.
Today, the online posting sites for fanfic demand beta-readers sift the stories before posting for free reading. Some beta-readers rise to the top because they actually edit (why did Stephen bite Rosemary's neck?)
People shun wasting their reading time on un-edited work.
Self-publishing is considered "un-edited" by almost all the professional organizations, so they are stomping on Harlequin for launching a vanity-press.
The new Harlequin Horizons imprint is an imprint for self-publishing authors.
A colophon is the graphic squiggle that labels an imprint. A colophon would be like a Vampire Romance and a stylized V dripping blood, the Imprint would be Stefan's Vampire Romances.
Harlequin said that Horizons won't offer professional editing by their own (rather sharp) editors. Harlequin will point authors rejected by their slush pile readers to the self-publishing operation as a "viable" alternative.
Those are the two points that have all the professional writers' organizations miffed.
Harlequin (nowadays a respected name though it hasn't always been so) is using marketing techniques to the disadvantage of beginning writers who don't know what's being done to them.
Harlequin (as any professional writer's organization knows) stands to make a hefty profit from the new writers (over and over again) because their new Harlequin Horizons imprint will not be geared up to teach these new writers why their work was rejected by Harlequin.
So new writers will continue to make the same anti-commercial "mistakes."
What's the difference between a vanity press and self-publishing?
A vanity press panders to the writer's ego and charges big bucks for the service.
Self-publishing is a job that smashes your ego down into a micro-dot.
SFWA says Harlequin's retraction of the announcement of the name on the new imprint (Harlequin Horizons) isn't enough.
The first uproar was targeted at the idea of putting the rather prestigious name Harlequin on what would be mostly a product that does not meet Harlequin's publishing standards.
So it seems it should be enough to name the venture something else.
But SFWA (rightly, I think) is still shunning the entire concept of a major publisher with known precision standards owning and operating a self-publishing operation that is marketed to their slush pile rejects on a distant promise of "if the book does well, we will consider..."
The writer's organizations discount all efforts made through self-publishing operations, vanity press or hard working self-published authors -- even most epublishers are excluded from qualifying a writer for membership because they don't pay advances against royalties.
Professional writer's organizations sift the publishing world on how the writer gets paid.
It's professional. We do it for a living. People who don't do it for a living aren't qualified to become members. It's an attitude that unites professionals in all fields, and divides them from amateurs and wannabees.
Those who have been in the publishing business since before the Internet became a publishing venue have their understanding of what is actually happening (and why Harlequin decided to launch this venture) conditioned by a vision of the industrial world that is in fact no longer exactly true -- though it may become true again, as we work through this turbulence.
I've talked a lot about the business of publishing in prior posts here. You might want to check:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2009/09/marketing-via-social-networking.html
Harlequin made a business decision based on an assessment of where the world is going with book publishing and what they could do to position the company to make a profit in that new world.
The people I knew at the helm of Harlequin years ago are long gone, and I expect their corporate culture legacy is long gone too.
But I see the Harlequin Horizons venture as if it were actually on the because-line of a novel that started at the power-lunch I mentioned at the beginning of this post.
Some trickle-down of the legacy of that lunch discussion, a bit of dust on a wall, a flake of paint here and there, some trace of something may have remained in the air at Harlequin and led somehow to this decision. (I can hope not, of course, because this decision is potentially very harmful to the very people I treasure most - the beginning writers.)
Here's what happened.
One day, I got a phone call from a secretary at Harlequin's Canadian HQ who said her boss (CEO) was going to be in New York (where I lived at the time) and would like to have lunch with me.
Huh? I mean REALLY!
She eventually convinced me it wasn't a hoax, and I made the appointment to meet him in New York at a very expensive, posh, hotel restaurant.
It turned into a six martini lunch for him. I talked his ear off.
Subject of his questions?
You won't believe this.
STAR TREK FANZINES.
That's what he wanted to talk about. And of course, at that time if you started probing Star Trek fan activity from any end of the spectrum, you would end up talking to me on the phone (pre-email).
It seems that the press had convinced this mover and shaker of the publishing industry that women were the market for STAR TREK fanzines and those women were into the exact kind of story that Harlequin published, except with science fiction and aliens emphasized.
You have no idea how bizarre that concept was at the time.
So I spent over 5 hours explaining self-publishing, fanzine publishing, Star Trek publishing, emerging genres, trends, economics of fanzine publishing, content of the stories, target audiences, editing quality, prices readers were willing to pay ($20 for an amount of words Harlequin sold for $2.50 ) to get those particular stories.
This "lunch" lasted so long that we were the last people in the place as they were closing and retooling for dinner. The staff had prepared all the other tables before one very obsequious manager crept up to softly suggest we might like to leave now. (what an experience! I've been thrown out of places coast to coast for being too talkative past closing time. Politeness was beyond comprehension -- I mean this was New York!)
This CEO asked questions and made comments and comparisons that convinced me he understood what I had said. That was the truly astonishing part. I was actually able to communicate these ideas to someone in a position to take the entire Star Trek fanzine phenomenon to the next level, Science Fiction Romance!!!
Not STAR TREK ROMANCE -- that was owned by Paramount -- but rather the underlying abstract concept of how sexy a smart non-human could be in a story.
I did convince him there was a future for science fiction about romantic relationships (totally insane and ridiculous concept but he believed me).
In fact, another such power lunch conversation resulted, where I was invited to Washington DC (had to take the plane shuttle and the train downtown, then back in the same day) for lunch at a really exclusive club -- the kind of place that's members only; all posh silence and exquisite service once you're through the security. The drapes in that place cost more than my house.
I was invited to a place like that in San Francisco, too, a Yacht club. They don't put a bill on the table when you're done. It's in the membership fee.
And that DC "lunch" too became a six martini lunch (not for me; I don't drink much) that left us the only two people in the place as it closed to retool for dinner. But lunch with a CEO that lasts about 6 hours is an experience and a half, especially when the talk really is all business. Lunch with editors isn't quite in the same category as lunch with the boss of the boss of the boss of the editor. How many writers get to bend the ear of the actual decision makers?
But nothing ever came of all that talking, that I know of.
I do know that for a while, the person at the helm of Harlequin understood fanzines, self-publishing, fanzine editing, and most importantly how very desperate the readership was for more SFR.
I had such high hopes.
But no.
It never happened. None of the programs he was meditating on ever materialized. He could see my vision and share it, but there was no way to make it materialize in the Mass Market Publishing world.
So I forged ahead and wrote the DUSHAU TRILOGY for mass market paperback and it won the first Romantic Times Award for SF, and other such SFR works with the R part disguised as plot driver. (see http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com for free chapters of that and my Hardcover efforts to make this point.)
Now Harlequin Horizons appears out of nowhere.
Vanity Press!!!
Monday, Nov 23rd, one of the Agents I most respect, Agent Kristin, posted the following on her blog:
-------quote---------
Today, Thomas Nelson Publishers joins the Harlequin hoopla in a ridiculous blog post. Ashley and Carolyn Grayson posted their response—to which I whole heartedly agree. I find it laughable that Hyatt believes that agents are speaking out against the ripping off of writers via vanity publishing arms because we see “self-publishing” as a threat.
As many commenters have already noted in my blog comments section, vanity publishing and self publishing are not the same. A distinction that Hyatt does not seem to understand. I suppose he also believes that venerated writing organizations such as RWA, MWA, and SFWA, all of which have a long tradition of helping and protecting writers, are similarly trying to keep the status quo by vehemently speaking out against such blatant ripping off of writers.
I also want to make this distinction.
----------end quote-------------
And there's lots more she has to say. See Agent Kristin's post for the links inserted in the above quote:
http://pubrants.blogspot.com/2009/11/horizons-is-not-remotely-like-harper.html
I really hope there's no connection with me because this is about the opposite of what I was saying to that CEO about the potential for SFR. But this is the very first time since then that Harlequin has made a business move even remotely flavored with that conversation's content.
I'm not sure I'm flat out against Harlequin Horizons (just against the proposed method of doing business).
If the operation is smooth and high quality ( Vanity presses are famous for not-being high quality!), it's possible Harlequin Horizons might take us the next step beyond the tizzy publishing is in right now.
What I envision is packagers. Independent editors who select and edit novels in a specific narrow category, then when the novels are at the highest quality level, though aimed at some specialty audience, the packager uses an outfit like Harlequin Horizons to publish the work with the packager's colophon (not Harlequin Horizon's colophon). The packager's colophon would then become trusted by readers.
Readers are the key element being ignored here.
All the professional writers organizations have spoken. Where are the readers?
A trusted colophon could become acknowledged by writers' organizations like SFWA, RWA, MWA, EPIC, etc. It could qualify the work for award consideration and as a membership qualification, in a defined category.
But I suspect long before that could happen, we will have a series of Awards created by various organizations for works in these nooks and crannies of reader taste. We already have the very respected EPPIES (which have been renamed) which have so many categories I can't count them.
As Alvin Toffler pointed out in his book Future Shock, the computer revolution, the information age, allows for customization of products that the industrial revolution handled as Mass Market.
The days of the mass market may be numbered.
The inflection point in history where that numbering may have begun would be the 1970's explosion of Star Trek fanzines that has continued into e-publishing on the web and overflowed into the universes of every other TV show you can think of (SF TV led the way, but today it's everywhere).
But economies of scale have not yet hit the niche markets.
It's still too expensive to self-publish, e-publishers are struggling with narrow margins, and the only solution business school graduates know is to reach a wider market.
But art aimed at a wider market leaves the various narrow markets luke-warm rather than ignited in passion for more-more-more at any price, as Star Trek Fanzines did.
We might view Harlequin's move to vanity or subsidy press as an act of desperation as their mass market readership evaporates beneath them, and they need another source of revenue so they're setting up to fleece beginning writers who don't know that they don't know what they need to know.
Publishers have to learn that the future of the fiction delivery system lies in the micro-market not the mass-market.
Or am I wrong? What am I missing here?
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
Labels:
business of publishing,
fanzines,
Harlequin Horizons,
Harlequin Romance,
Jacqueline Lichtenberg,
self-publishing,
Tuesday
Sunday, November 22, 2009
The Day The Earth Stood Still (yesterday, on TV, at 8pm)
I missed the first eleven minutes of this remake of "The Day The Earth Stood Still", because I was watching an absolutely gripping bit of political theatre.... and perhaps if I had seen the very beginning, I might have enjoyed the movie more.
How is a debate a "debate", if people vote from remote locations without any solemn or otherwise obligation to listen to, and weigh, the arguments for and against the motion? I hope the Jury Trial system never goes the way of the Senate!
My husband tells me that I am in for a real treat when I see the original movie. He rates the original a 10, and this version a 3.
Reviewers are kinder here http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0970416/
I give kudos to John Cleese for his endearing and totally charming performance as a true world leader, a Nobel prizewinner who keeps a blackboard and chalk in his living room.
The other fine supporting performance was by Jaden Smith as the bigoted little boy who probably did more than his stepmother to convince the unsmiling alien that mankind was worth saving.
The blubber premise grossed me out, frankly. I won't say more even though I don't consider it a major spoiler... unlike the idea of carrying a bit of ones own blubber/placenta around with one in a little jar in case of accidents, and even smearing some of it inside an inconvenient policeman's mouth.
Major spoiler:
That the explosion-proof, diamond-bit drill-busting robot turned into bifurcating cockroaches and ants bothered me. That they flew around in a cloud reminiscent of starling flock formations (currently on display in the Artology exhibition at the Cranbrook Institute of Science) was cool. I could have wished that they'd focused on eating something more to the point than one big truck and a few roadsigns.
If mankind is going to radically modify its alleged, environmentally destructive behaviour, a few missing truckers and roadsigns won't impress an out-of-touch President in his bunker. Those metal munching cockroaches ought to have eaten all the airports, and all the ships, and all the world's nuclear reactors. And the tree cutters and earth movers and shakers, such as Caterpillar, John Deere, Hewlett Packard, Google, and Goodyear... (You can't run a mine without rubber, apparently).
How the world has changed since this movie was made, by the way.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ibd/20091120/bs_ibd_ibd/20091120issues01
However the physics of mass confused and upset me the most. It always does. It's my pet peeve with science fiction. In fact, the cockroach size issue was my biggest hurdle... my wall-banger moment. It surely could, and should have been photographed with more care and sensitivity.
Oh, and there was another issue of mass. Keanu Reeves asked an apparently smaller man what size that man's clothes were. He then asked the man to undress. Unfortunately, we were not permitted to see this feat. Moments later, the tall Keanu left the room in a perfectly tailored, exquisitely well fitted suit.
Continuity is ok. But, what was Keanu going to wear if he did not take the man's clothes, no matter what size they were? Ask a silly question!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_bNDv0-ZrU
Bottom line, though. I'd have given The Day The Earth Stood Still (Remake) an extra two points at least if they'd shown that particular logistical detail. My philosophy when telling a fantastic story is to show everything that is --or could be-- plausible.
How is a debate a "debate", if people vote from remote locations without any solemn or otherwise obligation to listen to, and weigh, the arguments for and against the motion? I hope the Jury Trial system never goes the way of the Senate!
My husband tells me that I am in for a real treat when I see the original movie. He rates the original a 10, and this version a 3.
Reviewers are kinder here http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0970416/
I give kudos to John Cleese for his endearing and totally charming performance as a true world leader, a Nobel prizewinner who keeps a blackboard and chalk in his living room.
The other fine supporting performance was by Jaden Smith as the bigoted little boy who probably did more than his stepmother to convince the unsmiling alien that mankind was worth saving.
The blubber premise grossed me out, frankly. I won't say more even though I don't consider it a major spoiler... unlike the idea of carrying a bit of ones own blubber/placenta around with one in a little jar in case of accidents, and even smearing some of it inside an inconvenient policeman's mouth.
Major spoiler:
That the explosion-proof, diamond-bit drill-busting robot turned into bifurcating cockroaches and ants bothered me. That they flew around in a cloud reminiscent of starling flock formations (currently on display in the Artology exhibition at the Cranbrook Institute of Science) was cool. I could have wished that they'd focused on eating something more to the point than one big truck and a few roadsigns.
If mankind is going to radically modify its alleged, environmentally destructive behaviour, a few missing truckers and roadsigns won't impress an out-of-touch President in his bunker. Those metal munching cockroaches ought to have eaten all the airports, and all the ships, and all the world's nuclear reactors. And the tree cutters and earth movers and shakers, such as Caterpillar, John Deere, Hewlett Packard, Google, and Goodyear... (You can't run a mine without rubber, apparently).
How the world has changed since this movie was made, by the way.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ibd/20091120/bs_ibd_ibd/20091120issues01
However the physics of mass confused and upset me the most. It always does. It's my pet peeve with science fiction. In fact, the cockroach size issue was my biggest hurdle... my wall-banger moment. It surely could, and should have been photographed with more care and sensitivity.
Oh, and there was another issue of mass. Keanu Reeves asked an apparently smaller man what size that man's clothes were. He then asked the man to undress. Unfortunately, we were not permitted to see this feat. Moments later, the tall Keanu left the room in a perfectly tailored, exquisitely well fitted suit.
Continuity is ok. But, what was Keanu going to wear if he did not take the man's clothes, no matter what size they were? Ask a silly question!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_bNDv0-ZrU
Bottom line, though. I'd have given The Day The Earth Stood Still (Remake) an extra two points at least if they'd shown that particular logistical detail. My philosophy when telling a fantastic story is to show everything that is --or could be-- plausible.
Labels:
alien romance,
Artology,
blubber premise,
climate change,
Global Warming,
science fiction,
the day the earth stood still
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)