Story Up: No Body

My short story “No Body” was published today in Penumbra e-zine’s October issue, “Paranormal Adventures”, alongside several other excellent stories by talented authors (several of whom are friends of mine, which is always nice). At $4 for 7 stories, I’d say it’s well worth the price.


As for my story, this one’s a bit of a departure for me. It straddles the line between dark fantasy and horror, two genres in which I very seldom write. Needless to say, it’s quite a bit darker than my usual stuff, but I’m happy with the effect.

Leave a comment

Posted by on 1 October, 2014 in Stories, Writing


Story Up: Death in a Tin Can

My science fiction/mystery novelette Death in a Tin Can went live on Amazon this morning — only 99 cents, or free for Kindle Unlimited readers! This story is a special one for me: it was my Viable Paradise audition piece, and benefitted from advice from our talented teachers and my talented classmates. It’s been sitting in a drawer for a long time because I wanted to do something special with it. I think this counts: it’s my first foray into self-publishing, and I’m about ready to start shopping around my novel with the same detective. If the short does well, that will be useful information.

As always, I’m grateful to anyone who passes the link around, tells their friends, or leaves a review.

Leave a comment

Posted by on 30 September, 2014 in Stories, Writing


I Was A Guest on Sci Fi Saturday Night

Sounds like a nice 1950’s B-movie title, doesn’t it? Needs an exclamation point or five and a font dripping blood. Maybe starring Lon Cheney and the child star edition of someone you’d never associate with that sort of thing, like Andy Griffith or Jim Carrey.

Anyway! It wasn’t a horror movie; in fact I had a long and lovely chat with the fine folks of Sci Fi Saturday Night about my new novella Claudius Rex, and that chat is now online for you to listen to!

If you’re not familiar with the show, it’s a combination “what’s new in the world of SFF and fandom” chat and interview with a weekly guest. This week had some info about the next season of Sherlock, and about a Sesame Street skit referencing ComicCon, for example. I had a lot of fun (and would gladly do it again, Dome!).

A few notes of things I didn’t get to talk about but wanted to:
I was talking about my own novella, Claudius Rex, in Paper Golem Press’s ALEMBICAL 3 anthology. There are two other fine novellas in that anthology that I didn’t get a chance to put in a good word for, and would like to:

From Earth I Have Arisen, by Matt Rotundo, about an old man playing hero in a hot air balloon in the post-apocalyptic mid-west.

Star-Reacher, by Kam Oi Lee, about an artist and mechanic in a back-woods mining colony dealing with his desire to leave home and go make something of himself. (I’m from West Virginia — a theme like that strikes home with me.)

So, even if you don’t like mine, there are two other excellent stories to read!


I hadn’t intended to talk about the sequel to CLAUDIUS REX, since I’m still not 100% sure it’ll ever see the light of day. Writing a novel-length sequel to a novella can be a tricky proposition, after all, and I’m mostly writing it for my own enjoyment and the practice of finishing another novel draft (as I’ve said elsewhere, I consider myself mostly a short fiction writer, and expect to write two or three novels before I ever sell one). But since I brought it up, here are the details, such as they are: the working title is THE WRONG CLIENT, and it’s about Rex being hired to investigate the disappearance of an anti-AI activist. I’ve had to spend a lot more time thinking through some character and world designs (and deeply regretting a few off-the-cuff remarks in CLAUDIUS REX). When I said that Rex is blind, that’s true (despite Google Glass and its ilk): robot vision is a very different thing than biological vision, and that conversation has really gotten me thinking about how to present the way Rex “sees”. 

The novel draft about half-way done (as drafts go, which is some unknown percent done as books go) and at this pace it’ll probably be done next summer or so. To be honest, writing a novel is difficult work with few rewards along the way, and it’s tough to justify it to myself as something other than a sideline hobby if CR doesn’t do well. So, if you liked CR and want to see a sequel, review it and tell your friends.


Finally, in my story about my inability to order soda in Japan, I was nervous enough about being on the show that I left off the ‘punchline': Immediately after correcting me about how to order the size soda I wanted, the cashier helpfully pointed me to the sign, which read very clearly for even me to see, “S” “M” and “L”. So, if you’re scratching your head and wondering what the point of that story was… you’re not the only one. But I’m impressed by how polite the hosts were in simply letting that go and moving on!

Leave a comment

Posted by on 7 September, 2014 in Uncategorized


Write What You Know

There are many reasons a writer puts pen to paper. Some do it in hope of fame and fortune, others to show off how clever they are or make people laugh, others to scratch an itch or exorcise a demon, others just to pay the bills. I’d say there are as many reasons to write as there are writers, but I fear I would underestimate. But nearly everyone who seriously writes, who takes the time and effort to finish and polish stories — and especially novels — has something to say.

I know most of my readers aren’t writers, but I’d like you to perform the following thought exercise anyway. Think about the threat to your life that worries you most. Is there cancer in your family? Is your kid looking kinda tired lately? Are you nervous about being attacked by dogs when you’re out on your walk? Are you worried that someone might come into your workplace and start shooting? Whatever it is — and however realistic the fear, because I know fear isn’t always rational — keep that in mind. Kind of roll it around a bit, see if you have something to say about it.

Now, as the second part of this thought experiment, I’m going to tell you that you’re not allowed to talk about that fear. You might have something to say about it, but other people are worried about that thing too, and your talking about it makes them nervous. Or, to soften that, you’re only allowed to talk about it in ways other people approve of. Not everyone wants to have a frank discussion. Not everyone appreciates black humor or vivid descriptions of unpleasant things. And if you do talk about it in ways others disapprove of, the authorities might take you bodily away, your employers might disown you, and the media might make you out to be deranged and dangerous.

Does that bother you? Are you sitting there thinking, what’s the point of having freedom of the press if you can’t even talk about the things that worry you? Or are you tapping your feet and saying, “Yeah, I know you’re talking about Patrick McLaw, so spare me the theatrics”?

Anyway, yes I am talking about Patrick McLaw, the teacher who was placed in “mandatory medical evaluation” after it was discovered he had written two science fiction books involving large-scale school shootings, The Insurrectionist and Lillith’s Heir. [Edit: see update below] It seems to me that a teacher might have a few thoughts on the subjects of school shootings, might have something to say on the subject. Never mind that The Insurrectionist seems to be, according to its description, about the race to prevent a second shooting, the police and school board seem to have decided that a desire to write about a thing is equivalent to the desire to do a thing. They are punishing Mr. McLaw for writing about something that, presumably, he has great cause to have strong opinions about.

Other people have ably addressed the civil rights issues in this, and in any case I doubt most of the salient details are public. I’ll leave the subject to others with greater ability and information. I want to talk about this as a writer: in particular as someone who writes murder mysteries. Yup, I think and write about killing people and getting away with it. I entertain myself and others with stories about murderers who are only barely caught, sometimes only by luck, because being only barely caught makes the story more interesting and exciting.

This effort is not without consequence, of that I am morally certain. Copycats have lifted plots from the greats in my field, transferring them from the fiction reviews to the obituary page. Millions of people have read or watched thousands of murder mysteries over a hundred years. There is little doubt in my mind that real people have died because other people read an Agatha Christie or Arthur Conan Doyle or Dorothy Sayers novel and thought “I could do this, and then I’d be rid of that jerk next door and nobody would be the wiser.” It is possible (though, since I work in science fiction, unlikely) that someone will do the same with one of my murder plots.

I say this not out of pride nor out of shame, or because I think anything ought to be done about it, I say it because I think it to be true and because the truth is worth talking and thinking about. We write and read about poisonings, bludgeonings, shootings, stabbings, drownings, and all manner of terrible deaths. Murder is a crime that worries, fascinates, repulses, and even sometimes delights us (depending on who gets the wrong end of a particularly spectacular stick). It is entertainment, but it is more than that: it is a part of our culture’s way of dealing with mortality. It reminds us on the one hand that we and our loved ones too shall die, possibly by violence, but also reaffirms a shared belief that life is important and that violent death should be avenged.

This is not to say that art must have noble purpose, or any purpose at all. On the contrary, just as some people can learn the wrong lessons from anything, some people can be inspired to great things by anything, if only they are exposed to it. Even art with malicious or senseless intent can produce beauty and insight when observed by the right person. Even if the only aim and effect of art is enjoyment, well, enjoyment is important too.

They say to write what you know. Here’s what I know: Our civilization and our culture do not work when we are afraid to talk about the things that worry, fascinate, repulse, or delight us — even when the things that delight me, repulse you. Perhaps especially so. Among its other many virtues, fiction allows us to practice our own emotional reactions in a safe environment to disasters (and joys!) great and small; that requires a writer who is able and willing to write convincingly about those things. It is important, even vital, to be able to read about unpleasant and dangerous things if one so chooses; in which case it is just as important to be able to write and publish about unpleasant and dangerous things.


[Update: the LA Times is reporting that authorities in the case are saying that Mr. McLaw's books have nothing to do with the current situation. That seems to be a contradiction to the original local reporting. It's certainly plausible that a local reporter got things very wrong. In any case, much of what I said was in response to the reporting, which I felt implied that it was justified to take these actions over books like these, and in response to some comments on that reporting]

Leave a comment

Posted by on 2 September, 2014 in Writing


A Journey of a Thousand Miles

… begins with purchasing a treadmill. Which I have just recently done and installed as the main part of a walking desk.

Treadmill desk

Treadmill desk

I have been noticing for a while now that my writing output has been dropping off. At first, I chalked it up to my move last summer, and then my change in focus from short fiction to novellas and novels, but in terms of words written it’s just not even close to what I was doing two years ago. I’m coming to think that my general loss of fitness in the last year has had a larger effect than I thought. I’ve been tired and sluggish, and it shows. I’ve been spending a (tiny) bit more time in the gym, which has helped the sluggishness, but itself consumes time.

I’d been reading and thinking about walking desks for a while now, and after some experiments in reading and playing video games on the gym treadmill to confirm that I could concentrate and interact with something complicated, I bit the bullet. The treadmill is a Rebel 1000, and so far I’ve been very pleased with it. The desk is an IKEA Hemnes secretary, which I had already been using as a standing/sitting desk; I put it on bed risers, which put the top maybe an inch above optimal height for typing on my laptop, and a few inches too high for a desktop keyboard (which it is anyway too shallow for). I just hung a whiteboard behind it, and will be pushing up against the wall a bit more to use that more comfortably. My plan is to use this setup for a month or so to a) make sure I actually am able to use it in the long run before I invest in more bulky/expensive furniture, b) get a good feel for what I need out of it in terms of height and surface area, and c) make sure that this is really where I want this furniture to live.

Since the treadmill arrived about two weeks ago, I’ve been progressively spending more time on it while working and web-surfing and so on. I’m at the point where I can generally walk for an hour or so without noticing that I’ve been walking that long. My ideal walking pace seems to be about 1.1 mph, though speeding up and slowing down for brief periods can help break things up a bit. According to my Fitbit (attached to my sock, since having my hands/wrists on the keyboard tends to deaden the jostling its accelerometer needs to detect footfall at my waist) I had been averaging 5000-6000 steps per day (2-2.5 miles) and since then about 8000 per day (> 3.5 miles). My hope is to get that average to about 5 miles per day during the week.

As to writing, my hope is that I’ll generally have more energy, as I used to when I more regularly went to the gym, and that by getting some of my exercise while I work I won’t have to decide between exercise and writing in the evenings. Either way, I’ll make a note to update in a month or so.

Leave a comment

Posted by on 3 August, 2014 in Writing



Really, Amazon?

I’ve been sitting on the fence about this Amazon/Hachette thing for a while. Mostly because I just don’t give a damn. As far as I can tell, it’s one big company against another in pretty much standard big-company negotiations, moderately more amusing than most because each party is trying to suck in its gut and call itself “the little guy”.

This last letter from Amazon, though, contains a bunch of things that piss me off. And this is my blog, so I’m going to rant. Let’s start off with the thing that pisses me off the most: “Unjustifiably high”.

OK. Prices are high. But that word “unjustifiably” bothers the hell out of me. It’s an absolute, a blanket word. And it bothers me when that word comes from a bookseller, because it completely elides the bizarre concept that one book might actually be different from another.

News flash: Some books are different from other books. They might be different in ways that justify different pricing. Maybe, gasp, even higher prices.

Let’s approach this from the simplest metric, of length: everyone can agree that one book can be longer than another, right? If Tor released the Wheel of Time as a single ebook, should it suddenly be $9.99? It is, after all, widely touted as a single story (as I’ve heard a billion times since it got put on the Hugo ballot); what’s so magical about being in one volume instead of a dozen? Forget the “small number of specialized titles” weaseling; it’s pretty plain that they think the vast majority of ebooks should be $9.99 or less (they even begrudge that last penny to make it ten bucks!) Thanks to the strong focus on series in SF, fantasy, and mystery, just about everything I read is part of a series that could be packaged like that. Or what about the Lord of the Rings, or Connie Willis’s Blackout/All Clear pair? Both were originally single works split up because of mechanical printing constraints. Should The Fellowship of the Ring ebook be $3.33 because it’s only a third of a book? And if you allow that a combined ebook of the Lord of the Rings “can” be more than an X-note, what about the latest doorstop from George RR Martin? Sometimes $15 or $20 or even $30 might actually be a justifiable price for a single ebook based purely on the qualities of that book.

But wait! A 200,000 word book entertains me longer than a more standard 80,000 word book. Should the maximum for most books actually be $4.99, so that the maximum for the longest books is $9.99? Enquiring minds want to know, Amazon! Or is the policy that a book is a book, a Commodity Unit Of Entertainment, not to be price-differentiated except by discount?

Length is also useful to argue because, as Amazon points out, books compete against video games and TV, and those things all consume time. Time’s a good one! The Big Lebowski DVD costs $6.99 on Amazon ($9.99 if you prefer to partake in the video equivalent of e-books and watch online.) The run time for the Big Lebowski is 2 hours. I’m not the fastest reader in the world, but it takes me at least four hours to read most books. Should books be $13.99 (christ, what is it with that last fucking penny? Is it bad luck?) since by this metric they’re twice as entertaining as The Big Lebowski?

Since Amazon brought up video games, why not look at the thriving indie scene against which books are competing for reader time? There’s no one magic price for games. Some games are longer, better, more of a sure hit, or just incurred more costs that need to be recouped in order to produce the next one. Letting the blockbusters charge their higher prices opened up a space at the low end for indie games, many of which are just as good but lack a marketing budget or an art budget, or just have to be shorter because the indie developer can’t go that long between releases. (That’s something that indie authors should think a LONG DAMN TIME about before cheering for Amazon against Hachette, by the way.) More than that, a higher price lets a developer signal, “We think this game is so good that it’s worth a higher price.” And that’s a very important statement to be able to make about an artistic work.

Look. Amazon is probably completely right that when you adjust pricing, the sweet spot for volume vs. profit for most books is around ten bucks. So what? For some books it’s probably lower, and for some books it’s probably higher. It all depends: some books or shorter or crappier than other books. That’s the problem with doing large-scale analysis and treating a class of goods like a commodity: the individual differences wash out. But as an author, I live in those individual differences. If I ever self-publish a novel on Amazon, I’ll pay very close attention to their price analysis… and then make my own damn decision based on a combination of their analysis, my subjective valuation of my own work, my comparison of it to the prices of similar titles, and my own desire to experiment with price and see for myself what the sweet spot is for my work and my audience. I might screw up, I might strike it rich, Amazon might decide I’m too stupid to do business with. Many things could happen. I’m a grown-up, and will do the grown-up thing: whine about it on Twitter and circulate petitions.

That’s what really rubs me the wrong way: this notion that it’s Amazon’s job to prevent anyone from screwing up. If I’m publishing through Hachette, and Hachette prices my books too high, then that’s between me and Hachette and my readers. Thanks for the price elasticity data, absolutely, but it’s none of Amazon’s damn business. What if I decide that my professional strategy is to write books that only appeal to millionaires, and sell them for a ton of money apiece like that thousand dollar iPhone app? I may be bloody stupid to try it, but who the hell is Amazon to tell me I can’t? I can screw myself by selling for $.99 a copy, but not by selling for $99 a copy? They can decide to carry my books, or not: I think that’s the limit of Amazon’s right to unilaterally poke its nose in.

(Now, that said. There IS an argument to be made here that putting prices too high invites piracy and so cuts into Amazon’s expected return on its very small investment in putting up a web page and thirty cents worth of disk space for your book. But they’re not making that argument, probably because it would shine a spotlight on just how vanishingly little work Amazon does for its profit per ebook. 35 percent to the author who spent 6-18 months (what’s that in GRRM years?) writing it; 35 to the publisher who edited it, commissioned cover art, and marketed it; 30 to Amazon who …put up a fucking web page?? You want to talk marginal costs per copy, Bezos? Sure, let’s talk marginal costs per copy.)

Their whole post is a smokescreen. Even if everything in it is absolutely true, it’s all completely beside the point. Here’s what I see behind it: Amazon sells everything at a discount, and it’s bleeding money. So, they want Hachette to bring down their prices at all vendors closer to the price point Amazon picks, so that Amazon doesn’t have to discount as much to sell at the price it wants to sell at. It’s good old-fashioned squeezing the suppliers just like every other bookseller does (or would if it could); it’s standard business, and I respect that. Just don’t cloak yourself in sanctimonious bullshit while you do it.

And since any post criticizing Amazon is taken as pro-Hachette and anti-independent author, I present the traditional running of the caveats: 1) Hachette has shown evident incompetence in every single stage of this whole nonsense, at all corporate levels. The main difference is that Amazon’s bullshit comes in little easy to kick piles like this, while Hachette is more of a pig lagoon. If they’re so stupid in their pricing that Amazon doesn’t think it worth selling their books, that’s Hachette’s fault and it’s not up to Amazon to strongarm them into saving themselves. 2) I rather like Amazon’s practices taken as a whole. I buy a lot of stuff there, including books, and other than the sanctimonious bullshit PR posts, they’re engaging in standard negotiations (which, now that I think of it, is also standard negotiations!) I, like Amazon, am large and contain multitudes. 3) If you feel the need to knee-jerk protect Amazon from any criticism whatsoever, especially if you feel that criticism of Amazon threatens your livelihood (as some have claimed) then you need to rethink the adjective “independent”.

(EDIT: It was pointed out that my earlier post on Amazon and used e-books might also be of interest)

Leave a comment

Posted by on 30 July, 2014 in Writing


What Are Your Favorite Short Mysteries?

I’ve been thinking a lot about short mystery structure lately, trying to figure out what works at the 4k-12k word range. Shorter works than that always seem to rely on twists, and feel more like vignettes or rely on a single gotcha like those “Catch A Murderer!” books. Longer works than 12k get closer to traditional mystery plots, I feel, just shorter and with fewer twists and turns. That middle range eludes me, though, which is a shame because 4k-8k is the most publishable size for short SF. It’s too long for a twist or gotcha, but it’s often not long enough for a more traditional plot, especially when speculative elements need to be introduced, too.

So I’ve got a stack to read through over the summer while I think about this. But I’m also curious what your favorite short mysteries are, and what you like about them. Is there anything you think I should read in order to get a better feel for how these kind of stories work?

Leave a comment

Posted by on 18 July, 2014 in Mystery, Reading


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 476 other followers

%d bloggers like this: