Science-positive and at least generally accurate SF. Too much to ask?
Originally shared by David Brin
Revered colleague and friend Nancy Kress offers up wisdom here on whether science fiction does its part to encourage problem solving… or goes for cheap undermining of both science and confidence.
These could be worth a go if you’re looking to raise your books’ profile and are confident of their quality.
Originally shared by Samantha Dunaway Bryant
Another fantastic list from this site. Very useful if you are seeking review for your work, or would like to publish reviews you’ve written to a wider audience.
Interesting in itself, and with application to worldbuilding. Via Adriel Wiggins.
Originally shared by Jeff Baker
This is a very well-written and interesting article about how DNA is changing our perception of domestication of both plants and animals. I’m wondering if part of the issue with rice in India may be that after domesticated rice was imported from China, if a wild version of rice in India was cross-bred with the Chinese rice. This could have been either intentional or accidental. It is possible that the ancient Indians may have been cultivating a wild rice (and not having domesticated it yet). I don’t know if wild rices in India are/were fertile with the Chinese rice, but, in the Americas, there is some suggestion that maize was crossbred with wild strains of teosinte that were not present in the Balsa River Valley (where maize was first domesticated).
I was completely unaware of how recently rabbits were domesticated (nor why), nor the even more recent domestication of hamsters.
What do you think? Is this article overly optimistic?
I’m glad, at least, that South Australia took up Musk’s wager (it would have been tough to refuse). And if anyone can do it, he can. I watched an interview with him recently, and he talks casually about the astonishing as if it’s routine.
For him, it is.
Originally shared by Able Lawrence
Elon Musk has wagered to set up grid scale Lithium ion battery in South Australia within 100 days or give it away free!
My Gryphon Clerks series explores some social issues directly, others indirectly, and still others by showing them simply not being issues.
For example: the earlier books just showed men and women being equal in society. No discussion, really; that was just how it was.
Then I got into the politics of gnomes, and decided that they would have a very clear division of labour between male and female gnomes, and (with them being newly freed from service to the dwarves, and interacting more with humans) that this tradition would come into question. Mister Bucket for Assembly explored that. And, of course, ethnic prejudice against gnomes and the ways in which ethnic prejudice plays out, whether the Other is short and pale with pointy ears or… distinguishable in some other way.
My current WIP takes it further: young gnomes are being cast out of their families and having to live on the streets because they refuse to conform to the gendered division of labour. That doesn’t really happen in our society, but parallel things do.
And also in the current WIP, two gnome women are attracted to one another, and that is Not OK in their society, and they have to figure out how to work with that.
So I read this piece by Kay Solo on different approaches to representation with interest.
Originally shared by Kay Solo
tl;dr, there’s more than one way to confront a societal issue in writing, and it’d be nice to see more that doesn’t do so by using real-world prejudices. And at least for me, who often uses books as an escape from real life, I don’t want that stuff following me into what I read. At least not so frequently that I’m still wanting for media without it.
You don’t need to be an Einstein to see that capitalism has problems, but apparently it helps.
Via Sarah Rios.
Originally shared by ****
Sometimes (often?) it seems the solutions we seek are already here, just waiting for us to catch up to them.
Einstein is “convinced” that the only way to eliminate the “grave evils” of capitalism is “through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.” For Einstein, the “worst evil” of predatory capitalism is the “crippling of individuals” through an educational system that emphasizes an “exaggerated competitive attitude” and trains students “to worship acquisitive success.” But the problems extend far beyond the individual and into the very nature of the political order.
“Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands… The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights.”
The political economy Einstein describes is one often lambasted by right libertarians as an impure variety of crony capitalism, one not worthy of the name, but the physicist is skeptical of the claim, writing “there is no such thing as a pure capitalist society.” Private owners always secure their privileges through the manipulation of the political and educational systems and the mass media.
The predatory situation Einstein observes is one of extreme alienation among all classes; “All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their own egotism, they feel insecure, lonely, and deprived of the naïve, simple, and unsophisticated enjoyment of life.”
This last resonated pretty strongly. My time with the Golden Horde of Ta-Nehisi Coates taught me that in a slave society, everyone is in chains, in some form of bondage. Anything that prevents us from connecting, on whatever level, and relating to each other as equals is a form of bondage.