Welcome to the weekend — and to get you started, here’s a nice stack of new books and ARCs that have come to the Scalzi Compound. Tell me in the comments which ones excite your “gotta have it” neurons.
Welcome to the weekend — and to get you started, here’s a nice stack of new books and ARCs that have come to the Scalzi Compound. Tell me in the comments which ones excite your “gotta have it” neurons.
My old glasses prescription was going out of date, so I went to get a new pair. I ended up getting three pairs instead.
This is my new general set of glasses. It looks generally indistinguishable from my previous set of glasses, because I liked how they looked on me. They’re progressive lenses, which is the same as having bifocals but less obvious so you don’t have to acknowledge that you’re getting old.
These are my computer glasses, which is to say a pair with a fixed focus distance roughly in line with how far I sit from my computer screens. I got these because when I use my progressive lenses at my desk, I ended up doing a lot of neck craning to be able to see the screen (not a good idea) and/or taking my glasses off and parking my face a couple of inches in from the screen (not a good idea either). Now I can type rather more comfortably. Considering how much time I spend sitting in front of a computer, this is a positive turn of events.
And obviously these are sunglasses. These are also single-distance, designed for far distances since I will use them primarily for driving lounging about on a beach, where close vision will not be at a premium. These glasses have a nice Matrix-y vibe to them. Now all I need is a long leather duster (note: I will not be getting a long leather duster).
For those about to ask: My optometrist didn’t think I was an especially good candidate for contact lenses, because of the need for progressive lenses and because of a specific astigmatism that I have, and as for Lasik, well, I think lasers and eyeballs are a bad mix. So: new glasses! Three pairs! And there we are.
I made some awesome cookies, and by “made” I mean “combined ingredients that other people have already made to make them even better in combination.” And you can too! Here’s what you do.
Get with Trader Joe’s Ultimate Vanilla Wafers, Biscoff cookie spread, and Dandies vegan marshmallows. I suspect the recipe will work just fine with any brand vanilla wafer, cookie spread or marshmallow, but in my opinion these are the ones that taste the best (and yes, vegan marshmallows taste really good, or at least Dandies do), so these are the ones I suggest.
Get out three or four pairs of wafers.
Put a healthy (but not ridiculous) amount of cookie spread on each wafer.
Put a marshmallow on half of the wafers.
Complete the assembly.
CONSUME THE DELICIOUSNESS.
Seriously, these are waaaaaaaay tastier than you would think, and you would think they’d be pretty damn tasty. It’s the synergistic effect of wafers and cookie spread and marshmallow.
Now, I hear some of you saying “But, John, what you’ve got there is basically a modified s’more of sorts, so shouldn’t you cook the marshmallow first? I’ve anticipated this question, and while I did not create a campfire to toast the marshmallow, I did take one of the completed cookies and slap it into the microwave to gooey up the middle.
Verdict: It is also delicious this way, but you’re only going to want to nuke that cookie for about five or six seconds because the marshmallow expands to dimensions both comic and messy. Also, any longer than that and the wafer starts to lose its crispness. I personally prefer the unnuked version, but I wouldn’t stop you from eating it this way if such was your joy.
Enjoy your cookies. They are fabulous.
Like every other astronomy nerd, I’m super-geeked about all the pictures and data we’re getting from the planet. The only thing I have to add to the conversation that hasn’t already been said that for some reason the photos we’re getting back from New Horizons feel drawn or painted to me, rather than being entirely photorealistic. In fact, they remind me quite a bit of old drawing of Mars, not unlike this one, from 19th Century French astronomer Étienne Léopold Trouvelot:
It’s probably only me who sees it, but I still see it. I think it has to do with New Horizons’ camera, which among other things is adapted to see in very very low light (Pluto is very far away, and we’re looking at the side of it not illuminated by the sun). I like the effect, mind you. But it weirdly makes Pluto still very much mysterious to me.
Thoughts on our Pluto sojurn?
Here’s something fun:
As many of you know, I wasn’t always a novelist — my very first job out of college was as a film critic for the Fresno Bee newspaper in central California. I had spent most of my senior year of college doing freelance music writing for the Chicago Sun Times and New City magazine, and during the second half of that year I sent my resume out to newspapers all over California (my-then home state), looking for a music critic gig. I was rejected everywhere, except for the Bee. There, the Features Editor, Diane Webster, called me on the phone and said to me, “We already have a music critic, but we’re looking for a movie critic. Do you think you could do that?” To which I said, “Yes. Yes, I could.”
But they need proof that I could, so that very night I went to the local theater and bought a ticket for whatever movie was about to start showing. That movie: The Silence of the Lambs, about which I knew next to nothing. When it was done, I walked back to my apartment and wrote the review which follows. After this review and a couple others (for the Oliver Stone-directed biopic The Doors, and the utterly forgettable Michael Keaton film One Good Cop), I got flown out for a face-to-face interview. And then after that I got the job.
I thought it might be interesting for you all to see what I wrote like, when I was twenty-one years old and desperately, desperately trying to get a job as a movie critic.
What do I think of the review now, after nearly a quarter of a century? I think it shows that editors are good things; it’s too long, for for the length the review should have been, and for newspapers (it’s over 1,000 words; in the actual gig I was lucky to get 600). I gives away too much of the plot and particulars. It reads like I was trying to ape Roger Ebert (mostly because I was, him being a very good writer, and also the film critic I read the most). Also, and I think obviously, I’m trying to show off.
But there are good points, too. I also think the review is fairly observant, has some good turns of phrase, and largely accurate about the strengths and weaknesses of the film. I wouldn’t write this review now, but I don’t disagree with what I wrote then. The good news for me was that all the review’s weaknesses were solvable by subtraction, rather than by addition — which is to say, fixable through editing rather than requiring additional training. Which was ideal for the daily newspaper grind.
In any event, here is me at twenty one, writing about The Silence of The Lambs. Enjoy.
The Silence of the Lambs. Starring Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins. Written by Ted Tally from the book by Thomas Harris. Directed by Jonathan Demme. Rated R.
The most horrifying creatures in the world don’t wear hockey masks or wield chainsaws. The most horrible creatures in the world are composed and cultured. They take the time to build a convincing front of civilized behavior. They’re the type of people you’d have over for dinner, without realizing they’re planning to make you the main course. The subtle monsters.
This is why the most chilling monster in “The Silence of the Lambs” is not the serial killer Buffalo Bill (Ted Levine), who has earned his nom de mort through his habit of skinning his female victims, but Dr. Hannibal “the Cannibal” Lecter (Anthony Hopkins), an absolutely civilized and erudite psychiatrist incarcerated in a Baltimore institution for the criminally insane because of his unseemly taste for human flesh.
The first glimpse of him is enough to send a shock down the spinal column. Lecter stands at the end of a corridor of howling madmen, politely and contritely awaiting a visitor. He’s beaming a knowing smile that is not quite predatory.
Lecter’s visitor is newly-deputized FBI agent Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster), who has been pulled out of her training by her boss Jack Crawford (Scott Glenn). Crawford needs insight into the mind of Buffalo Bill, insight that Lecter, both a psychiatrist and a serial killer, is in a unique position to give. Crawford believes that the sight of Clarice might entice the uncooperative doctor to open his mouth. The last time Lecter saw a woman was eight years ago, and he opened his mouth then only long enough to gobble up her tongue.
But Lecter isn’t interested in Clarice’s body. He’s more interested in her soul, the only part of her that he can get at through his glass cage. He offers her a deal: He’ll dole out views into Buffalo Bill’s mind. In return, she’ll answer any question he asks. Starling, who is only slightly more ambitious than she is terrified, accepts, figuring she can hold her own against Lecter and puzzle out the Buffalo Bill murders from Lecter’s cryptic utterances. She’s half right.
“The Silence of the Lambs” revolves around the twisted symbiosis of its two main characters. Everything else, including the nominal objective of tracking down Buffalo Bill, takes a back seat to the electrifying dialogue between Lecter and Starling. Director Jonathan Demme courts disaster grandly; if either of his main actors failed at their challenge, his film would have collapsed like a house of cards. Fortunately, Hopkins and Foster are up to the challenge. When they are both on the screen (usually photographed by Tak Fujimoto in extreme closeup), the movie cracks along.
Jodie Foster, in particular, deserves special mention. Foster’s Starling is not nearly as flamboyant as Hopkins’ Lecter, but in many ways she is more impressive. There have been many believable psychopaths before Lecter. Starling, however, is the first action heroine in recent memory who a) isn’t required to put herself in tight clothing and b) doesn’t need a man to get her out of trouble. Starling may have been chosen for her task by Crawford for her sexuality, but that criterion is ignored by Lecter in favor of her overlooked mentality. It’s ironic that the only male Starling is supposed to entice is the only one who treats her like a fully-functional human being.
Foster’s grounded Starling gives Hopkins’ Lecter room to fly. Hopkins chews scenery with nearly as much enthusiasm as his character chews on a human liver (accompanied, he tells Starling, with “some fava beans and a nice Chianti”). Hopkins plays Lecter as the ultimate subtle monster, so polite, so engaging, and so utterly possessed of an unholy need to devour.
Lecter probably woudn’t consider himself a cannibal. It’s just that there are so very few human beings out there. Certainly not Jack Crawford, who Lecter guesses wants Clarice for his own. Certainly not Ruth Martin (Diane Baker), mother of Buffalo Bill’s latest victim, and the unwitting agent of Lecter’s grand escape. And most certainly not head psychiatrist Dr. Frederick Chilton (Anthony Heald), whose petty digs at Lecter include blasting evangelistic television at him twenty four hours a day. All these “people” would be lunch meat in under thirty seconds, if Lecter wasn’t tightly bound up at all times.
The only person in “Silence” who is totally safe from Lecter’s culinary idiosyncrasy is the only one who deals with him fairly: Starling, who is bound by agreement to be totally honest and open with him. Lecter feeds on that honesty like manna from heaven. After one particularly harrowing confessional scene, which explains the title of the movie, Lecter sits back, eyes closed, with a look of such grateful sensuality that it crawls the skin. Hopkins controls that crawl masterfully, jacking it up to chair-gripping tension for as long as he owns the screen.
The Starling-Lecter scenes are so powerful that they almost cover up the fact that the rest of the movie is only average, as suspense movies go. Buffalo Bill, the other murderer, is hardly the menace Lecter is. He can’t even keep his latest victim (played with admirable feistiness by Brooke Smith) from getting the upper hand on him. On the level of plot, the devices which allow Starling to track Buffalo Bill down aren’t very well explained; she manages to end up in his living room on the barest of clues.
Before we can argue the point too much, Starling is thrown into a final confrontation with Bill, who stalks the novice agent in the dark with a pair of night finder glasses. The scene is a beautifully-shot nail-biter, but the loose ends are never quite tied up. The suspense in this suspense film peters out, unfulfilled.
These shortcomings and short cuts keep “The Silence of the Lambs” from being an unqualified success. They take nothing away, however, from the very fine performances of Foster and Hopkins, and the unforgettable character of Hannibal Lecter, the subtlest, and best, movie monster in years. Novelist Thomas Harris hasn’t closed the book on this character. It’d be interesting to see where he goes.
Here you go.
Close up of the crawdad, say? Very well, here you are:
Also, I found this, too:
I don’t know what kind of fish it is. I call it a “yard trout.”
Both of these things were perfectly alive, incidentally. The yard trout was slightly beached on the grass, however; I gently pushed it back into the “river” with my toe and it swam away in the direction of the creek down the road.
You find such interesting things in your yard after heavy rains, I have to say.
This is my backyard at the moment, illuminated by lightning courtesy of the ridiculous thunderstorms coming through the area, and long exposure times. The big muddy river-looking thing is in fact a small river of water coursing through my yard, put there by a massive downpour that’s overwhelmed the yard drainage system. Don’t worry, we’re fine; we’re on a hill and the land directs water away from the house in any event. But it’s pretty impressive.
Here’s a view looking down toward the road, which at the moment is entirely flooded. Fortunately, we don’t have anywhere to go right now. We’ll stay here in the house and see if the rain lessens any. If it does, by the time we wake up in the morning most of this water should be gone. And if it’s not, well. Good thing I work from home, I guess.
We re-graveled the driveway.
For those of you who don’t live in rural parts, when you have a long dirt-based driveway (as we do), in time that dirt can develop ruts and potholes and otherwise become difficult to drive on. To avoid that, and to give the driveway an overall consistent driving experience, we pay a dude to come and drop several tons of gravel on the driveway with a dumptruck that distributes the gravel in a consistent orderly fashion. The gravel also gives you traction (useful in winter) and allows for drainage (useful the rest of the time). Plus, it’s cool, in a “feel like you’re five” sort of way, to see just an unfathomably large load of crushed rock being poured out onto the driveway. Even Lopsided Cat is impressed!
So, yeah: Gravel. It’s a thing.
Also because I figure it might be fun and interesting to list them. So here they are, in order of my own personal opinion of my competency with them.
1. Writing. I mean, duh. You don’t do something professionally and profitably for a quarter of a century without being rather proficient at it. I think it can easily be argued whether my writing is any one person’s particular cup of tea, but that’s different from me being competent at this particular skill (I mean, if you want to argue I’m not a competent writer, go right ahead; I won’t stop you. I just won’t be able to hear you over the sound of me signing book contracts). Likewise, it’s easily arguable that other writers are better or more competent writers than I am. I don’t disagree. However, I’m more than competent enough, both for what I want to do as a writer, and for making money at it.
That said, it should also be obvious that I am better at some types of writing than others. The two types of writing that I think I’m most competent at are novel writing, and column writing. If there’s a type of writing at which I am the least competent, I’m pretty sure it’s poetry, which I’ve only occasionally attempted, and the results of which I found to be mediocre at best (the lone exception being The Sagan Diary, which I wrote as free verse but then formatted and edited into prose form. I like to joke that it’s stealth poetry, but I don’t know that the description is actually accurate).
Be that as it may, I write well, and I write profitably, which are not necessarily the same. Writing: It’s my thing.
2. Public Speaking. I do a lot of this, especially in the last several years, in which I’ve done a book tour yearly plus various conventions, book fairs and one-off events. I’m good at reading my own writing, of course, but I’m also pretty good at speaking off the cuff and for being entertaining in Q&As, panels, public interviews and so on. I don’t get nervous speaking in front of large crowds and in fact enjoy it quite a bit (it’s exhausting, but fun).
I think my facility for public speaking and public events has been a positive thing for my writing career. It’s also profitable, both in the sense it sells my books, and that I make money from speaking engagements. I expect it will continue to be a part of my overall creative career.
3. Editing. A skill separate from but related to writing, and I do think it’s a creative endeavor, actually, thanks for asking. It takes creativity to look at a mass of words and see not only what’s there, but also what the author intended to be there, and how you can help the author get from the first point to the second. I was a professional editor back in the 90s, working intensively with other writers, and have done it sporadically since then. Aside from helping me become a better writer myself (in no small part by helping me to see that not everything I write is pure gold right out of the box), I learned that I was pretty good at helping people shape their work, to make it say what they wanted it to say. It’s not a skill I use very often these days, but it’s one I know I have and that I’m pretty good at, and one I could make money from.
4. Photography. I take a lot of pictures, and for an amateur I think I’m pretty good at it. I have a reasonably good eye for composition, and I’m competent enough on the photographic back end to get the mood and feel I want out of any particular picture I’m working with (well, that’s not entirely true; there are pictures no amount of tweaking will fix. But then, those stay in my archive, rather than being put out where other people can see them).
I’m not as good a photographer as any competent professional photographer is, but I believe that if made a concerted effort (and picked up some good equipment), and had a few years to focus on it, I could over time become as good as at least some pro photographers. This is one creative field where I have never worked professionally where I think I could work professionally, if I had time and resources.
Alas, the chance I will ever have the time to really focus on photography is rather slim. That’s fine. There are enough professional photographers, and I’m good enough as an amateur for what I want to do with my own photos.
5. Singing. I can carry a tune and I don’t embarrass myself in karaoke. If I’m singing in my natural range (I’m a baritone) I can occasionally surprise people with the not-suckitude of my voice.
So, I can acquit myself, but I’m not a pro-level singer, and if I wanted to be I would have to spend more than a little time learning breath control and actual performance techniques. I want to be a better singer than I am, but I don’t expect to get much better at it than I am now. I have fun singing in my car, though.
6. Dancing. I used to be a very good dancer; I took two years of it in high school, and I was never self-conscious about being on a dance floor. I’m fond of saying I’m one of the few straight white men who can dance while completely sober (I don’t think it’s true, really, but it’s amusing to say). These days if I do any serious amount of dancing, I pay for it the next day, which is more about my general flabosity than anything else. With all that given, at no point would I have said that I was a good enough dancer to do it professionally; that would be, uh, a little much. I’m good enough to have fun and to dance with my wife and friends, and that’s all I want from dancing.
7. Acting. This is different from public speaking, since with public speaking I’m being me, whereas with acting I’m trying to be someone else. I am a passably adequate actor, which is to say that if you saw me on Broadway you’d say I was terrible, but if you saw me at your local community theater you might say I was pretty good. I have reasonably good acting instincts in terms of playing characters, but mediocre ability in transferring those instincts into actual performance. I would have to put in a lot more work to be a better actor than I am. It seems very unlikely at this point that this will ever happen.
8. Playing musical instruments. I love playing musical instruments; I’m not great at playing them. I’m most competent at playing drums, which I’ve been playing since high school. If you need a meat-and-potatoes rock drummer who can 4/4 all night long, I can do that for you (uh, after I get back up to speed, as I’m kind of rusty at this point). If you need a versatile jazz drummer who can handle 8/13 time without blinking, well, you should probably call someone else. I also play ukulele and tenor guitar in a minimally competent way, in that I can strum decently enough and make chord figures that usually correspond to actual chord figures. I have no idea how to solo. If we were in a band, I would be the rhythm guitarist, and you would probably fire me as soon as someone better came along. Nor would I blame you for doing so.
One musical thing I’m actually not bad at: Sequencing musical samples to make compositions out of them. I used a bunch of (royalty free) samples some years back to make an entire album of electronic music, and it wasn’t terrible. I might do that again at some point. I won’t be giving up my day job, however.
I’m also a pretty good DJ, in the classic “play a bunch of songs in a row that people want to dance to” sense, not the modern “drop the bass on a bunch of ravers” sense. I DJ dances at science fiction conventions. I have fun with it.
9. Cooking. I can make grilled cheese, ramen, and schadenfreude pie. Anything else you probably want someone else cooking for you. I mean, I won’t poison you, or anything. No one has died from eating food I’ve made. But I don’t go out of my way to eat my own cooking, you know? Given the choice between making myself something to eat and ordering pizza, I’d pretty much always go for the pizza. I’m never going to be anything better than a “manages not to burn water”-level cook, and I’m just fine with that.
10. Drawing/painting/any non-photography visual art. Oh, man, I suck at these. I used to say that I could draw stick figures, but then Randall Munroe and xkcd came along, and I realized how much better his stick figure people were than mine. Now I know I’m not even competent to draw stick figures. Go to Hell, Randall Munroe! Go straight to Hell, damn you! Seriously, though, if I had to draw or paint to make a living, I would starve inside a week. There would be nothing left but bones.
That’s what I’m good at, creatively and artistically, and what I’m not.
It comes from this.
(For those of you seeing this in the future, after the subtitle has changed, at the time of this writing, the subtitle was “I still dream of Orgonon.”)
If you’re visiting Whatever via Web and mobile, you’ll notice I’ve changed up the theme again; the new version is slightly less twitchy and a little bit more basic functionality (like dates/times in comments, etc). I may fiddle with the look a little bit more, but I think this is going to be it for a while.
This morning I updated to Final Draft 9, i.e., the most recent iteration of the most popular script-writing software out there, and because it’s been a while since I’ve used it, I wrote up a short script to reintroduce myself to its functionality. Here it is.
Yep, I’m definitely getting a series out of this one.
As we approach the weekend, here’s another stack of new books and ARCs for you to admire and yearn after. What looks good to you here? Tell us in the comments!
Why, it was Paul Nikkel!
How did he win it?
Because I asked my wife to pick AM or PM, then a number between one and 12, then a number between zero and five and then a number between zero and nine. She picked PM, 9, 2, and 0. 9:20pm. The entry closest to that time? Paul Nikkel’s!
Congratulations to him and thank you everyone for playing!
Some questions asked of me recently in person, via e-mail or on social media.
You haven’t written anything much on the Hugos situation recently. Why not?
Because at this point it’s boring as shit and neither I nor anyone else has anything new to say about it, and I have better uses of my time. Plus I’ve already voted. Done thinking about it unless forced to.
Related: Hey, remember that boycott of Tor Books? Did that affect you at all?
As far as I can tell it had no impact on my sales, or anyone else’s. This did not surprise me in the least.
Hey, they’re taking down the Confederate flag at the South Carolina capitol! Your thoughts on that?
Good. Took long enough.
Enraging business associates with your racism when you’re never going to be president anyway doesn’t appear to be a fabulous strategy.
Also not going to be president, but I’m glad he’s giving Hillary some worries.
Chinese stock market!
I know very little about this. Glad I don’t have stocks there.
What very little I know about this makes me suspect the drachma is going to make a comeback there sometime soon.
Ariana Grande licking donuts!
Why would I give a shit about this in any way?
But she licked some donuts!
So don’t eat those donuts.
Please don’t make me kill you.
Women’s World Cup!
Government officials refusing to marry same-sex couples!
Bigots who should be out of a job.
What about cats?
I don’t know, just, cats!
San Diego Comic-Con!
Hope everyone there is having fun. I still want them to improve their harassment policy, which continues not to give useful examples of what harassment is, and I still won’t set foot into the convention proper until it does.
I think that’s everything today.
See the ARC of The End of Things that Zeus is assiduously guarding and/or not actually giving a damn about? It could be yours! It could be yours because I’m running a contest to give it away. And here’s what you do to enter:
In the comment thread, recommend a book that you enjoyed, which has been released since January 1, 2014. It can be fiction, non-fiction, YA, graphic novel, e-pubbed or indie-pubbed or “traditionally” pubbed. Anything is eligible to be recommended, so long as a) you have read it, b) it was published after January 1, 2014, c) you were not the author (and neither was I; I mean, people already know I have books out). If you want to leave a brief description about why you loved the book, that would be great, too. Basically, I’m giving away an ARC as an excuse to get people to recommend recent new books they loved.
Only one entry per person, please. If you leave multiple entries, sorry, I will disqualify you. If you leave a post and it’s put in moderation (for whatever reason); don’t panic — I’ll release it fairly soonish. No need to post again. Once is enough.
The contest runs from this moment until 1pm Eastern tomorrow (Thursday July 9, 2015). At which point I will close the comment thread and randomly select a winner, who I will notify at the e-mail address they use to leave a comment. I’ll sign (and if desired, personalize) the ARC for the winner and mail it to them wherever they are on the planet — so, yes, this contest is open to everyone everywhere on the planet Earth.
So: What book published after January 1, 2014 do you recommend? Leave it in the comments below!
So, my problem recently is that every now and then I get it into my head, “Hey, I should write a Whatever entry about something,” and then I go through the list of things out there to write about, and by and large the emotion I feel about them is “oh, Jesus, like I give a single shit about that right now.”
And it feels great! I am bathed in enjoyable lassitude about pretty much everything right about now. I don’t imagine it will last — it never does, I’m a cranky bastard — but for the moment? It’s kind of lovely. I think I will appreciate it while it lasts.
A new book means a new tour, and this year I’m hitting 18 cities over three weeks. Yow! As always, if you’re in one of the cities I am visiting, please come to see me and bring every single person you’ve ever met in your life with you. It’ll be fun! I’ll read from an upcoming work (this is an exclusive for people who show up for tour stops — no one else gets this) and from other stuff, answer questions, maybe massacre a song on a ukulele, and of course sign books and participate in other mischief. You want to be there; we’ll have a good time.
Here are the cities and stores I’ll be visiting, on these dates at these times. Immediately after the tour information I’ll have an FAQ addressing some common questions. Ready? Here we go:
Aug 11 – Memphis, TN: Booksellers at Laurelwood, 6:30pm
Aug 12 – Raleigh, NC: Quail Ridge Books & Music, 7:00pm
Aug 13 – Athens, GA: Avid Bookshop, 6:30pm*
Aug 14 – Lexington, KY: Joseph-Beth Booksellers, 7:00pm
Aug 15 – Cleveland/Westlake, OH: Barnes & Noble, 2:00pm
Aug 16 –Lansing, MI: Schuler Books, 4:00pm
Aug 17 – Madison, WI: A Room of One’s Own, held at Madison Public Library, 7:00pm
Aug 18- Portland/Beaverton, OR: Powell’s at Cedar Hill Crossing, 7:00pm
Aug 19 – Seattle, WA: Elliot Bay Books, held at Seattle Public Central Library, 7:00pm
Aug 20 – Boise, ID: Rediscovered Books, held at Downtown Boise Public Library, 7:00pm*
Aug 21-22 – Spokane, WA: Sasquan (Reading date/time to come)*
Aug 23 – Fort Collins, CO: Old Firehouse Books, held at Midtown Arts Center, 3:00pm*
Aug 25 –Los Angeles, CA: The Last Bookstore, 7:30pm
Aug 26 – Phoenix/Scottsdale, AZ: The Poisoned Pen, 7:00pm
Sept 1 – Dayton, OH: Books & Co, 7:00pm
Sept 3 – Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Bookstore, 7:00pm
The stops with the asterisks denote new cities for me, which is to say, ones I’ve not been to on tour before.
And now, a brief FAQ about the tour:
Can you also come to [insert town here]?
Nope. The tour dates are locked for this year.
Why aren’t you coming to [insert town here]?
For various reasons, but mostly due to a) who wanted us when we asked earlier in the year, b) what made sense for travel this time around. This tour is slightly shorter than the one last year, so some hard choices had to be made. It’s not you, it’s me. Don’t worry, I am very likely to tour again, so I may end up visiting your town sooner or later. Honest!
What do the events cost?
With the exception of the Spokane, Fort Collins and Menlo Park events, all events are free, although depending on the event stop you may be asked to RSVP. Check with the stores for details. At Spokane, I’ll be appearing at Sasquan, this year’s Worldcon, so you would have to pay the membership fee to attend (that will also get you in to all the other Sasquan events). At Menlo Park, my event is part of Kepler’s Premier Events Series, so paid tickets will be required. At Fort Collins, tickets are $5, but if you buy The End of All Things from Old Firehouse Books, you’ll get $5 off, so it’s kind of a wash.
While all events except those three will be free, I strongly encourage you to buy a book from the booksellers who are hosting my event. It’s a good way of telling them “thank you” for bringing me into town. Obviously I will be happy to have you buy one of my books, but honestly, any purchase from the bookseller would be good.
Again: Please buy a book from the bookseller hosting my event. It’s actually really important. Thanks.
Will you be signing books?
Pretty sure I will be doing a signing at every stop, yes.
May I bring previously purchased books for you to sign?
I’m fine with with it but doublecheck with the venue to be sure (if you buy a book there I’m sure it will help with your request). Note also that depending on the size of the signing line, I may only sign three books at a time, after which you’ll be asked to get back in line for any additional books you want signed.
Will you sign my eReader/limb/other non-conventional object?
Generally speaking, sure. If you’re asking me to sign something dark, please bring your own sparkly/light-colored pen; I don’t usually carry those with me.
Do you allow pictures?
I generally allow pictures but again, check with the venue for their policy. If you want a picture with me, please have your camera ready before you get up to the signing table; you’d be surprised at how much time it takes to fire up a camera if it’s not ready. And that’s not great for everyone else in line.
May I give you a gift?
Sure. If it’s something edible please have it secured in something I can take back to my hotel room with a minimum of fuss. If it’s something else, smaller is better. Please note that I am usually traveling very tightly packed for these tours so you may see me hand the gift over to the bookstore in order for them to ship it to me at a later date.
May I take you to a meal/show you around my city, which is awesome if you know where all the cool things are, which I do?
Well, one, thank you, and two, I’m generally very tightly scheduled on tour stops and/or have already arranged to see friends who are local to the area, so probably not. I do appreciate the thought, however.
I’m a member of the local media in a town to which your tour is coming and I would like to interview you. May I?
Possibly! Please contact my publicist, Alexis Saarela, at Tor Books (firstname.lastname@example.org). Please note that if you contact me directly for an interview, I will ask you to contact Alexis, because she’s the one who will be keeping my schedule straight. So please eliminate the middleman (in this case, me) and check with her directly. Thank you in advance.
I will not be in a town to which your tour is going but I want a signed book anyway. Help!
Here’s what to do: Contact any of the bookstores hosting a tour stop and order the book you want from them, and ask them to have me sign and personalize it when I come through. I will be happy to do so. Alternately, I am likely to sign stock for each store at which I have an event, so if you contact a store that I have already been to on the tour, they will likely have signed stock on hand.
As a third option, Subterranean Press is offering signed editions of The End of All Things. If you want to order through SubPress, however, do it now, because they will have a limited number available.
I have an additional question you have not addressed.
Ask it in the comments.
See you all soon!
Well, this is a nice way to start the week: Publishers Weekly give TEoAT a starred review, which means they find the novel especially notable. Along with calling it “polished and powerful,” they also note:
Scalzi knows just how to satisfy his fans, providing tense, thrilling action scenes while turning a critical eye on the interstellar equivalents of the military-industrial complex.
Nifty! The full review is here.
This is the second starred review for the book, the first coming from Kirkus. It’s nice when people like your work.
For the Americans: Enjoy yourself, keep your pets from freaking out and try to get through the day with all or at least most of your fingers still on your body.
Everyone else: Uh, we Americans are gonna mostly be drunk and setting off fireworks for much of the day. You maybe want to stay out of our way until tomorrow. Thanks.