COSine 2011 Panel: Theology Building

Panel Participants:
Sharon Shinn
Theresa Crater
Carol Berg (M)
Cynthia Felice

If you've read any/all of my books so far, you know that religion plays a major role in all of them, and religious discrimination even more so. So, too excited to bring something to take notes with, we headed for the Theology Building panel.

Carol Berg is an excellent moderator and had some good, prepared questions to field with the likes of GoH Sharon Shinn, and the others. After introductions they were off and running, but the excitement level was kind of lacking. No one was really bringing the passion, and 5pm was far too early for me to be yawning. I don't think it was their fault, or anything, but no one seemed very excited about the topic. You can read Theresa Crater's blog post about the panel here.

The major highlight came when someone in the audience asked, (paraphrasing here) "We see a lot of heroic mythology based around tenets of Christianity. Do you know of any books at are similar but for something like Islam or Buddhism?"

An interesting question. Tons of SFF is based around Western thought and various concepts familiar to us in USAmerica, and some of us feel it's a bit limited--at least considering how much or little we've read so far. There have to be books we've never heard of that are not only fantastic but based around something different. No example were forthcoming.

Then a guy replied, "Maybe Islam and Buddhism just aren't that interesting."

The room stopped. Most of us, including all four of the panel authors, regarded the guy with confusion or outright horror. Not because what he said wasn't Politically Correct, but because it was so incredibly closed-minded as to be preposterous.

Other faiths, whether they be in practice, long dead, or absolute fantasy, are fascinating. Finding difference interesting is a prerequisite to being a student of culture, and of giving more of a damn about the world at large (rather than just your own self, household, or community). Learning about lives different than yours expands your awareness about the human race and how the rest of us live, even if it does not reflect rightness (or righteousness) in the slightest.

This kind of statement really gets under my skin. Lack of respect for other cultures, whether it occurs in fantasy or reality, or is about fantasy or reality, will usually prompt an emotional response from me. What can I say but that I'm intolerant of intolerance.

Luckily, I suppose, the panel ended almost immediately after and we went for a surreal dinner at the Outback Steakhouse. We talked a little about it, and I posted a note about it on twitter/facebook the next morning to a similarly appalled response.

We missed the evening programming (which was apparently quite successful) and the ice cream social in favor of hanging out with each other and the dogs. Therefore all I'm left with is these few questions from last night's event.

Are there any Islam- or Buddhism-esque SF or Fantasy? (Rushdie was mentioned, but I'm not familiar enough to know if it applies)
How do you feel about learning trappings and features of faiths not your own?
And, I suppose, do you feel like Christianity is a big influence on Western SFF tropes?
It's been said by one of my major contemporaries that Fantasy "sounds like it's written by white men, and that's the way people expect it to sound." See the comments in my Racism in Fantasy post. Do you agree or disagree with this, and why?


If you enjoyed this post, please Follow this Blog or use the subscribe button (below) to receive updates.

COSine and upcoming posts

Just a quick note that there will be some forthcoming posts on the panels we attended here at COSine. Mostly informative and fun (this'll make sense later), it's been a good Con and there are still a few hours to go. We're leaving a little early, as is our way, but in the coming week look for some reflections on these topics:

Building Theology
How to convince readers to buy your book
Building your fan base

(and, if I take any notes, these ones as well: Is Heinlein dated, and, What makes you pick up a new author)

Hope everyone's had a great weekend. Everything will be back to normal tomorrow!

Drafting (and updates)

Today I want to talk about the process of drafting a novel, but I have a few quick updates to get out of the way first.

I'll be at COSine 2011 this weekend. It's a (relatively) small SFF convention held in Colorado Springs every year. It's a lot of fun. They have a new hotel/venue this year, and the GoH is Sharon Shinn. While I can't say I'm hugely into her work, I do plan to pick up a copy of Troubled Waters and have her sign it, just to see what all the fuss is about. If you see my wife and I out walking our dogs, or listening to some of the panels, or even at the Dominion table, feel free to say hello.

As far as the status of the current project, tentatively named Rise of the Carrion, it sort of goes like this: if I am able to write 20,000 words per week for the next five weeks, I just might hit my deadline. So, not completely impossible, just pretty damn difficult. Expect me to cloister myself away for at least a few upcoming days in an attempt to get as close as possible to meeting my deadline.

Now, on to the actual topic.

The process of drafting is one that needs to be learned over time. No author, particularly not a debut author, should believe that their initial draft is gold. It may be a great story, but it will inevitably have problems. And I do mean problems beyond the need for proofreading.

There will be things you forget. Subplots that went nowhere. Characters who, despite their quirky personalities, would be better off dead or deleted. Quested items that were never found. Unresolved interactions. Damsels who've gone unsaved. Promises unkept. Wishes and dreams unfulfilled.

In short, expect your first draft to be crap. It's going to be, and that's okay. It doesn't make you a bad writer and it doesn't make your project a bad book. All it means is that you need a second draft.

Now, I've talked about my editing process at great length, as have others, and about the only thing we agree on is that editing is absolutely necessary. Rewriting, while a dreaded concept, is also absolutely necessary. Sometimes a sentence turns into a paragraph and, while it gets your point across, being incredibly verbose is not likely to win over all that many readers on its own. No, what you're looking for when you edit and rewrite are areas where you didn't accomplish what you set out to do.

Perhaps that means expressing the allure of one character to another, which would paint the rest of their interactions in a certain context. If the spark isn't there for their first meeting, the subsequent ones can seem awkward and forced.

Perhaps it means noting areas where you merely glossed over a character's motivations, and really need to add more detail about their past, and why they do the things they do. As a reader, I'm always looking for character development because I believe it's essential to driving the plot forward. I've said it before and I'll say it again: if I reach the end of a book and I don't feel like I know the character, something has gone horribly wrong. I want to know them so well that I feel like I know what they'd do given a set of circumstances.

I want your characters to be able to be described by just their name. Think of MacGyver. Everyone knows who he is, even if you haven't seen umpteen-million episodes of the popular television show. He's a symbol of popular culture for a certain age, and that's the kind of identification you should be striving for. Not necessarily uniqueness, since there are a ton of characters who can make something from nothing, but rather distinctness.

While you're paging through your first draft, rewriting sentences like a madman/woman, keep in mind how a reader might see your character. Are they depressed or just lazy? Are they curious about the world around them or are they just naive? Are they adventurous and brave, or just stupidly pushed along by the circumstances of the plot? It's not just the lack of identification with a character that will hurt your novel, but a lack of identification of a character's personality that will frustrate a reader to no end.

Think: Who is this person and what role do they play? Always keep that in mind because, honestly, if you focus on the characters and what they can (or are able to) and would (want to) do, the plot will take care of itself.

Anyone want to share their draft troubles?
Has anyone else actually sent a query letter after writing their initial draft?


If you enjoyed this post, please Follow this Blog or use the subscribe button (below) to receive updates.

Thoughts on TRON: Legacy

I guess I should start by saying, "This isn't a review." It's not, after all. I was just so excited about the film that, having seen it, I now have something to say about it. Some things, rather.

Tron, to me, is epic sci-fi. A lot of popular science fiction (Star Trek, Star Wars, Babylon5, etc.) are nearly always giving the impression of compacted spaces. The bridge. The cockpit. It's obvious the Starship Enterprise is enormous, but what's the largest room you've seen in it? Engineering is sort of warehouse-sized, but how low is the ceiling and how packed is the area? Even in world-sized environments, the shots are usually so close-up that the camera angle creates a confined space.

Tron is different. With "the grid," there's a lot of space to cover. Just think about the size of the lightbike racing arena, how large it would need to be. Also, it must be understood that digital space is not like physical space. At least, not in the quantifiable, Planet Earth way. Digital space is only constrained by the number and prefix before the word byte. It's hard to believe that, in my lifetime, we've gone from 8MB hard drive computers to 32GB handheld devices, and that in the next 5-10 years we're going to go even further.

So, we have a big space. But that's not all that makes epic epic. There's also a grand adventure, heroism, and high stakes. These things all deal with plot.


The main character in the original Tron wasn't Tron, but he was the "hero." There is a very good reason the movie was titled the way it was, and not some cryptic 8-bit code phrase. Tron was the true definition of a hero, the original definition (not that Flynn's character was only along for the ride), and it was his mission to save the grid from Master Control. Tron was the savior of the digital world.

In Legacy, the main character is Kevin Flynn's son--and the focal point isn't Tron at all (despite the title). What happens to Tron is a bit of a surprise, and it sets up a great moment later on in the film. His influence is key, but the story revolves around Sam Flynn. He is both hero and main character. And, like Tron in the original, he faces each challenge with spirit and determination.

Once again the digital world is in peril, and once again the aggressor is a tyrant. The difference in the new one is that the villain is a copy of Sam's own father. The man who disappeared and abandoned him and, yet, who he never gave up on. If this were a novel, I imagine we'd see some intense emotional conflict inside Sam. Still struggling to understand the events he's wrapped up in, he has to fight a "man" he assumes is his father.

The icing on the cake is how they tied the storyline from the original to this one and made it plausible. In a world without original plots, they've created something that stands well on its own merit. And, in a world where Star Wars dominates the "evil father" market, being distinct is not an easy thing to do.

The other difference is that the "real" world, if you'll allow the Matrix reference, is also in peril. I can't imagine the physics required to transmute a human to digital reality, therefore I can't even begin to speculate what would facilitate going the other direction. I don't know what the villain would have done when he got here, but I know it would have been bad. Stakes raised.

The update to Tron, if you'll pardon the pun, also shows something great a sequel can do. In the 8-bit era, you had computers that processed very slowly. By their standards, they didn't know any better, so things would race forward with every megabyte they added to the RAM. But with a modern view of computers, the lightjets (or whatever they're called) are certainly plausible. More complex programming languages can produce more complex code, and therefore more diverse and distinct programs.

In the 80s, you were lucky if your computer did more than one thing. Now, your phone can deposit checks to your bank, while you're talking and seeing a friend living in another country, while holding days worth of music, movies, books, games, and anything else you can fit on it.

If you liked the original Tron, then you were probably just as excited as I was to see the new iteration. Sure, people can complain about this or that. Perhaps the story wasn't strong enough for them. I certainly didn't understand the Iso's, or their seemingly-vital importance. I always prefer action films to be rated R, but the special death effects of deresolution (derezzing) were amazing.

Maybe the climax to the story was a bit predictable, but the foundation of it was solid to me: freedom from tyranny, reuniting with one's lost parent, a dash of love and redemption thrown in for good measure. It's a good mix of themes. Above all, it's different.

But the technology, I think, captures my imagination more than anything. The creators paid special attention to detail when it came to the world, the grid, and how it would have evolved since the early days of computers. Neon lights are the least of the fancy aspects now. They are like the chrome on a motorcycle. Things move faster, think smarter, and die flashier.

Tron, at least conceptually and thematically, appeals to me in all aspects. I earnestly hope we see more creative ventures such as this in the future.

Dresden Files vs. Dresden Files

So, here I am, blogging with my new bluetooth keyboard for my iPad. Excellent. Sorry, I had to share a moment of happiness. I've wanted the iPad for multiple reasons but first and foremost was to turn it into a convenient and compact writing machine. Laptops are great, but they are bulky, heavy, and it's like carrying around an entire toolbox when all you really need is a hammer.

All that aside, today I'd like to talk about The Dresden Files. Yes, again. I'm sure you're all well aware of my enjoyment of the series at this point. What you may or may not be aware of is that there's a television show of the same name based, however loosely, on the novels.

Now, I'm not normally one to bash television shows or books unnecessarily, but as a fan having watched the show I can tell you that the difference is night and day. If you've watched the show and thought "this isn't great, doesn't make a lot of sense, and isn't very entertaining," I'm here to tell you why you should still give the book series a try.

The Dresden Files book series has many things going for it. A fantastic lead character in Harry Dresden; a quirky, brave-yet-smart, old-fashioned, and deep personality. We come to know a lot about him even in the span of the first book, Storm Front. On the other hand, the Harry of the television show is barely discernible as a wizard, or from any other random person walking the street. He tries his best with short, spaced monologues, but he doesn't have anywhere close to the amount of personality to the original.

It'd be easy to say "they changed too many things when they turned it into a tv show" and be done with criticism, but that's not saying nearly enough. They did change quite a bit. His car, for one, though it does make somewhat of an appearance later in the series. As does his cat, in the same episode (oddly, Storm Front). Same thing with magic being left at a threshold, and the dislike between Dresden and the warden named Morgan.

The magic is random and bears very little explanation. At least, the Evocation (magic on the fly) is; the Thaumaturgy (planned spells to the uninitiated) is always explained at great length--even if it's unnecessary. His hockey stick/staff and drumstick/wand/blasting rod? receive little to no attention despite their multiple uses, and Harry's ability to cast spells without these focus items with zero repercussions... It's just so different.

I should have known when the show's creators decided to change the function of his shield bracelet (and to specify that he received it from his mother rather than his pentacle) to literally catch bullets rather than deflect them using energy. I should have known when he didn't wear a duster, didn't drive a bug, and lacked that old-fashioned charm. They changed Justin DuMorne, Bianca the Red Court Vampire, Morgan, Murphy, Susan... the concepts for all of the major characters are so different that I don't understand why they even have the same names.

For example, in one of the episodes, Morgan actually "works with" a Hellion. With a doubting mind, I continued to watch. Then, that same Hellion breaks the first law of magic right in front of him and Morgan does nothing except to say "the Council will not be happy about this." Morgan! The guy with uncompromisable morals! The Warden who even Harry is afraid to disagree with! It just boggles the mind why they tried to stay true to the source matter while shamelessly bastardizing it.

One could watch the show and simply imagine that Harry Dresden is not the same one in the books, or that it's just a "good try." Halfway or so through the Storm Front episode, I have decided to completely abandon it. There's just not enough to redeem the effort. They went about it the wrong way, the quality suffered, and the reasons why the series didn't succeed are so obvious as to make this whole entry fairly pointless.

You always hear "the book is better" when talking about movie or television versions of your favorite stories. In this case, the differences reinforce the adage with the weight of a safe falling from the tenth story onto your head. Be it budget issues, bad writing, a lack of respect to the original (and its fans), I'm sorry to say that the Dresden Files television show missed the mark entirely. A great idea, no doubt, and well worth the effort to give it a shot, but it just doesn't deliver in the same way as the original.

Bottom line, do not let your experience with one lead you to believe anything about the other. And now you'll have to excuse me, I'm off to read for a bit and then go see Tron Legacy in 3D. Happy New Year.