Tag Archives: ethics

Something’s Going On ‘Round Here

I’ve been quiet on-line recently.  Scrambling to survive can rake up a lot of energy, denying it for creative purposes other than furthering survival.

To quote a favorite line from a broadcast personality:  Can we say “Whee” now?  (Bless you, Benny Hill, wherever you are…)

Really.  We have a roof for now.  We have food for a week or more, even if not of a type or with a variety to please both of us.  BUT the challenges are piling up taller, deeper, and darker.  Does make it difficult to write cheerfully positive viewpoints, although some of the darker futures I have envisioned over the years are already getting far too much reinforcement from the political front these days.  (The work on “Tales of the Apocalypse Decade” had to be suspended when I saw where some of the storylines were headed in the face of the ill wind out of Washington D.C. …)

I’ve not updated this blog in far too long.  Distractions and realities of navigating end-of-life care for family members took their own toll.  Added to that was the challenge of assisting my partner’s family as they prepared the house (we’d lived in it with her family as they declined) for disposition.  No small task:  they’d been there for more than thirty years, and there were family records and “stuff” going back at least fifty beyond that even ignoring some of the genealogical records and family history.

We were exhausted by the process, which was made worse by conflicting points of view about the needs of preserving financial records for the estate.  It saddened me considerably to have more than one adult who should have known better advocate for the wholesale destruction of records that legally the estate is bound to preserve by law and / or IRS rules.  My brain suffered whiplash in the process, I tell you true!  (As later matters have developed, even some of what we did manage to preserve has been lost, but we could not have known that at the time.)

Then there’s the small matter of lacking income since.  Declining health has not helped with the writing or the employment search either.  Only so much energy remains after days of dealing with Texas heat, mountains of sometimes crumbling paper, and emotional disruptions.  Health demands a toll, and takes payments from you even when you have nothing in reserve to make those payments.  (Human biochemistry has a VERY efficient collection agent in these matters, a mechanism that is relentless and not easily bribed or mollified.)

So.  What’s next?  We don’t know yet.  Even once we find out, there could be interesting twists and turns before, during, and after the revelations are made.  No doubt interesting to those directly affected, maybe not so much to others.

And THAT, my putative readers, is Life with a capital L.


Emerging Trends In Writing — The Downside Of Drivel

I’ll probably be strung up by my thumbs, figuratively, if Certain People ever actually read this particular rant.  However, I have opinions.  Strong ones.  Sometimes I even express them in written form, as opposed to simply shouting them into an empty well…

I don’t like bullies.  Never have, never will.  Does not matter one bit in the slightest whether it is a matter of brute force physicality or sharp-witted intellectualism.  Bullying is bullying, regardless.  Along the way, this attitude gets me in trouble.  That falls into place along with my other sterling quality of an inability to resist pointing out that the truth is other than some nitwit might be claiming.  “Flamewars”, “Blog Battles”, and the not-so-honorable art of “Trolling” in forums, boards, or newsgroups all — I repeat with emphasis ALL — deserve to be held up to the real light of honest truth and discarded as “not worth my time”.  Will they be?  Unfortunately for all of us online, not very damn likely.  Among other reasons that I propose they must continue is that we must each and separately aggressively preserve our rights to freedom of expression.  Ignoring the ignorant and the deliberately, willfully erroneous just is not where my heart lies in the fight for Truth.

Hmmmm.  Truth.  Sticky concept there.  There are self-evident Truths out there.  Trust me that this is indeed so.  Whether they are necessarily the same for you, me, or any other individual remains an unprovable position as long as we continue to operate under our current universe’s rules for proof and refutation.  What is preference for me and others born into my birth-culture may be utterly foreign to others of my species and race born into a different culture, sometimes even though both may express adherence to the same standards of morality and (substantially) similar religious teachings.  A third culture on the same spectrum may take those preferences and make them essentials of civilized behavior, treat them as self-evident law, and severely punish any who would choose a different manner of expressing the tenets.  Horrid and reprehensible wars have been fought for all of recorded history over just such differences.  We should expect more of modern human society, warts-and-all interconnected as we may be on some frighteningly final levels?  (Nuclear Armageddon is NOT anyone’s friend.  Global Winter may play favorites, but it still kinda ruins the day of the vast majority of the planet’s currently viable biomes.)

“Politically Correct” had a time and a place in polite conversation.  The egregious overuse of the term, the certitudes, and the mindset have all contributed to a distinct and urgent need to kick all three to the curb with vim, vigor, and carefully-applied velocity.  YES, with politeness too.  Politically Correct changes to the way we write have taken hold, whether good, bad, or indifferent.  Those changes should not necessarily be abandoned utterly.  It is the combative attitude of “Politically Correct” that has become less than truly polite and has edged far too closely into the thought-policed fringe leading toward Orwellian or Huxleyian dystopias.

There comes a time in the writing of fiction when the writer must choose the degree of verisimilitude to be applied to the “world” being created by the words being set forth to bring the story to life.  (Yes, Virgil and Virginia, this also applies to non-fiction writing of most coherent types I’m ever likely to put my own attentions to…)  For the best of the authors out there, now and in the illustrious (HAH!) past of human literature, the STORY came first, the “real” and desired systems of the non-story world that we live in have nearly always been secondary.  (Yes, even in the midst of a rant I can demonstrate tempering consideration.  Wouldn’t do to ignore Ayn Rand or that Sinclair fellow, among other counter-examples.)  I am encouraged by the extent to which most of my peers seem to understand this.

I am discouraged by the extent to which some of those willing to rant AGAINST the practice have apparently been gaining traction and radicalizing otherwise sane and sober folk through various means.

I write on both sides of the fiction divide for a number of reasons.  Some of those reasons directly relate to my desire to make fiction “better” in some way.  I’ve written about the history of weapons, the historical Bard (and modern descendants of the type), and about how to create more-believable corporeal undead.  My article on the last has even been reprinted (in a paying market, no less!), so at least one editor out there seems to think I can get an idea across.  I also wrote a column on grass-roots activism for a size-rights magazine a decade ago.

Does any of that make a difference when I sit down to write a fictional account of the next apocalypse to threaten human extinction?  Well, maybe a little — my zombioid critters may not have active mentality, but they also Make A MESS as they thrash across the story-scape, and the human survivors facing them don’t suddenly all have swords available to lop off the squishy bits.  Does my understanding and background mean that any of the human survivors will be anguishing over whether or not their gender/sex role choices are the “right” ones?  Not likely, unless / until they have some time to relax and think about anything beyond personal and perhaps racial survival.

Does my emerging culture of survivors care (much) what the remaining technologically-blessed enclaves are opining about politics in blogs written on the pitiful remnants of the Interwebsnet they have managed to keep running while the rest of the civilized world collapses into howling chaos?  Not likely, at least not until it makes a difference to  personal / species survival for the band of “winners” who crawl out of the chaos into the too-temporary safety of an enclave.

Does religion make a difference to any of the survivors?  Probably, but I haven’t gotten that far in the creation of the alternate universe this set of stories will occupy.  Hey, wow, I only started writing this particular storyline three days ago.  Give me SOME time to consider what the stories need, what I need for the stories, and what my erstwhile readership wants.  Will the type of post-apocalypse government forms make a difference?  Far more likely, BUT the functions and types of government the survivors will tolerate are going to be driven by the needs of my story.  They will not be bent to the expectations of any external body.  There may be some consideration of outsider opinion on the way to publication, but that consideration will be separate from the form and choices of MY ORIGINAL story.

I’m betting on more physical and immediate survival as driving the characters that will be most interesting here, those who will be living through their unexpected descent into nightmarish conditions.  The “Politically Correct” elements will go hang on a meat-hook in the corner for now.  They don’t contribute to surviving the next night’s challenges.

Does that make me less of a (insert genre tag here) writer?  Well, as long as the genre isn’t “Women’s Fiction”, “Politically Correct”, or “Message Fiction”, I Do Not Think So.