My drug of choice is writing––writing, art, reading, inspiration, books, creativity, process, craft, blogging, grammar, linguistics, and did I mention writing?

Friday, April 9, 2021

Do You REALLY Need a Cover Letter? (Mailbox)

How important is a cover letter with short story publications?

[Remember, keep sending in your questions to chris.brecheen@gmail.com with the subject line "W.A.W. Mailbox." I will use your first name ONLY, unless you tell me explicitly that you'd like me to use your full name or you would prefer to remain anonymous.  My comment policy also may mean one of your comments ends up in the mailbox. Though I regret to inform you that I may not always provide you with the answer you want to hear.] 

Just a note before I jump into this question. My queue of questions isn't EMPTY, but I can kind of "see the bottom," and like a cat, I'm absolutely sure that this means I will soon run out and perish. So if you've got questions for me, now's a good time to send them.

Malk asks:

Do you really need a cover letter filled with accolades? Shouldn't a good story be a good story no matter who writes it? 

I have a book that everyone I give it to really likes when they read it, but I can't get an agent—not one I would take seriously—without a cover letter with a bunch of short story publications. The thing is, I hate short stories. I hate writing them. I hate reading them. I don't want to do it that way. My book is good. It'll sell; I just know it. Do I really need a cover letter? Is there any other way?

My reply:

There are absolutely other ways, Malk. You seem like a RECRUITING POSTER for self-publication. Edit that monster and spend a year or two doing self-promotion instead of spending that time trying to shop it. Chances are, you'll make more money and have more readers when all is said and done. However, I'm going to assume from the way this question is worded that you want the "street cred" and affirmation of a gatekeeper's nod and traditional publishing.

You can also fill your cover letter with different kinds of writing accolades than published/recognized short fiction. If you are a journalist, for example, an agent may take a chance on you based on a cover letter of journalism awards and career laurels. They may even give you a good-faith read if you have experience in freelance writing, technical writing, blogging, or anything that can show you are a capable wordsmith who has delighted a reader or three in the past.

Not so much with that either?

Why doesn't that agent just sit down and read your book (that is totally awesome, if they'd just give you a chance) and be swept away….even if you don't have some well-populated cover letter?  What's up with that?

The short answer is because every one of a hundred other people, who have sent this agent an entire novel to read, feel exactly the same way about their work. Does this agent read a hundred and one novels, probably 99-100 of which will be utterly unpublishable, in good faith? (And I'm not saying YOU don't have a catchy start, Malk, but I can't tell you how many people say some variant of "Stick with it until at least chapter six because that's when it really gets good*.") You're talking about a year's worth of work to maybe come up with one viable client. Or does said agent maybe come up with some way to figure out which ones they should glance at a couple of pages and which ones they should give a good and proper gander?

[*Bit of advice that doesn't have anything to do with this post? If "that's where it gets good," then that's where your story should start. And you should figure out some other way to get the desperately important information of the first five chapters in there.]

So how does this agent haze a hundred people who all swear that their farmer vs. the dark lord story (who ends up being his FATHER!) is the best and that all their friends love it?

First….a story.

I don't know if this is still the case, but when I was at SFSU, there were two literary periodicals. One that the undergrads did, called Transfer, and one that the grad students did, called Fourteen Hills. (I was the managing editor of Transfer for one semester and believe me, I have seen some SHIT. But that semester is not what this story is about.) Transfer was RUN by the undergrads, but it still solicited submissions almost exclusively from graduate students. And while Fourteen Hills was considered more prestigious, Transfer wasn't slumming it.

One semester I submitted something to both magazines. To Transfer, I included who I was….really. Chris the undergrad from their very own English (with emphasis in Creative Writing) program just submitting a story. To Fourteen Hills…..well okay, listen. This might sound a little underhanded, but I was already sort of aware of the point of this story and I was trying to test something. SOOOOOOOoooooooo I might have maybe made up a persona. Graduate of University of Cornell (a really REALLY good MFA program), and frequently published author. 

Transfer- Rejected

Fourteen Hills (the DEMONSTRABLY more difficult publication to get accepted to magazine)- Accepted

Same pedagogy. Same faculty teaching the kids. The offices are down the hall from each other. But the HARDER one accepted my work. Because they thought I was somebody.

Of course, I withdrew my submission from consideration. I didn't need the kind of heat that getting caught could bring down on me before my writing career had even begun, but it proved the point I was trying to make. 

The quality of writing does matter, of course, but getting someone to pay enough attention to give your work an actually good-faith read can come down to whether they think you are any good. Critical reading is a skill, and it's HARD—that's why you have to write papers all damn day in English programs doing it; and if someone doesn't think the writing is worth their dedicated effort, they're not going to be paying attention enough to see what a writer is trying to do. There were things I was doing with the language in that piece that the rejection letter from Transfer didn't even mention and the acceptance letter from Fourteen Hills gushed about. When you approach something like it might contain really good ideas, you see a lot more of what's there. When you approach it like "Pffft. Whatever," you won't even notice when something really good might just need a spit shine polish to be spectacular. 

Writing is an impacted industry. There are way way WAY more people who want to be writers than there are book deals, publishing contracts, or even people willing to do a close, thorough, and good-faith read, and most of the people who aren't your friends or trying to bang you are going to pick that manuscript up looking for a reason to put back down unless they already think you're the shit and THEY will look the fool for not picking up on some subtle thing you were doing.

I've seen this bear out in a creative reading class (and presumably it happened in more than just the one I was in). The instructor handed out two short stories. Half the class got one that said at the top that was by a writer in a different class of the same program. The other half a got story attributed to a multi-award-winning author who we might not have heard of but who was well known in the literary world. We started discussing the pieces in tandem, and half the class is ripping theirs to shreds and the other half is doing this amazing analysis of the language, and the prose rhythm, and the deep imagery. The discussion questions were designed very carefully to keep us off of content and on prose quality.

It took about five minutes for us to realize that we were discussing the same piece. It was not written by a student in another class. But those of us who had been told it was never even approached it as if it might have had something to say. (Our first lesson in critical reading.)

Should it be this way? No. Is it? You betcha. 

When most folks read something by someone they know has been published, they approach that work with a bias. They assume there's something there, and may even further assume that if they can't see it right away, they should read closer. Agents (who it's worth mentioning at this point don't get paid until/unless the writer does) know this. They know exactly how hard it is to close a book deal and make a commission. At least all the ones who ~checks notes~ you "would take seriously" do. Given how many submissions they get and how labor-intensive each submission is, they try to figure out who will have the best chance of getting them paid.

It's a little bit like how, when you're dating for keeps (not just fucking around), you don't give three full dates to the person who wants to travel when you don't, wants kids when you don't, and wants someone they can do "everything" with when you enjoy your independence. Like maybe, yes maybe, you are walking away from the absolute love of your life, but more likely, you want to be spending your Friday nights exploring things with someone who is more likely to work out.

Or maybe a better analogy might be assuming you are a good candidate for a job if your resume/CV includes having done smaller parts of that job before. And having no experience….isn't good. Sometimes it's easy to forget that publishing is a business and publishers make business decisions. 

And it turns out that short stories are a PRETTY good indicator of who writes good novels. Who knows how to turn a phrase. Who knows how to clean up copy. Who knows how to deal with publishers professionally. Who can almost certainly handle being edited. Who (obviously) know how to be economical with their words.  

Is it perfect? No. But like Newtonian physics in a quantum world, if you presuppose that writers are better at writing longer works when they have a few short story accolades under their belts (and that they're not if they don't), you will get HIGHLY USEFUL RESULTS.

Of course there are exceptions. Celebrities, ex-politicians, and people who have been near these people can usually jump straight to a book deal (especially if it's a kiss-and-tell-all), as can many people with sort of "preconstructed" networking webs like popular seminar facilitators or motivational speakers. Also people who know agents can often get their book looked at through sheer nepotism without a cover letter—the better you know the agent, the higher the chance of it.

But for most of us plebs, unless we want to take our chances with the slush pile (and I absolutely promise you that we don't), short story publications and/or literary recognition that form a good cover letter are really the price of doing business. 

Unless you want to go non-traditional publishing. But that's a whole other kettle of fish, Malk. 

Thursday, April 8, 2021

Best Stand Alone Modern Sci-Fi [Last Chance to Recommend]

What is the BEST stand alone science fiction book (or short story) written AFTER 1980?

This is it! The last call for nominations (or seconds of existing nominations) that will go on our compilation page. While I work behind the scenes to finish up my Inside Scoop newsletter for that tier of patrons, you all take the last swing at our current book recommendation conversation. 

Remember there are no more polls. We just have a conversation about some good books. Next week (Tuesday probably), I will publish the two lists: one of "undersung heroes," (the books that aren't the best but that you love and want to see more people know about), and the BEST, which will have no ranking other than being listed in order of which got the most seconds.

You can also check out our growing Master List for great recommendations in lots of different categories! (It's also a great way to see the what the results of participation here will look like.) Come check it out!

Please remember to go to the original page to drop your nomination (and familiarize yourself with the rules if you haven't yet). If you put it anywhere else (including a Facebook comment on this post) it will not be counted.

Thank you all for your input. I've really love reading all your comments about the books you treasure and why.

Wednesday, April 7, 2021

Facebook Compilation (Bottom of February)

For years, I didn't count all the bite-sized chunks of writing I was doing on Facebook (particularly during "interesting times) as "writing." But it's a post here and a post there, and sometimes I spend hours a day working on that writing, so it's high time I acknowledge that fact that it "counts."

Here is a collection of the best statuses (and a few of the most popular memes) from my public Facebook page over the period of Feb-15th through Feb-28th. (You're welcome to follow me there but read up in the Facebook FAQ [last question] before you send me a friend request.) Once we've caught up, these will only land once every two weeks or possibly even less often if it's a slow month.

A status to the people who were shaming folks happy to see that Rush Limbaugh died

Look, you don't get to pioneer the proto-Trump conservative ideology of saying whatever you want and thinking that the more upset liberals get, the better you're obviously doing, including advancing conspiracy theories, cheering the idea of rising up against the government, naked racism, misogyny, and other types of bigotry and even making fun of HIV/AIDS deaths, and then get some sort of "speak ill of the dead" pass. You just don't.

And if you're one of the ones trying trying to tone police that shit, I would strongly consider you find something more useful to do…like rearrange your sock drawer.

"Holding them accountable" is worthy and noble, and nothing a politician should evade because they have a (D) after their name. But I am so, so, so, so weary of leftists who use clickbait titles as their outrage porn and literally won't even read the article because it might be nuance.

So weary.

I'm not saying the initial wave wouldn't suck (especially the secondary effect from an initial collapse of infrastructure if more than 10% are killed right off), but most canon zombies are going to be roughly as dangerous as wild animals once humans sort of figure out what stymies them (any situation where a human can get roughly five feet up from a zombie using complex skills like tools or climbing, heavy metal doors with a bolt, wearing the only three-ish layers of clothing that would prevent a human bite from penetrating your skin—transmitting through bites is actually really ineffective, which is why we don't see a lot of rabies cases—having literally no defense against counterstrikes, not having the SLIGHTEST sense of self-preservation, and I'm sorry but the claw/bite-proof tanks and planes and body armor of the military are going to kick their undead asses when we fight back). Roughly as dangerous as a wild animal is not to say zero danger, especially if you live in the country, but a few precautions and most of us don't sit around thinking grizzly bears or crocodiles or venomous snakes or hippos are going to WIN.

I've got a story percolating where they only get that slow and animalistic as their body decays, but a fresh zombie that hasn't experienced muscular or brain decay can run, use tools, put on armor, hide, HUNT, reconsider, work with other zombies, hold basic conversations, and have flashes of the person they were, and even access their memories and skill sets. In fact, there's NO outward sign when they first turn, AND THEY WILL EVEN SHAME YOU FOR SUGGESTING IT.

Of course it's also steampunk and there are ninjas and pirates, but….we'll get there.

There's a lot to be said about zombies as an American genre monster. (Loss of individuality is one of our greatest fears.) And I think the creepier idea would be that that loss comes slowly instead of all at once. Like….being radicalized into a violent mob.

My views are pretty centrist in most of the western world. 

If you are an extremely conventionally attractive woman in your 20s with like twenty-five friends (all dudes) who just got on Facebook yesterday and wants to launch a burgeoning sex work career (which I have absolutely no problem with, and I will protect you from SWERFs in my space), but you also happen to want to be friends with me because, I guess, you think writers are awesome or something, I apologize for jumping to conclusions and rejecting your friend request.

HOWEVER….like everyone else who wants to be my friend, you should be tossing me a PM with that request and letting me know that you're an oxygen-loving human who isn't here just to pick a fight about social issues.

Tonight I had to come up with the name of an Inn on the fly, and the image that jumped into my head was a donkey chewing on grass. 

"The Inn of the Munching Ass," I said. And then, "Oh god!!! No! Wait!" 

But it was too late. The players refused to accept any other name. We settled on the fact that it was The Munching Donkey but it had a reputation and even some of the employees would say "Welcome to Ass Munchers" if the boss wasn't around.

This is why you don't ask a revision-dependent writer to come up with all that clever shit impromptu.

I am officially throwing a curse*.

May every one of you who bought up the PS5s to flip them and gouge people end up with a dozen sitting in your closet that you can't sell for any more than half what you paid for them. May Sony find wonk in their hardware and fix it, leaving you with obsolete, defective units. May your early returns turn to ash, and you take a BATH on your exploitative investments.

(*Please note that I do not actually have the ability to curse anything. Certainly not officially.)

The most unrealistic thing about the MCU is that the villains so rarely have multimillion-dollar P.R. departments that convince about half the world that it is they (the villains) who are right, and further convince the 90% of the other half that even though they're bad, physically attacking them is the real evil—thus making the heroes terrorists. 

I mean, that's definitely one of the trope plots for a single arc, but if you look around the world at who is LITERALLY being super villain evil by ratcheting up the price of things people need to survive like water and electricity and insulin, you see that actually ALL of them are basically engaged in these PR psyops and have state protection, and no "hero" who stopped them would get their reputation back by the end.

U.S.- destabilizes region, backs coup attempts, engages in psyops, sanctions the shit out of the place

Capitalists- "This is what happens when you have socialism. It’s why it can’t ever work. It’s just a bad system."

Leftists- point out problems inherent in capitalism

Conservatives, Moderates, Liberals- sitting in lotus pose My child…. What simple eyes you see the world with. This is not TRUE Capitalism™ you decry. No TRUE Capitalism™ would do this. Only by ascending to TRUE Capitalism™ can you see its perfection as an ideology is marred only by its imperfect earthly expressions, and thus is entirely above your feeble reproach.


People who insist that Gina Carrano got "punished" for having conservative believes are confessing to you exactly what they think are INTEGRAL parts of conservative beliefs.

Wednesday, March 31, 2021

Vaccine Side Effect Sick

The writer is sick. Or….well….he was. I think I'm better today.

Folks, that vaccine. Holy shit. I mean it beats having Covid (I know), but it knocked me out.

I've since read that this is pretty common when someone has had covid. It's often the first dose (not the second) that is really the doozy. Because it's actually the second EXPOSURE that is rough. 

Anyway, I'm seeing it's about a 80/20 split with people who've had covid and rough dose one experiences that dose two is either LESS of a deal than does one, or that it's "OMFG even worse!" Fingers crossed for the former. Otherwise, I'm going to lose a WHOLE week of writing come about April 16th.

Yesterday I thought I was better, but I think I was actually suffering from the Covid brain fog. I seem to remember my first day back to the writing after ACTUAL covid (a tiny bit less than exactly a year ago) I also had an amazingly difficult time. Getting brain fog when you have ADHD just feels like a bad ADHD day. But holy CRAP is it noticeable when it's gone. ("Oh right. I do know how to form coherent thoughts and triage plans of actions that go beyond, "Need chips. And clear splashy stuff.")

I'm a day behind. But really I'm THIS WEEK behind. I'm going to keep doing what I'm doing and try to get a meaty post up on Friday, and since I missed yesterday, I'll aim to post that post on Saturday instead of taking the day off. 

Or maybe I won't. I get to be sick sometimes and not have to work on the weekend to make up for it. We'll see how I'm feeling. 

Monday, March 29, 2021

Admin (TWO DAYS)

For folks following close, I'm going to be taking two days off of regular posting for admin work. 

I always take off one Monday a month to catch up on emails and write a newsletter for Patrons (this month it's the Inside Scoop). Since I'm out of Mondays in March, I guess it needs to be today. But also the Covid-19 Pfizer vaccine kicked my ASS (which is, I am to understand, kind of typical for folks who've had Covid…which I did). 

Folks at the Inside Scoop tier can expect that probably Wednesday or Thursday and I'll be back on schedule with posting on Wednesday as well. 

My writing hours won't suddenly become full-time on May 1st, but you should see them start to improve by then. 

Five more weeks!

Saturday, March 27, 2021

Facebook Compilation (Top of February)

For years, I didn't count all the bite-sized chunks of writing I was doing on Facebook (particularly during "interesting times) as "writing." But it's a post here and a post there, and sometimes I spend hours a day working on that writing, so it's high time I acknowledge that fact that it "counts."

Here is a collection of the best statuses (and a few of the most popular memes) from my public Facebook page over the period of Feb-1st through Feb-15th. (You're welcome to follow me there but read up in the Facebook FAQ [last question] before you send me a friend request.) Once we've caught up, these will only land once every two weeks.

If there's a specific context that's important to one of the posts, I'll add it in at the top, but remember this would have been before, during, and just after the Senate impeachment trial of Trump.

I have seen the regressive left. I have witnessed first-hand an online mob that cares more about cyber bullying than restorative justice. I have watched in real time as people have lost huge chunks of their friends and chosen family networks because someone with greater “leftist cred” (usually Ship of Theseus’ing a personal incompatibility into a social justice “sin”) has dragged them publicly. These aren’t boogeymen made up to point baseless fingers at a community with absolutely zero cause for some self-reflection.

But when someone like Bill Maher or some people throwing their support behind a TERF or some vast moderate, right-of-center chunk of the Democratic Party who are sure they could win elections if everyone harmed by the status quo would just stop talking about it are the ones complaining, what they are complaining about is CONSEQUENCE CULTURE.

Chris's Pass/Agg theater of the day:

If you're going to run back to your wall to get support from your peeps, that's cool. We all do it. And we all cast ourselves in the best possible light when we relay our conflicts with others. (Well….most of us. Some of us question ourselves for the rest of time even if we were clearly being abused.) 

But when you start to maybe replace what happened with a few embellishments and maybe leave the part out of the screenshots where you were absolutely behaving unconscionably and got called on it, and topping the whole thing off with a bold determination of bigoted intentions that literally no one INCLUDING MEMBERS OF THE GROUP IN QUESTION (which it should be made clear that you are not) thought was actually happening…..

At that point, you should probably check out the Ship of Theseus question. Because that thought experiment is starting to become very relevant. And I see this shit in leftist circles all too often.

At what point does your representation of the exchange alter SO many details to your favor or the other's castigation that it's not even really what was said?

In the writers room, moments before the concept of SG-1 gets pitched:

"So, what if we had a show kind of like Star Trek, but instead of the prime directive, they basically do…just…. the TOTAL FUCKING opposite? They just show up and jack the shit of EVERY culture they see. Show them tech. Say where they’re from. Interfere left and right. They don’t even PRETEND not to meddle if they have a contrary value system.

The sooner Democrats learn to just say, "It didn't seem to bother you when Trump was president," the better we're all going to be. 

Fiscal hawks and the claim that you can't punish someone if they're no longer in office are the argument dujour, but it'll work in SO MANY situations!

I know the GOP think they can do the Jedi Mind Trick with gaslighting and just get away with that abusive bullshit, but I distinctly remember "Lock her up" being chanted OH….ONCE OR TWICE at rallies. So what do we say?

And where to even begin with deficit spending….JFC, the things Trump did. So what do we say?

"It didn't seem to bother you when Trump was president."  

Phrase that pays, Dems. Learn it. Love it. Say it a LOT.

Do you know what it was that Gina Carano said that upset people? Can you find the exact words? Are you capable of looking it up across almost any medium in the known world?

That's freedom of speech. The fact that she wasn't silenced means she has it.

Everything that has happened since? Just consequences of her actions.

Stop. Just stop. 

None of these people cares if Gina Carano "learns," or "is allowed to develop." (Neither of which requires employment by Disney to occur.) They just don't want there to be consequences for this speech. They walked right past the fact that she did NOT learn when people objected to the last months of her hateful bigotry. No apologies. No backtreading. No learning to at least shut the fuck up with a public profile. Just double, triple, quadruple down and add worse and worse hate speech. And they want people to be able to use hate speech without consequence.

"Any speech!" they will claim, but this is not accurate. Certain people socially censured will earn a shrug and a "that's what you get" or "something something something free market something." It happens every day, and with far more insidious replatforming tactics than someone getting fired from a position where their public political views will cost a major corporation.

How do we decipher this hypocrisy? Well, actually it's piss easy. You just watch what they defend and what they are conspicuously silent about. Anti-social justice is seldom about people being WRONG with their rationalization. It's just about calling out the double standard. They're a lot less slick than they think they are.

But if you don't trust yourself, know that EVERY. SINGLE. STUDY. done on this reveals the same thing: people start to defend "free speech" in situations where it doesn't actually apply when the ideas being discussed more closely align with their own. Because they recognize that they may suffer consequences for their OWN beliefs.

I have basically watched people this last year make (informed) decisions that lengthen and worsen this pandemic for my loved ones, many of whom have had no choice due to their status but to treat it with an abundance of caution. I'm not even talking about maskholes and hoaxers. I don't really know any of them. [Incidentally, I'm also not talking about careful people who got Covid despite their precautions. It's been a while, but don't forget that I WAS one of those.] I'm talking about people who were just…..done. Like a bad driver at a stop sign who yanks their car out in front of a semi because they've "waited long enough."

I'm talking about people who just decided they were not going to let the pandemic slow them down TOO much. They gathered, they exposed themselves to high risk without quarantining, they mixed pods with pods with pods until they were "podding" with dozens and hundreds of people by proxy, and they did risky stuff while assuring everyone they were "being careful," and they didn't seem to care that they were acting like a turd in a pool and ruining things for everyone who couldn't be so cavalier with their risk assessment. (Some of them even acted shocked when they GOT Covid.) 

I haven't said anything. But I see it.

Stargate SG-1 understood the microaggression of saying people's names wrong 23 years ago. Every person who basically power-disrespects the Goa'uld says their names wrong ("Like Goold.") The races that respect them pronounce it correctly. And Daniel alternates depending on whether he is speaking academically or with his emotional hatred. 

Twenty-three years ago, they got this concept that it's intentionally shitty to not say someone's name correctly. It really cuts into the plausible deniability of the "Gosh, whatever could the problem be?" faux innocence an entire generation later.

Regarding the freezing storm that hit Texas

This would be one of those times when it's super uncool to do that "You call that an earthquake" or "You call this cold?!?" one-upmanship, and remember that if an area is getting weather that they basically NEVER get, they will not have the infrastructure in their building designs or utilities or the cultural knowledge ("lifehacks") to deal with it in the way that a place that gets more extremes on the regular will.

Of COURSE it's just about the sexism and the racism and the world order where white men ran EVERYTHING (instead of just, like, 85%). Of course it is. Of COURSE it is. JFC. Do you think they're harkening back to the halcyon days of strong unions, 90% tax brackets, and the entrenched New Deal?

Of all their bullshit, "Make America Great Again" has been the easiest to decode for exactly what it is.

It’s funny to me how much of “awesome” alien future communications tech from shows even as recent as the 90s basically amounted to Zoom.

The Senate voted on jurisdiction days ago, voted that they had it, proceeded, and then a handful of Senators walked out of the chamber having acquitted Trump, popped right over to a media microphone, and practically boasted that the main reason they voted to acquit was because they didn't believe they had jurisdiction*. 

[*It's not. They did it because Trump had an (R) after his name. But that keeps them arguing about the legalese instead admitting to what they're actually doing, which is exonerating his behavior for the sake of party loyalty. They're washing their hands just as fast as they can and with as much plausible deniability as they can muster.]

But in case you think that's slick of them, basically here's what just happened: the party of law and order just did the Senate version of Jury Nullification….practically bragging about it to avoid defending Trump's ACTUAL behavior.

It takes a special sort of moxie for a lawyer to get up during the due process part of a procedure and argue that their client isn't getting due process.

Regarding the firing of Gina Carano

The irony is that people at Disney—paid to do analyses about shit JUST. LIKE. THIS.—almost certainly knew exactly what the blowback was going to be, and her words were SO hateful they said, "We have to do this even if it means we weather a controversy. Loud. Proud. And NOW! Because over time she will lose us MORE money." Like they didn't even bother to do it quietly or write her gently out of the show or just let her go for some ostensible other reason.

That's how awful she was. That a team at Disney sat down and said, "Here are our projections with or without her and we've decided to do something." This is a company that DOES NOT take a stand on social issues and that quietly ignores its controversies until they go away. They didn't even release a statement or show up to answer congressional inquiries to speak to their involvement with Xinjiang slave camps. SLAVE CAMPS. They don't take a stand on anything "moral." They do things that protect their bottom line. And they took one look at the continuing consequences and noped out.

They're never going to get 17 Republicans to turn on Trump, and they know it. 

What's really on trial is the 50 Republican senators. What they're really doing is putting the narrative that this was no big deal (just some angry people blowing off steam) and "we can just move past it with a shrug" on trial. And those senators will have to go on the record in all their partisan glory and say "No big."

How come, in TV and movies when they shoot something and it goes down for a while but then reveals itself to have REGENERATIVE POWERS and it's not really dead, the next time they shoot it, it just stands there laughing? But there's no reason for it to be stronger. It didn't grow armor or anything. It just regenerates. Bullets should do the same amount of damage, and technically shooting it should make it go down for the same amount of time. Every time you shoot it, you buy yourself the same couple of minutes. If you have enough bullets, you might have hours or even days to plan something, just as long as you remember to shoot the thing every once in a while. 

It could be done intense like that BSG where the cylons showed up every 33 minutes, or kind of funny where the person is like, "Oh crap, it's 30 seconds over. I'm going to have to listen to the monologue about my doom now." "I SHALL FEAST UPON YOUR––"  "Yeah yeah." BAM!

I say let them filibuster. But old school. They can't just use the bylaws of the Senate to THREATEN to filibuster. In front of CSPAN cameras with a scrolling newsreel in front of them that tells every single American what they are so desperate to block that they can't even risk a vote, they have to hold the floor without so much as a break. Let it go on for days. Weeks. All hours of the morning. (An earlier version of this said don't let them lean or sit, which is [on reflection] ableist bullshit, but if this rule is going to exist, they have to HOLD THE FLOOR.) 

Put their complete inability to compromise and or suffer a regular vote in a representative body on full display for every single vote they want to block, instead of framing the fillibuster as some twee little check-and-balance rule that keeps bad legislation from eking through rather than the blunt and ostentatious obstructionism that it really is. If cloture can't happen, make them show everyone their true colors like in 1964, when Southern senators held the floor for SIXTY DAYS in opposition to anti-lynching legislation.  Force them, on camera, to be on the wrong side of issue after issue and willing to waste the taxpayers' money reading Dickens to prevent a floor vote instead of just doing their fucking job.

Tuesday, March 23, 2021

Best Stand Alone Modern Sci-Fi (Book Recs—More Recs and Seconds Needed)

What is the stand alone science fiction book (or short story) written AFTER 1980? Come join our conversation.

Remember there are no more polls. These days instead of a grudge match, we just have a conversation about some good books. ANY book can end up on our list with even as much as a single nomination. The only thing I do even remotely like "ranking" is to put the books in order by number of "seconds." 

I'm doing a week that is pretty extra on the nanny front, so we might have to do some jazz hands by the end of the week, but I'm still trying to hit all of our update goals and stick the landing.

However, we do have a book rec conversation going on RIGHT NOW, and you haven't already, please don't forget to pop over to the original page to drop that nomination, see what has been nominated already, second (all) those you agree with, and brush up on the rules (there are a FEW after all). 

Keep in mind, as there have been some charming A/V media adaptations (and a few terrible ones), that this is a poll about BOOKS. If you loved Jurassic Park The Lost World when it was scientifically inaccurate CGI dinosaurs running around eating people, but found Michael Crichton's 1995 technothriller to be a dry read that was nothing like the moview, you should nominate something else. 

Again, please remember to go to the original page to drop your nomination (and familiarize yourself with the rules if you haven't yet). If you put it anywhere else (including a Facebook comment on this post) it will not be counted.

Thank you all for joining in our Book Rec Conversation. I've really loved reading all your comments about the books you treasure and why.