Monday, April 29, 2013
Friday, April 19, 2013
Anonymity: The Syndrome of Communicating More Only to Communicate Less
Recently, I had a great conversation with good friend David
Honigsberg as we sat in a Starbucks in Toronto, chugging back some coffee and
watching the world go by. Most people walked with iPhones or similar devices
glued to their hands; talking, texting or simply holding their precious cargo
like it meant the world to them. They’d be checking emails, updating their
Facebook page, talking with a friend, and surfing a favorite site.
I know…I
used to do the same thing. Until I gave
mine away.
After a whole suite of people had passed—virtually everyone
clutching their link to the world—David
and I turned to each other in synchronicity. I thought he was going to remark on humanity’s co-dependency with technology or our obsession with connecting, even if only superficially, with the world. But he opened a topic that had nothing to do with it; or did it?
and I turned to each other in synchronicity. I thought he was going to remark on humanity’s co-dependency with technology or our obsession with connecting, even if only superficially, with the world. But he opened a topic that had nothing to do with it; or did it?
He brought up the topic of anonymity. He’d recently written
to the National Post, a paper he esteems and highly respects, about their
apparent promotion of anonymous letters to the editor in the online version of
the newspaper vs. the print version, which requires a name and corresponding
contact information. Here’s his letter:
This brings up an interesting point about where we—and our news media—are headed. With virtually all communications going digital, individual and online (from books to news to movies), it is interesting to note how differently we treat the online, more easily accessed, cousins to the print versions.
Let me give you an example: I published my first ebook with
Liquid Silver in 2005 (when ebooks
weren’t that popular yet; the iPhone hadn’t
made its debut and the ebook industry was in a chaotic mess re formats and
devices). While “Collision with Paradise” (now re-issued with eXtasy Books
under Kate Wylde) was a hit with its few readers and was praised by Romantic
Times and Yet Another Book Review, it hadn’t sold more than a thousand copies.
Ebooks now outsell their print cousins 3:1 with sales in the hundreds of
thousands for any given title.
David Honigsberg |
Over the years I have observed a great difference in quality
between ebooks and their harder-to-get-published print books. And I know the
reason…
The easier something is to do or get, the less it will be
valued; the easier it is to communicate, the less likely it will have deep
meaning. Take the easy road, the slippery path, and you are sure to miss the view.
And isn’t that the very reason you were journeying in the first place?
Are we sacrificing the quality of our journey to reach our
destination, forgetting that the journey—living with meaning—is ‘part of that
destination’?
Texting every ten minutes. Updating your Twitter every hour.
Checking your Facebook page every few hours. Does that mean you are
communicating more?
I used to talk to a good friend almost every day. The chats
used to happen randomly but when we both had time to talk. We shared meaningful
things, what was important to each other’s life. We gave each other the gift of
time, compassion and understanding. Then as time passed, those calls became more routine and more rigidly
timed; while they occurred perhaps more often, the calls became shorter and
shorter, until soon nothing of meaning could be shared.
What does that have to do with anonymity? Everything.
When we do not cherish, preserve, and protect meaningful
communication, we give away our freedom to be the individuals we are. We throw
away our true gifts to the world. We turn into an anonymous society of
avatar-wannabes with no genuine identity; texting, chatting, surfing an
undifferentiated sea of information pixels.
If we do not say, “Here I am! This is what I believe!” those
very beliefs will eventually be taken from us. If it’s too easy, it won’t be
valued; if it isn’t valued, it will soon disappear altogether.
Anonymity is not the enabler of freedom of speech; it is its
harbinger of death.
Stand up and be counted. Or you will lose your most precious
thing: YOU.
Nina Munteanu is an
ecologist and internationally published author of novels, short stories and
essays. She coaches writers and teaches writing at George Brown College and the
University of Toronto. For more about Nina’s coaching & workshops visit www.ninamunteanu.me. Visit www.ninamunteanu.ca for more about her writing.
Monday, April 15, 2013
Twenty-five Percent of Denmark is Powered Exclusively by Wind
The government of Denmark isn't satisfied with 25 percent. The nation is plowing ahead with an ambitious plan to be a whopping 50 percent powered by wind turbines in just eight years time. That's actually faster than a plan that Denmark itself proposed only last year, which called for only 35 percent of the nation's energy needs to be met by offshore wind."
(cited from "General Knowledge")
In the words of Itzhak Stern, "This is an absolute good" for the planet. And a lesson for the rest of us.
Nina Munteanu is an
ecologist and internationally published author of novels, short stories and
essays. She coaches writers and teaches writing at George Brown College and the
University of Toronto. For more about Nina’s coaching & workshops visit www.ninamunteanu.me. Visit www.ninamunteanu.ca for more about her writing.
My upcoming book on water entitled Water Is... (due in Summer
2015) brings my over twenty-years experience as an aquatic ecologist to explore what water means to each of us. Part history, part science and part philosophy and spirituality, "Water Is..." combines personal journey with scientific discovery that explores water's many "identities" and ultimately our own.Friday, April 12, 2013
Through You…
Through you, I love the world
Through you, I feel the world
Through you, I save the world
Through you, I am the world
Wednesday, April 3, 2013
Nina Munteanu Discusses SF and Women with the Globe and Mail
Deirdre Kelly, reporter
for the Globe and Mail interviewed Nina Munteanu and two other SF authors
(Marie Bilodeau and Madeline Ashby) in an article entitled “Authors push science beyond the lab into fiction and fantasy” (Feb 25, 2013).
The article provided a
well-rounded perspective on storytelling from the minds of three women science
fiction and fantasy writers in Canada.
Here’s an excerpt:
Writing about women’s issues at the same time as exploring the new,
and often speculative, frontiers of science is what distinguishes Ms. Ashby and
[Nina Munteanu and Marie Bilodeau] from their male counterparts.
“Female writers seem to use characters or social concepts as the
foundation to their stories and then build worlds around them, whereas male
writers tend to create worlds and technologies first,” says full-time author
and professional storyteller Marie Bilodeau, the Ottawa-based author of the Destiny
series of space fantasy novels, among other works, including science fiction. “Hard
science fiction explores scientific concepts and is most often written by males
while soft science-fiction, or science-fiction with a strong social
focus, is written more by females.”
These are risky divisions implying, perhaps, that one approach is
better than another.
It is why Nina Munteanu, a practicing scientist with degrees in
freshwater science and aquatic biology who is the author of The Splintered
Universe Trilogy, among other futurist [and hard science fiction] books
[like Darwin’s Paradox], wants to believe that gender differences in science
fiction ought to be irrelevant.
“In terms of what good science fiction does – examining humanity and
our journey in life through our relationship with the unknown – I see little
difference between gender representations,” explains the former Simon Fraser
university instructor and [Douglas College] lab [instructor] who today resides
in Toronto.
“Science fiction is the literature of consequence exploring large
issues faced by humankind.”
Yet in all her books, among them the recently released [fantasy] The
Last Summoner, Ms. Munteanu, born in Granby, Que., … puts women front and
centre as a way of telling stories of relevance to women.
“Speaking for myself, and for the other women I know who read science
fiction, the need is for good stories featuring intelligent women who are
directed in some way to make a difference in the world,” says Ms. Munteanu, who
describes science fiction as a literature of allegory and metaphor. “Their
heroism may manifest itself through co-operation and leadership in community,
which is different from their die-hard male counterparts who want to tackle the
world on their own. Science fiction provides a new paradigm for heroism and a
new definition of hero as it balances technology and science with human issues
and needs.”
Post Script:
With all due respect to
Marie, master storyteller and good friend, I disagree with her prognosis of hard
and soft science fiction as related to male and female writers—and readers.
It’s not that simple (and she may not have meant it that way and might have
elaborated if given room, which there wasn’t—if that’s the case, I apologize to
Marie, but I’m commenting on what’s written in the article only). If we were to
entertain the stereotype, then, yes, that would be the case: men write
idea-driven stories and women write character-driven stories. But when it comes
to science fiction, and SF authors, this is far too simple and a dangerous
assumption—as most stereotypes are.
If you visit the online Globe & Mail article, you’ll find several rather unsavory (even childish) comments,
challenging some of the simplified ideas suggested in this article. The truth
of the matter is that we belong to a continuum, in fact in all matters,
including gender and certainly gender-related thought. Science fiction, by
virtue of its exploration of “the Large or Unknown” must evolve naturally from
idea/premise to character; not the other way around.
If I were to look at my
own work as an example, I have written romantic SF (Collision with Paradise, The
Cypol), which certainly fits the stereotype. But even these stories would
not be the stories they are if I hadn’t first created and explored the premise
and dilemma related to idea. I conducted scientific research into AI, robotics,
habitable worlds, jungle ecosystems, and Atlantean mythos, etc.) in order to
fully explore the premise. My characters evolved from this process; not the
other way around. So, Genevieve’s character—her yearnings, faults, weaknesses
and victories—realized themselves organically through the story promise based
on larger global issues and ideas.
The same can be said for the
young vivacious baroness Viviann of my fantasy The Last Summoner and hard-boiled space cop Rhea Hawke in my
science fiction space thriller The
Splintered Universe Trilogy or data handler Julie Crane in my hard science
fiction duology Darwin’s Paradox and Angel of Chaos.
Characters always play a
role in realizing the larger issues of theme. In science fiction, these are
almost always related to the impact of and our relationship with science and
technology. That is why I call Collision
and Cypol romantic science fiction,
not SF romance. The difference is that the SF part isn’t just thrown in as
exotic setting (like in so many romances); it is an integral part of the story
theme. This is why good SF must spring from idea and premise, not character
(unless character and premise are the same thing—wink).
So, in Darwin’s Paradox, which explores
humanity’s relationship and co-evolution with technology and Nature, the theme
of our tenuous co-evolution with Nature and technology is realized through the premise
of an intelligent virus melding with a community of machine intelligence. Story
is achieved through the main character who is largely marginalized (an
introverted veemeld who can speak to
machines in her head) who wishes she was “normal” but distrusts her community.
She romanticizes but feels uncomfortable with Nature.
Where do women SF writers
differ from men SF writers? Really? I think it lies mostly in how we portray
our characters, particularly our women protagonists. That is where readers will
see the most difference. And where we, as writers, have the opportunity to
build a new paradigm for heroism.
So, in Darwin’s Paradox Julie, who is a loner,
must learn to trust and rely on her community of machines, other people and
even the virus to overcome negative forces. Even the negative forces, overseen
by a female, by the way, are not so much vanquished and destroyed as educated
and influenced to change. This is the purview of the woman. To teach. To guide.
To nurture. To show compassion and forgiveness. To yield, even.
When I sign Darwin’s Paradox for readers, my tagline
is usually evolution through cooperation,
in honor of my personal hero, microbiologist Lynn Margulis. Margulis endured
over twenty years of censure from aggressive male scientists for her incredible
theory of cooperation between a parasite and host (endosymbiosis), which
created the prokaryotic cell. I think it’s high time that heroism—like Darwin’s
Theory—be redefined. It’s up to us, through story.
“Science fiction is traditionally a more male-oriented genre,” says
Marie in the Globe & Mail article. “It’s both harder to find acceptance as
a woman writer and also more freeing because there are so few of us around.
It’s still pioneering territory with a lot of space for women’s voices and
visions to grow and be heard.”
“The
best part about writing science fiction,” Marie adds, “is showing different
ways of being without having your characters struggle to gain rights. Invented
worlds can host a social landscape where debated rights in this world—such as
gay marriage, abortion and euthanasia—are just a fact of life.”
I couldn’t agree with you
more, Marie. Let the stories begin…
Nina Munteanu is an
ecologist and internationally published author of novels, short stories and
essays. She coaches writers and teaches writing at George Brown College and the
University of Toronto. For more about Nina’s coaching & workshops visit www.ninamunteanu.me. Visit www.ninamunteanu.ca for more about her writing.