Top Tips on Reading Science Fiction Short Stories

Freshly off another volume of sci-fi shorts, I’ve come up with a set of ideas, dos and don’ts (okays and not okays), random thoughts on how to approach them, based on my experience. 

#1.  If you don’t like science fiction, don’t read it. It’s okay. But if you haven’t read much of it, you are not at liberty to judge it. Much like claiming not to like lettuce soup when you’ve never eaten a spoonful of lettuce soup in your life. Base your ideas and opinions on your own experience.

      #1.1. Those who say they don’t like sci-fi and their argument is that alien stories, far-far-away technology and the likes are silly and there’s no meaning to them, have no idea what they are talking about. Take it from a sci-fi fan: it’s not the aliens that I watched 9 seasons of X Files for. (It’s not Mulder either.) Better say “it’s not my cup of tea” and nobody will blame you.

#2. Don't be too picky. Yes, Asimov, Clarke, Bradbury and Vonnegut are great. But then so are many many others. If you pick up an anthology, don’t just select the stories by authors you’ve heard of. Read ‘em all. You won’t regret. It’s okay, however, to choose the order you read them in.

#3. Use a bookmark. Anything you can stuff in a book will do. Avoid folding the corner of the page. Except in case of emergency. You never know when you’ll pick the book up again. Trust me. Use a bookmark.

#4. Read-at-once. Short stories, rarely exceeding 30-40 pages, are best read at a sitting. This is a hard one to keep, especially if you work a job and a half, have a family, a social life and other hobbies. I usually fail at this, and I always regret. Once you’ve stepped out of the world of a story, you’ll never sink as deeply back in. When a twig snaps, you can’t glue it back together.

#5. It’s okay to take notes while reading. 

#6. Let it sink in. When you finish a story, don’t rush off to read another one watch a movie or do intellectual work. Think about it. Let it roam through your brain. Sometimes you can stop and think between paragraphs too. In fact, you should, when you feel the need. You’ll know. You can cook or hang out clothes to dry or do anything that you can do without much focusing. 

#7. Ensure the right conditions. Preferably read in a silent room. Don’t try to read while your spouse is watching football in the room, while someone is speaking on the phone. Indistinct noise (such as in a park or on a bus) is okay. Anything you can ignore is okay. 

      #7.1. Reading while listening to music may or may not work for you. If you’re the kind who listens to music rarely, but you listen with all your heart and soul, chances are it won’t work. Monotonous, instrumental music might. But we’re all different. Find out what works for you.

#8. Don't be sexist. Women, on average, are not as good sci-fi writers as men. (Wonder if I’ll get stoned for that.) But that doesn’t mean that no female writer will produce quality sci-fi.  Again, read before you judge. I’ve read one by a female writer and I liked it. Cold hard sci-fi with a touch feminine is quite a surprise. Much like chili flavoured chocolate. Or vanilla flavoured coke (that one sucked though). 

#9. Devour it. Use all the time you can to read. In order to do that, you should always carry a book around. Can’t really put this any better than Stephen King did: (not that I could put anything better than he did): “Books are the perfect entertainment: no commercials, no batteries, hours of enjoyment for each dollar spent. What I wonder is why everybody doesn't carry a book around for those inevitable dead spots in life.” Well said, sir.

      #9.1. It’s okay to read on the bus, on the train, etc. Unless someone sitting close to you is talking loudly. Even while walking, as long as you can look in two different directions at the same time. Honestly, I wouldn’t try it, but I’ve seen it done.

      #9.2. It’s okay to read while eating. As long as you’re eating alone. And if you own the book you’re reading and you don’t mind tomato chicken stains making their way through four or five sheets.

#10. It’s okay to read when tired. In fact, I’ve found that stories can be a helluva lot more touching when you’re tired. At the end of a long, hard working day it’s perfect. 

      #10.1. It’s not okay when you’re too tired. Stop reading long before it requires considerable effort to keep your eyes open. How to know when to stop? If you glance back at the previous paragraph, or at the previous page and you don’t remember instantly what happened there – instantly means before finding keywords or rereading a memorable line of dialogue –, you need to stop and go to sleep. If you find yourself rereading whole paragraphs because you don’t remember what you’ve just read, turn back a page, place the bookmark there and go to sleep.

#11. It’s okay to watch a film based on the story. But read first. That way, you can enjoy both, think about them, compare them, and get the fullest possible experience. Watching first will botch the read; it will deprive your brain of the fun task of imagining what things, setting, characters look like. That kills 80% of the fun of it.

#12. Life is too short. You’ll never be able to read everything you might ever enjoy. So why are you reading this instead of reading literature? There’s so much out there.

      #12. 1. It’s okay, however, to reread.

#13. Come back to the real world when you’re finished. You won’t have the chance to learn to read and write fluent Martian, you won’t be there when they land on Jupiter Five and discover that …grrr… whew! just fought off an urge to pop a spoiler in. It’s fiction. Live with it. 

     #13.1. Don’t forget to return the book if it’s borrowed. Do it before you get tired of it lying about on your desk or in your bag and toss  it up a shelf and forget about it.

Most important of all: Enjoy! 

Most of these probably apply for most genres of written fiction. And they probably don't apply if your primary reason for reading is research into language, narrative techniques, or anything scientific; or anything other than fun.

However (yes, this is a disclaimer), none of this is a proven fact and it has nothing to do with school, aliens, literary analysis, elephants, neurosis, or Eco’s theory of the model reader.  Why should it?

Christmas Spirit?

Without too much ado, my wishes of a peaceful and hopeful Christmas go out to everyone. The deliberate effort here is to avoid the Santa- and shopping-centered Christmas and focus on something more beautiful and, hopefully, more important. Something that the song below begins to express, but can only exist if it is carried on in our hearts, words and actions.

Morning Has Broken is originally an Irish hymn, made famous by Cat Stevens (whose voice can be heard in the video above). Here are the lyrics, attributed to Eleanor Farjeon.

Morning has broken, like the first morning
Blackbird has spoken, like the first bird
Praise for the singing, praise for the morning
Praise for the springing fresh from the word

Sweet the rain's new fall, sunlit from heaven
Like the first dewfall, on the first grass
Praise for the sweetness of the wet garden
Sprung in completeness where his feet pass

Mine is the sunlight, mine is the morning
Born of the one light, Eden saw play
Praise with elation, praise every morning
God's recreation of the new day.

Society Seen Through Jokes: What Stereotypes Tell Us

I discussed earlier that jokes which refer to certain aspects of society may well be considered a form of art, as they express feelings and ideas, as well as social truths in creative ways, through metaphors or parables or other devices.

We've looked at the process that takes place as a 'social' joke is born from a source and reaches the state of final product. Now let's shift our perspective for a sec and look at the other end of the stick: once we come across such a joke, what kind of social truths does it convey about the society that has produced it? What does it tell us about the people behind it?

Here, I find it particularly interesting that certain groups of people are attributed certain characteristics: many social jokes are based on extreme stereotyping. Even more interesting is that these stereotypes differ from country to country, sometimes from region to region.

As Romania (Transylvania) is the only place I've ever lived in, I can only bring valid examples from the joke-stereotypes which are frequent here. For instance, many jokes are based on the idea that policemen are complete idiots. I suppose it shows the kind of respect that people here have for the institution. I've heard that in some more civilised countries people wouldn't begin to imagine how such jokes can exist. Then, many jokes dwell on the thought that marriage and wives are bad things, and mothers-in-law are something horrible. Also, different nationalities are associated with different characteristics: the Scottish are stingy, Jews are shrewd (especially in business), the Japanese are small and yellow, the Somalis weigh about 20 kilos and they eat one grain of rice a day. Similar generalising thoughts exist about locals of different regions, for instance, in Transylvania, it is said that folks in Oltenia (south of the Carpations, along the river Olt) are even thicker than policemen. Not really sure what kind of jokes they have down there though...

Generalisations which, if you think of it, are very cruel. But that is beside the point. The point is, some of these stereotypes are world-wide, others are not. Those that are wold-wide, reflect a world-wide opinion. The more restricted ones are signs of differences between nations, values, concerns, attitudes. Through 'social' jokes, we can gain an understanding of local social stereotypes, which can reveal deep aspects local society, anywhere.

Disclaimer: no offense is meant to any of the groups mentioned (or ignored) above. The generalisations do not represent the author's views or opinions regarding any nationality or group of people, but serve as examples of the existence of social stereotyping.

Stop and Think. Blog Action Day 2011: Food

Before I go on talking about another aspect of how jokes are a form of art, I'd like to touch on something slightly more serious. In the previous post, I brought up a joke based on a fictional survey with a single question:
"Would you please give your honest opinion about solutions to the food shortage in the rest of the world." 
This topic deserves some attention, mainly since 16 October is Blog Action Day, and this year's topic of Blog Action day is FOOD. As basic as that may sound, food is still a very big problem in many countries, and not only in Africa and Asia. Households are starving even in developed countries with a roughly stable social balance. We could say that families like that have probably brought it on themselves by laziness, reckless spending etc, but I'm sure there are many families who, through a series of mishaps beyond their control, end up starving. 
So, my question is: what can we, (not exactly rich folks, but people in financially acceptable situation) do to make a difference in this direction?
Setting up homeless shelters and such are good ideas,  but that is far beyond our reach and possibilities. We technically can't afford to feed others like that. Some, again would argue, it wouldn't even be fair to us, and in most cases I'd agree with that.
One solution though that occurs to me several times every week is this: we throw away enormous amounts of food. When we buy a fresh loaf of bread, I'm sure most of us throw away the possibly quarter of a loaf left over, even though there's nothing wrong with it, but why eat in when we have a fresh loaf. I often throw away milk, sausages and similar things simply because I know we won't eat it. My parents' and my in-laws' dogs feast on sausages, but sometimes even chicken and pork. Anyone who has ever been at a wedding reception can guess how much food gets chucked out in restaurants. Somehow, it is painful to think that we do that, while others starve daily. So, what I see as a possible solution is this: find a way to direct our extra food (that we would throw away anyway) to those who really need it.
The easiest way to do it is to give it to beggars in the street. Now some may not want it. They'll say they need money. In that case, they probably need money for alcohol or other substances and then, I'm not sure how we could possibly help them. Or, you might be lucky enough to live in a town or in a country without beggars. Even though I find it hard to believe. Donate your extra to shelters or to a neighbour who might need it.
But the most effective way would be an organized system, which allows people to drop off extra food in special centres (which could be placed strategically in such a way that you pass them by as you go to work in the morning, because unfortunately, having to take one extra step will usually deter ordinary people from helping out.) People in need from each town or city could then access these centres to grab a bite. They could be asked to provide proof of their social situation and they should also satisfy some criteria defined by people wiser than me. Those who have no jobs could be asked to do minor community service (such as picking up litter, heaven knows we have plenty of that) or even run these centres themselves.
Obviously, this would be much more complicated to accomplish than it sounds, but I trust there are many smart people out there who would know how to do it. And even smarter people who could find a way to come up with a similar project to direct the tonnes of extra food from developed countries toward famine-stricken areas of the world.
Too naive? Maybe, but  I would really like experts in economy to express their ideas about if and how something remotely similar is possible. Also, brilliant minds might come up with completely different, but possibly much better solutions. But we should get those brilliant minds thinking. Fast.

Jokes and Society: Another form of Art

They say every joke is half true. The more I think of it, the more I have to agree. Maybe even more than half. Not in the exact facts or actions that the jokes describe, but in the underlying realities and often absurd - but existing - truths that they expose.
We channel our dissatisfaction with society into punchlines - 'social' jokes express feelings and thoughts: pain, rebellion, cultural differences, much like poetry or any kind of socially critical literature.
What am I talking about? This is one of my favourite examples:

  A world survey was conducted by the UN. The only question asked was: "Would you please give your honest opinion about solutions to the food shortage in the rest of the world." The survey was a huge failure.

• In Africa they didn't know what "food" meant
• In Eastern Europe they didn't know what "honest" meant
• In Western Europe they didn't know what "shortage" meant
• In China they didn't know what "opinion" meant.
•  In the Middle East they didn't know what "solution" meant.
•   In South America they didn't know what "please" meant, and
•   In the USA they didn't know what "the rest of the world" meant. 

(from 1000ventures.com) 

Nobody is trying to suggest that any of those sentences are true, but you kinda have to agree with the grain of truth they carry about the stereotypes of people living in different countries. And if any or all of these stereotypes happen to be wrong, then the grain of truth lies in the fact that somebody
(and the popularity of this joke proves that not only one person) believes them (the stereotypes, that is) to be real. And the fact that stereotypes exist and the forms they take are all part of a social reality, whether or not they are actually correct.
To put it simply, if thousands of people in a country say 'the government sucks', that covers a social reality. Either the reality that the government of that country actually sucks, or the reality that many people think that their government sucks (something causes them to believe so.)
My point is: 'social' jokes are one of the wittiest forms of social criticism and they are worthy of being considered a form of art, because they express public concern, fears, wishes, ideas about different categories of people, regimes, and so on.
To be continued...

D.H. Lawrence versus Danielle Steel

Photo by Willivolt

I spent a few mornings of this summer rearranging the collection of English books at the school where I teach. It is like a mini-library, run by students who study English, who are responsible for lending books to their schoolmates, keeping a record and then having them return the books, safe and sound. What really bothered me was that most of the books were just shoved back randomly on the shelves, and recently it has become very difficult, nearly impossible to find anything. So I decided to take all the books, arrange them in categories, alphabetize them and create a list of what exactly we have there, so that anyone can find whatever they are looking for.
One day as I was working on this, I was telling my colleague who teaches Italian and French that I had selected all the romance and pulp novels and I was going to hide them on two dark, bottom shelves, so that students wouldn't, even accidentally, choose to read those over, say, Dickens or Hemingway or any other similarly established authors.
My colleague, a very experienced language teacher, educated, learned and intelligent man, said "Right, but, you know, sometimes romance novels are more useful for students to read ." I stopped with the bundle of books I had in my hand and blinked at him, looking for a sign that he was joking. He wasn't. Then he explained that romance stories, by the nature of their topic, contain much more of the basic everyday vocabulary and expressions in use today, in everyday life, in situations that today's learners of English (or any language) are most likely to find themselves later on. And that, back when the only French TV show we got here was Hélène et les garçons, he used to encourage his students to watch it. I blinked again, this time only to pretend that I wasn't completely surprised about how I had never realized this before, and I went on arranging the books on the shelves.
Then I kept thinking about it. Right. Nobody will actually be required to speak like this:

His soul leapt up into the gloom, into possession, it reeled, it swooned with a great escape, it quivered in the womb, in the hush and the gloom of fecundity, like seed of procreation in ecstasy. (from The Rainbow by D.H. Lawrence, Chapter VII : The Cathedral)

They will, however, make greater use of vocabulary like:

“Yes I do…no, I don’t.” They had both laughed. It was true. She did and she didn’t. She wanted to be with Alessandro, before she missed it all, before he was suddenly nineteen and she had missed her chance. (from To Love Again by Danielle Steel, Chapter I)

So, do we admit defeat?

The romance and pulp books in our department library are now on a separate shelves from canonical authors. Yes, they are bottom shelves, but not really dark and hidden. Will I be sending my students off to read romance? Umm... I think not. But I might just give away some clues about differences between reading for fun and/or culture and reading as a tool for acquiring vocabulary, fluency of language etc. 

It is a tough choice, really. If only we had all the time in the world; then we could read every book ever written, then it wouldn't matter which one we'd begin with.

When a Song Just Haunts You for Weeks

Nek's song has been crawling through my mind for a long time now, I cannot explain why. I hadn't heard it in ages. When I finally looked it up to listen to it, I found this version. Which sounds great!

I have no idea what's up with this song; if I think about it, it's just one of the millions of love songs out there that I can't even empathise with. But I think I'll just admit defeat and let it carry me away.
Also, I really need to brush up my French and my Italian.