(Updated June 17, 2012) This post has become of historical interest only ... the chat log lived on someone else's website and is now overcome by events. But if chatting is your thing, check out my new discussion group at Goodreads).
Where does the time go?
My thinking about occasional SF and Nonsense internet chats was: every couple of months. Today I noticed that the first-and-so-far-only chat was way back in ... January. Yikes!
That inaugural chat was a lot of fun. (Curious? Check the chat log here.) So: I thought I'd test the waters (see virtual toe dip) for doing another. Hence, the poll on the righthand side of this page, immediately below my profile. As before, the chat would be on a Saturday late afternoon (as such things are judged in Eastern time).
You want to know more? IIRC the last chat touched on many of the topics you read (and comment) about here: aliens, SF tropes, TV and movie SF. Those are all fair game if we do this again. But the calendar suggests my own writing as a topic (internet chat hasn't been foremost in my mind for a reason):
Last June: Juggler of Worlds (a collaboration with Larry Niven) was reissued in paperback.
September 1: Fools' Experiments will be reissued in paperback.
October 13: Small Miracles will be released.
November 10: Destroyer of Worlds (a collaboration with Larry Niven) will be released.
The poll runs through September. Vote early and often ;-)
Showing posts with label chat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label chat. Show all posts
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Heavy on the SF, (hopefully) light on the nonsense
If you ever wondered what an SF author's chat session is like ... wonder no more!
The first (of an occasional series?) of SF and Nonsense chats was held January 24th. Topics included tropes in SF, what makes SFnal aliens interesting, genre and subgenre boundaries, and science popularizations. Along the way, we almost certainly took potshots at something you hold dear.
The whole dialogue, from start to finish, is here.
The first (of an occasional series?) of SF and Nonsense chats was held January 24th. Topics included tropes in SF, what makes SFnal aliens interesting, genre and subgenre boundaries, and science popularizations. Along the way, we almost certainly took potshots at something you hold dear.
The whole dialogue, from start to finish, is here.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Just slightly ahead of our time
Last week's SF and Nonsense chat (thanks to everyone who dropped by!) visited several topics. Tropes in SF occupied much of the back-and-forth, and what makes a fictional alien interesting, and whether tropes are good or bad things, and what fraction of SF readers welcome -- or shun -- scientific rigor. Large swathes of the nominally SF section of bookstores are alternate history, or scientific fantasy, or high fantasy, or oaters in space, or ... darn near anything but SCIENCE fiction.
Which led briefly to a related literary form: the techno-thriller. Arguably the techno-thriller is science fiction -- the type of SF with its science/tech front and center. No fantasy, no hand waving, no magic -- just stuff that works or very plausibly can be extrapolated from what we already know to work. Think Michael Crichton, (some) Tom Clancy, Dale Brown, Stephen Coonts, Robin Cook ....
By most definitions of science fiction, science must be, somehow, integral to the story. That said, science's role may be metaphorical or tangential or stage setting.
As with so-called hard SF (hard meaning scientifically rigorous), tech -- and lots of it -- is integral to the techno-thriller. The techno-thriller reader grooves on technical description. Techno-thrillers can (to some tastes) overdo the digression into neat techno-toys, but description is expected. Perhaps because these stories are grounded in today's cutting-edge tech, techno-thrillers are generally -- I want to say always, but someone will surely cite an exception -- near future. (See, there is meaning to this post's subject. I merely took longer than usual to get there.)
By their content, techno-thrillers could be considered SF. By marketing and convention (and location at the bookstore), techno-thrillers are positioned as a separate genre. And yet hard SF and techno-thrillers logically speak to similar readers.
Much of my writing straddles the fence. In fact, I have declared myself a "perpetrator of science fiction and techno-thrillers."
What say you? Are techno-thrillers SF marketed differently? Or are techno-thrillers a genre all their own?
Our operators are standing by ...
Which led briefly to a related literary form: the techno-thriller. Arguably the techno-thriller is science fiction -- the type of SF with its science/tech front and center. No fantasy, no hand waving, no magic -- just stuff that works or very plausibly can be extrapolated from what we already know to work. Think Michael Crichton, (some) Tom Clancy, Dale Brown, Stephen Coonts, Robin Cook ....
By most definitions of science fiction, science must be, somehow, integral to the story. That said, science's role may be metaphorical or tangential or stage setting.
As with so-called hard SF (hard meaning scientifically rigorous), tech -- and lots of it -- is integral to the techno-thriller. The techno-thriller reader grooves on technical description. Techno-thrillers can (to some tastes) overdo the digression into neat techno-toys, but description is expected. Perhaps because these stories are grounded in today's cutting-edge tech, techno-thrillers are generally -- I want to say always, but someone will surely cite an exception -- near future. (See, there is meaning to this post's subject. I merely took longer than usual to get there.)
By their content, techno-thrillers could be considered SF. By marketing and convention (and location at the bookstore), techno-thrillers are positioned as a separate genre. And yet hard SF and techno-thrillers logically speak to similar readers.
Much of my writing straddles the fence. In fact, I have declared myself a "perpetrator of science fiction and techno-thrillers."
What say you? Are techno-thrillers SF marketed differently? Or are techno-thrillers a genre all their own?
Our operators are standing by ...
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Chat: a noble experiment
Just a reminder ... the first SF and Nonsense chat will be held Saturday 1/24, beginning (or at least I'll be checking in) at 4:00 p.m. ET.
See the chat announcement for details.
I hope to see you there.
See the chat announcement for details.
I hope to see you there.
Monday, January 5, 2009
A little gossip, a little chat
(Updated June 17, 2012) This post has become of historical interest only ... the chat log lived on someone else's website and is now overcome by events. But if chatting is your thing, check out my new discussion group at Goodreads).
A little idle talk of SF and Nonsense (with apologies to Joe Darion).
Last year's blog poll showed interest in an SF and Nonsense online chat. Let's give it a try, shall we? Saturday, 1/24/09, starting at 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time (that's GMT - 5 hours).
To access the chat, go to the Edward M. Lerner IRC chat server. Holler if you have questions.
Judging from comments on blog posts, I'll anticipate a few likely topics -- not to insist on them, but to prime the conversational pump: SF tropes, what we like (and don't) about popular SF series on TV, fandom, and my own fiction.
Whether or not you voted, I hope you'll join the fun.
A little idle talk of SF and Nonsense (with apologies to Joe Darion).
Last year's blog poll showed interest in an SF and Nonsense online chat. Let's give it a try, shall we? Saturday, 1/24/09, starting at 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time (that's GMT - 5 hours).
To access the chat, go to the Edward M. Lerner IRC chat server. Holler if you have questions.
Judging from comments on blog posts, I'll anticipate a few likely topics -- not to insist on them, but to prime the conversational pump: SF tropes, what we like (and don't) about popular SF series on TV, fandom, and my own fiction.
Whether or not you voted, I hope you'll join the fun.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
