Bests
At the very first Readercon <http://www.readercon.org/> a writer pal of mine introduced himself by saying, "I’m Michael Swanwick, and with the possible exception of Gene Wolfe, I’m the best writer present today." While I may not be Asimov’s most accomplished practitioner of fiction, I will assert that I, James Patrick Kelly, am the best damn Internet columnist ever to appear in this magazine.
Having typed that, I would be the first to acknowledge that my contributions here are by no means above reproach. The links I commend to your attention mostly work. When they don’t, it’s because an eternity passes in the dot.com time stream between when I write this column and when you read it. Meanwhile the net continues to grow at an incredible rate. When I opened Google <http://www.google.com/> this morning, it informed me that it would be searching 1,387,529,000 web pages. I know I must be missing lots of good stuff. And recently I have observed myself offering opinions much more freely than when I first occupied this space. I sometimes fear that I may be slipping from reportage into pundithood. Luckily for us all, many of the folks who read this column are not shy about offering comments, critique, and suggestions.
Strange
I had a long and thoughtful response to a recent column from one Jed Hartman of Mountain View, California, who among his other accomplishments is senior fiction editor at one of our best new webzines, Strange Horizons <http://www.strangehorizons.com/>. I asked Jed for permission to share some of his comments and he agreed. He writes, ". . . in the ‘Web Zines’ column, you talk about online magazine archives as potentially becoming ‘the place where yesterday’s stories go to disappear forever.’ I can certainly understand the concern–any archive that contains more than fifteen or twenty items can be pretty daunting, just like the stack of unread print magazines you compared it to. And yet, it seems to me a somewhat strange complaint, because without the archive, yesterday’s stories are really gone forever. The choice isn’t between an archive and some better way of keeping stories around; it’s between an archive and no archive. It seems clear to me that having an online archive of published material is better (in terms of reader access to stories) than removing published material permanently as soon as it’s no longer recent.
"And there are distinct advantages to online archives. For example, they can be searchable–our SH archive now allows you to search for authors, titles, phrases, and we’re working on improving the archive-search function to look for keywords and categories.
"Also, archives can be indexed by the big search engines like Google and AltaVista. This seems to me to be an even bigger advantage than having a search function on the magazine’s site. If Joe Random Websurfer wants to find stories by Canadian writer Ursula Pflug, for instance, he can type her name into a Google search box, and the first hit Google returns is her story in our archives."
Your columnist replies. Jed’s points here are well taken, in particular with regard to turning up hits on the big search engines. But I’m still not sanguine about readers rooting diligently through on-line archives. Strange Horizons is about a year old and already has a fiction archive of some fifty stories. If, as we all hope, the site prospers, in five years the archive will contain two hundred and fifty stories and in ten years, five hundred stories. True, some writers may pull their work from the archives for publication elsewhere, but I can’t imagine myself scrolling through screens and screens and screens, looking for stuff I missed. I guess what I’d like to see is some kind of organized archive-mining once our webzines mature, so that the editors pull stories they particularly loved back onto the front page, or perhaps package thematic collections, say of stories with dinosaurs or robots or people who get pushed out of airlocks, and put them where readers can easily rediscover them.
Believe me, I have nothing against archives. You will note, if you are reading this on the Asimov’s website, that there is no archive of the best damn Internet column in the magazine. This is not a complaint, mind you, only an observation. I knew the rules going in and so have taken upon myself to create an "On the Net" archive at my own site. In fact, as I continue sharing reader reactions, I’ll be pointing you at the source material. You might, for instance, want to read (or re-read) Web Zines <http://www.jimkelly.net/pages/webzines.htm>, first published in May of 2001.
Jed Hartman also took issue with my sweeping generalization that webzine editors seem to have a preference for shorter forms and cites all the novellas that have appeared on SciFiction <http://www.scifi.com/scifiction/>, edited by the excellent Ellen Datlow, as a counter example. I might also point you toward Keith Brooke’s pioneering Infinity Plus <http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/>. However, he does admit that "there are plenty of people who don’t like to read anything from a computer screen, but who are probably more willing to read shorter stories than longer ones. I’m personally willing to read a novel on my Palm handheld, but I know there’s a wide range of attitudes about such things among readers. I suspect, though, that over the next ten to twenty years we’ll see more and more people shifting toward reading online."
Jim again. Sure, when all the dinosaurs like me die off. In the meantime, I have a near term solution to the online reading conundrum: the yBook Reader (see below).
One last shot from Jed: "You had mentioned that Strange Horizons seems to have a preference for ‘short, sharp shock’ stories. It’s true that we do regularly publish pieces under two thousand words, but we also regularly publish pieces between five thousand and six thousand words, which generally tend to have more depth and a slower pace and a bit less punch-at-the-end."
Of course, I get the last word. I’m glad for the chance to correct a misrepresentation. When I first visited Strange Horizons, it featured not quite a dozen stories. In the interim the site has become a showcase for some of the most exciting new voices in the genre, folks like Nnedi Okorafor <http://icarus.cc.uic.edu/~nokora1/index.html>, Madeleine Rose Reardon Dimond <http://home.earthlink.net/~mmroserd/> , Michael J. Jasper <http://www.sff.net/people/michaeljasper/>, Alan DeNiro <http://www.taverners-koans.com/ratbastards/alan.html>, Nora M. Mulligan <http://www.geocities.com/noramm10566/>, Christopher Barzak <http://www.taverners-koans.com/ratbastards/zakbar.html>, M. L. Konett <http://userdata.acd.net/sheep/index.htm>, Cecilia Tan <http://www.ceciliatan.com/home.html>, and Beth Bernobich <http://www.sff.net/people/beth-bernobich/>. Not only that, but SH has reprinted some of our very best, like Thomas Disch <http://www.michaelscycles.freeserve.co.uk/tmd.htm>, Howard Waldrop <http://www.sff.net/people/Waldrop/> and Carol Emshwiller <http://www.sfwa.org/members/emshwiller/>–you know, writers who play in Michael Swanwick’s league.
useful clicks
Simon Haynes of Perth, Australia wrote me not once, but twice to call attention to some cool software he has coded. The second time was in response to my column on E-Books <http://www.jimkelly.net/pages/e_books.htm> in March of 2001. Seems that Simon has created a Windows-based e-book reader called the yBook Reader, which is available for free at his website, Spacejock Software <http://www.spacejock.com>. Simon points out that his software "has these advantages over MS Reader: It’s got a two-page view and will read HTML and TXT files and can be run off a floppy." Its advantage over Adobe Reader (formerly the Glassbook Reader)? "You don’t have to pan the damn page when you zoom in," writes Simon. "It rejustifies the book instead." I have tried the yBook Reader and find that it works very well indeed. It is particularly handy for reading downloaded web pages. Say I want to read the latest from Strange Horizons or SciFiction. I save the file to my hard disk, pop up yBook Reader, load the file into it and voilà: indented paragraphs and no scrolling! You too can have a book-like reading experience on your very own screen. By the way, I would be remiss if I did not point out the name of Simon’s site comes from his comic novel Hal Spacejock, which was short-listed for Australia’s George Turner Prize in 2000.
Rachel Sythe of Sebastopol, California thought I might be interested in a webcomic site called Electric Sheep <http://www.e-sheep.com/> created by the artist Patrick Farley and I was. Very much. There are some wonderful web-enabled strips here; the ones I like best were "Chrysalis Colossus," an SF meditation on evolution and futurity that quotes from Ray Bradbury’s "A Sound of Thunder" and "Shapeshifter," a surreal but exquisitely rendered fantasy about ancient powers that lurk in an enchanted cup of coffee. Clicking on the coming soon link will take you to a page previewing future delights that also includes a list of links to other comic sites. First on the Electric Sheep list is the website of Scott McCloud, which I raved about in my column on Comics <http://www.jimkelly.net/pages/comics.htm> back in December of 1999. McCloud’s site is well worth revisiting, especially for the graphic essay I Can’t Stop Thinking #5: Coins of the Realm <http://www.scottmccloud.com/comics/icst/icst-5/icst-5.html>, which is about how "The New Economy" might affect artists. Also check out Scott’s link page <http://www.scottmccloud.com/links/links.html> for ten of his favorite webcomics artists. Much beautiful weirdness here.
Craig Engler, Maximum Commander of the sprawl that is Scifi.com <http://www.scifi.com/> asks that I mention two new features that he says "are designed to be general resources for the entire SF Internet community." The Events Calendar <http://www.scifi.com/events> and the SF Web Guide <http://www.scifi.com/webguide>. The calendar is intended to be a list of what’s happening across the genre from book releases and TV show premieres to conventions and net chats, while the Web Guide aspires to be "the Yahoo! of science fiction." As I write this on a hot day in August, both are works in progress, but given the resources of Scifi.com, when you read this on a chilly evening in March, they may well be must click sites.
I first mentioned Tangent Online <http://www.tangentonline.com/> in a column on Content <http://www.jimkelly.net/pages/content.htm> in July of 1999. Some time thereafter, what was indisputably the premier short SF review site on the web fell on hard times: updates were irregular at best. In April of 2001, the indefatigable Dave Truesdale announced that he was relaunching Tangent with a new look, a new web master and a new web address. I am here to tell you that it is better than ever. The reviews are by divers hands and while some critics are perhaps more astute than others, all of them are eminently readable. The current incarnation of Tangent is not quite as free as it used to be, however. While you don’t need to pay to browse the site’s archives, in order to read the very latest reviews Dave asks that you subscribe for the very reasonable sum of five dollars for an entire year. Jim says do it–this is a site that both writers and readers should care for.
Walt Smith of Raleigh, North Carolina wrote to pick "a relatively minor nit" with my use of the word listserve in the July 2000 column called Inbox <http://www.jimkelly.net/pages/inbox.htm>. Walt points out, "One subscribes to the list (or mailing list) and not to the listserve, itself. Properly, there ain’t no such animal as a listserve . . . there’s a list server and like any server, it’s hardware running some kind of program. I realize that the rabble have managed to make this, through their linguistic bastardization, a losing battle, but never let it be said that I don’t try to keep otherwise intelligent and well-meaning people on the straight and narrow."
I hope that means me, so thanks, Walt!
exit
I believe it was Anton Chekhov <http://geocities.com/Heartland/Bluffs/7745/chekhov/> who said that if a writer puts a gun on the mantel in Act I, it had better go off in Act III. I’ve had my friend Michael Swanwick sitting on the mantle since the beginning of this column; I guess it’s time to explain why he’s there.
Several years ago Michael picked up an issue of Asimov’s that featured the two of us. My name appeared on the cover just above his and, for an instant, he misread this as "James Patrick Kelly" by Michael Swanwick. He has related his confusion to me several times as the idea for a work of fiction he might write someday. I take this seriously; Michael has already given me a walk-on part in one of his stories. So now, by writing an essay called "Michael Swanwick," I hope to have discouraged him from penning his threatened Jim Kelly story.
But I do have a justification–however slim–for making "Michael Swanwick" the title of this column. In a February 2000 column called Readers’ Writers <http://www.jimkelly.net/pages/readers’_writers.htm> I chided Michael for not having a website. Recently Vlatko Juric-Kokic of Zagreb, Croatia, Keith Brooke of Brightlingsea, England, Peter Tillman of Tucson, Arizona, and Nicholas Gevers of Cape Town, South Africa, banded together to unleash Michael Swanwick Online <http://www.michaelswanwick.com/> on cyberspace, with Michael’s blessing and cooperation. This is a very nice site indeed, with a generous sample of stories and opinion by and about Michael. One unusual but very Swanwickian feature is Unca Mike’s Bad Advice column. Michael explains the concept, "My advice is designed to cut new talent off at the knees and thus keep down the number of writers I have to compete against."
Very funny, Michael, but is it the best bad advice ever?