WICKED is wonderful

A colleague had warned me that the Broadway version of Gregory Maguire's terrific novel WICKED was nothing like the book itself, which I loved. I haven't had a chance to ask her why she felt that way, but my impression was quite different.

We all know the stories of movies eviscerating the books they sprang from, and even a few stories of movies improving upon flawed novels (BRIDGES OF MADISON COUNTY springs to mind, as does THE HORSE WHISPERER.) The musical WICKED, in my opinion, did something different. In a way, it opened up the ideas of the book, made them more accessible, made us in the audience think about how evil is, as both the book and the play assert, sometimes thrust upon us.

I'm not the greatest Broadway musical fan. Particularly in the last fifteen years or so, the music has a sameness that I find tedious. Such a dearth of melody! But the tunes in WICKED, while hardly memorable, weren't bad, and they did take a minor turn once in a while that reflected the sense of the story. And I appreciated not having to put my fingers in my ears, as I did all the way through RENT.

But it was the story I found remarkable. WICKED the musical works beautifully as a play, not so much referencing the original source material, of course--the L. Frank Baum material, that is--but the movie, which is quite a different story. The play has a quite satisfying dramatic arc, and something substantive to say. I found the ending a tad too convenient, but still, it's a delightful show. I'm not surprised Gregory Maguire is so happy with it (according to an essay in the program, written by him.) His novel personalizes a figure we've accepted for years as the embodiment of evil, without backstory or individuality, and the play goes even further to bring this figure to life, although of necessity without the depth of Maguire's characterization.

If you've never read the original WIZARD OF OZ, I recommend borrowing it from the library if you can get it. It's hard to believe that such a primitive work can take on a lasting life of its own, create its own cultural paradigm, grow into a variety of forms. Of course we've all seen the movie. And I hope you'll read Geoff Ryman's odd but fabulous novel WAS, for yet another approach.

And then, when you can, go see the musical. I enjoyed it from beginning to end. Wonderful!

The write priority

Sent by my buddy Sharon Shinn:

"When writing a novel that's pretty much entirely what life turns into: 'Houseburned down. Car stolen. Cat exploded. Did 1500 easy words, so all in all it was apretty good day.'" -Neil Gaiman

And I remember William Gibson saying: "Writing a novel is mostly just walking around and worrying if it will work out."

Let's talk about plagiarism

Okay, there seems to be consensus that Cassie Edwards is too old to beat up on. She even puts her age on her MySpace page, 71--the page is all in pink, by the way. Naturally.

The issue stealing from other authors is being chatted up all over the internets now, with this poor senior lady at its center. So the question becomes, "What is plagiarism?" Crediting sources? Footnotes?

I'm working on a novel with lots of historical references now, and I'm certainly keeping a bibliography, in case I need to re-check something. Maybe--maybe that bibliography will go on the web page for the book, but it doesn't belong in the back of a piece of fiction.

Footnotes worked gloriously for Susannah Clarke's JONATHAN STRANGE AND MR. NORRELL, but they were part of the entertainment. They were funny and colorful and beautifully written. They had nothing to do with sources, and I don't think footnotes in fiction ever work unless they serve the purpose Ms. Clarke put them to.

It seems perfectly clear to me that plagiarism means lifting whole passages out of another author's work and putting them in your own. A little modification doesn't alter the fact that somebody else wrote the passage. And I don't think any writer--student, beginning author, or 71-year-old romance novelist--could mistake that for anything but what it is, stealing.

As has been pointed out on another forum, in science fiction we're all riffing off each other's ideas. Ideas are at the heart of what we do in sf, and there's no patent on them. Where we would get in trouble would be directly quoting another author without saying that we're doing so. Duh.B

ut gosh, I would hate, at the age of 71, and having published 100 novels, to have my career falling around my ears in such a fashion. I think I'm feeling more sorry for the lady in question than outraged. Her pride must be in tatters.

My pride, I feel sure, would have forestalled me doing any such thing in the first place.

Plagiarism, Romance, and Readers

Poor Cassie Edwards! Cassie is the author of more than 100 romance novels, delighting her readers with such titles as SAVAGE LONGINGS, SAVAGE MOON, and SAVAGE BELOVED (that one sounds fun, doesn't it?) Apparently she writes historical romance about Indians. Never mind all the issues I have with romantic views of Indians, since I are one, but imagine this: she's been cheating, and her READERS outed her!

In the New York Times, Felicia R. Lee (see, I'm being very careful to credit my sources) writes that Cassie's readers caught passages lifted directly from research materials. The whole article is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/12/books/12roma.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Romance+novelist+accused&oref=slogin (The best part is a link to blog called SmartBitchesTrashyBooks.com. I might like a blog by that name.)

And in her defense: "Ms. Edwards told an Associated Press reporter earlier this week that she did not know she was supposed to credit her sources. “When you write historical romances, you’re not asked to do that,” she said."

Okay, I've written historical, and of course I've done tons of research for my sf. I use the material, but I don't quote it. How boring would that be? This whole thing seems very odd to me, and I'm sure it will all blow over.

The part I can't get over is that the readers turned on her, like a pack of dogs chasing a rabbit! I don't know if I'm more stunned that they cared about the issue, or that romance readers found comparisons between a novel and a historical source. Maybe they really are SmartBitches. Bless 'em.

The trouble with used book sales

The following post is mostly quoted from a position paper published by Novelists, Inc. (NINC). The subject is one that worries a lot of us, and in my opinion, NINC has come up with a significant and well-informed position on the matter. It satisfies both my worry that my used book sales do nothing to help my publisher or me, and my guilt over the fact that I, too, buy used books, especially the very expensive reference books all writers have shelves and shelves of!

So here are a some of the most cogent passages. Many thanks to NINC and to the SFWA Forum for making this available:

"Novelists, Inc. (NINC) is a non-profit organization of professional published authors dedicated to advancing the interests of working writers. Used book sales, particularly sales of used books through the Internet, have a significant negative effect on the income of publishers, and, therefore, authors, as there is no remuneration to them for any sales of used books. This document is intended to focus attention on NINC's position that the copyright clause of the Constitution of the United States stands for the principle that authors and publishers have the right to share in the profits that others make from the sale of their work. Currently, authors and publishers do no share in the profits made through the sale of used books, a multi-billion dollar enterprise."

"In 2005, in an effort to understand the used-book industry and its scope, the Book Industry Study Group, Inc. (BISG) hired a consulting firm to conduct an in-depth study of used-book sales and the used-book industry in the United States. The study indicated that the negative effect of used-book sales on the book publishing industry is growing rapidly and bears serious consideration."

"NINC holds a firm position in favor of Federal legislation to combat the potentially damaging effect of used book sales on the current and future health of the publishing industry. Such legislation would be grounded in the intent of the language of Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the Constitution of the United States, which states that:'

The Congress shall have Power . . . To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.'"

In short, NINC proposes that a percentage of fees be paid ("Secondary Sale" fees) upon the reselling of any book within two years of its original publication date. A percentage of these fees would then transfer to authors.

Make no mistake, this is a serious issue. New contracts for authors are routinely, these days, being negotiated on past sales. And those past sales are NEW book sales. All those used books that crop up on Amazon before the new book is even available cost their authors money. I like NINC's proposal, because it doesn't ban the selling of used books, or even scold those of us who buy them, but make provisions for the publishers and authors to be compensated. For some writers, such a provision could be career-changing. And for readers, it means the variety of books available to them will be protected. Such a move would go a long way toward offsetting the best-seller, big box store mentality that assails publishing in this decade. I hope it works out.

The art of book promotion

Poor Ann Coulter. Did no one explain to HER that she has to promote her book?

Her newest hatefest, IF DEMOCRATS HAD ANY BRAINS, is tanking. Her last book spent twelve weeks on the New York Times bestseller list, but this one only lasted four. Her last book sold 223,000 copies in its first month out, and this one only 97,000.

Now all of us out here in genre-land know that you have to blog, you have to print up bookmarks, you have to do appearances, you have to work the system. Reviews don't help, Ann. (Well, in your case, they really don't help, since they're ghastly.) You have to work at this, not just write two hundred pages of tripe and expect it to sell!

Toby Bishop understands all this. The androgenous writer of AIRS BENEATH THE MOON is celebrating the appearance of the second book in the trilogy, AIRS AND GRACES, which is released this very day, December 18th. Toby's smart, and has sent e-mails to all and sundry, refreshed the website (http://www.tobybishop.net/, if you want to know). Or eager readers can visit http://www.amazon.com/Airs-Graces-Toby-Bishop/dp/0441015565/ref=sr_1_1/002-7963065-4204831?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187052410&sr=8-1 Toby doesn't expect great reviews alone to sell books.

Of course, Toby doesn't go around in an assortment of inappropriately skimpy little black dresses, either. Maybe that's how Coulter went wrong?

The stuff of science fiction

It's hard to write sf that's wild enough to compete with the truth these days. Here's a quote from the IPCC in Bali that will give you the chills:

"Dec. 12, 2007 How dire is the climate situation? Consider what Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the United Nations' prestigious Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said last month: "If there's no action before 2012, that's too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment." Pachauri has the distinction, or misfortune, of being both an engineer and an economist, two professions not known for overheated rhetoric."

We've all read doomed planet scenarios, of course. But have we read the ones in which ultraconservative politicians and mentally lazy consumers deny the evidence laid out for them?

According to Technorati.com: ". . . as of Dec. 11, the synthesis report had some 265 blog reactions, where the Aug. 24 YouTube video of Miss Teen South Carolina struggling to explain why a fifth of Americans can't locate the U.S. on a world map had more than 5,300 blog reactions."

The whole article is here: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/12/12/ipcc_report/ And it ends this way: "Or perhaps we could videotape Miss Teen South Carolina trying to explain why Americans still refuse to take serious national action on climate change. "

I suppose exploring this wouldn't make as exciting a story as, say, the planet blowing up and shooting bits of itself all over the 'verse, but it would be real science. I'm just not sure I have the internal fortitude to take it on.