1. So, indulge me for a minute while I say something here about a thing my detractors do, and why, and what I think about it. The thing is to avow that I am no Heinlein, or Asimov or Ellison or [Insert Revered White Male Science Fiction Writer Who They Consider a Great Here].
2. Why do they go out of their way to do it? Because it's very important for those they admire to be "great," for whatever values they consider great, and this is their way of telling themselves (and me, in a distaff fashion) that I will never measure up: I'll never be "great..."
3. ...no matter how many books I write or sell or how notable I become in the genre or out of it. They are denying to me the thing they consider to be the most important thing, and what they assume I consider important as well. Don't we all want to be "great"?
4. I think it'd be fine to be "great" but "greatness," however one wants to define it, is not up to me. It'll be decided by others and will only tangentially have anything to do with what I do. No point seeking it; it seems a task bound for frustration and disappointment.
5. What I *can* work on is being "good." As in: Am I playing fair with my readers and giving them work that's to the best of my ability? Am I helpful colleague to the people who are helping to put my book out into the world and let people know it exists?
6. Am I useful and supportive to other writers and professionals in my field? Am I proceeding with my career in a decent, ethical manner? Am I modeling the behavior that makes others in my community feel welcome and included? Am I still trying to improve as a person and writer?
7. These are things I *can* control, and that I can work on. And to be clear, I am not always as good as I could be, or would like to be. I'm imperfect and I'm lazy. As I've said before, sometimes I have to cosplay as a better version of myself and hope that version takes.
8. Greatness happens or doesn't, and I may never be considered great, which is fine. I'm happy with my life and my career and I wouldn't change either for a shot at someone else's definition of "greatness." Goodness, however, is work that I can do, and should.
9. So I'm not offended when someone says I'm no [Insert their version of a great science fiction writer here]. I'm not! Won't ever be. I'm me. What I hope to be is not great but good: A good writer, colleague, friend and person. If I can manage that, it'll be good enough.
10. Thank you for reading, and as always, to reward your attention, here is a picture of a cat.
/end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I am attempting something strange and possibly objectively terrifying in the kitchen right now. No, it is not related to burritos. You will know more if it is successful.
Update: the culinary experiment is cooling now. My friends, allow me to present to you:
Hey, @FedEx, I'm pretty sure you delivered my package to someone else's house, and both your online and phone help are being notably unhelpful about it. This is not a great look for you.
(I normally don't have a problem with @FedEx, so this is a little weird. I got the email notification of delivery, but there's no delivery. Either I had the first door robbery in 20 years of living on a rural road where there is no foot traffic, or it was delivered elsewhere.)
Update: package magically appeared. Gray minivan drove off down the driveway. I'll take it.
Just arrived at the Scalzi Compound: The signed limited edition of Murder By Other Means, the latest installment of the "Dispatcher" series. If you preordered from @SubPress, they're on their way! Also, SubPress has the ebook edition up on their site:
You can also still get the signed, limited hardcover edition from @subpress, although hurry, since "limited" means just that -- once it sells through, it's gone forever. It is, he said, with absolutely NO bias whatsoever, a gorgeous little book.
ALSO ALSO, let me give a shoutout to artist Michael Koelsch, who did such a terrific job on the cover art, which is taken from a scene in the book. It's so good!
1. So, as a follow-up to yesterday's thread and comments about copyrights and lengths thereof, some additional thoughts about the practical and theoretical issues revolving copyrights, their length and copyrightable intellectual property in general. Ready? Here we go:
2. To begin, the pipe dream of a 30-year-term of copyright really is just that, a pipe dream. 179 countries including the US are signatories to the Berne Convention, a treaty tightly wound into the World Trade Organization. Here's the actual text:
3. Basically, the Berne Convention and its terms the "floor" for copyrights; you can't offer less protection than it offers and be a signatory. A copyright term of 30 years-and-out is, uhh, *less.* It is not seriously going to be considered any time soon. So, it's Life+50, folks.
I write books as a fucking business, thank you very much, and part of my business is the long tail -- creating a body of work that is saleable for many years. It's one reason I have that long contract with Tor: All my novels at one house, motivated to keep it *all* in print.
MOREOVER, a backlist I control means the ability to sell older novels as new in foreign markets and into other media formats years after the were originally published. Those additional publications/adaptations feed into backlist sales of the original work, and thus, royalties.
Reminder: Nearly every movie you loved from the 1980s is worse than you remember. Yes, there are exceptions. We're talking on average here. Pre-screen them before you show them to your kids. You'll save on a lot of "pausing and explaining" later.
(Also every single Disney animated film before ooooooh, let's say, 2000)
Incidentally, this is not me telling you that you can't ever enjoy your 80s favorites. Just to be aware that, especially if you haven't watched them for a while, they will likely vividly remind you the culture has, uhhhh, *moved on,* especially if you decide to show them to kids.