It’s about to become enforced policy: it’s illegal to take photos in national parks and on federal lands without a $1500 permit. The fine for taking unauthorized pics will be $1000/photo. Even in the /cough/ Ansel Adams Wilderness area.
USFS says it’s to protect the forests. Sure, our parks have been under a lot of stress — illegal logging, water pollution, drifting air pollution, human-started fires have all taken a high toll. You know what’s not damaging parks? Digital and film recordings. Photography doesn’t ACTUALLY steal the soul, you know. Continue reading
So the “f-word” is getting a lot of chatter this week, as Emma Watson spoke to the UN on Monday about feminism. Of course some people immediately threatened a nude photo leak (or manufacture, since apparently no one has legit nude photos of Watson) to bully her into being quiet. [see update below]
Way to prove Watson’s point exactly, people.
There are two fundamental problems here, and I can personally contribute to fixing only one of them. But I’ll explain them both. (And yes, this is still about stories!) Continue reading
Image found on a book published by “Samual Bagster and Sons” (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Fair warning: Today’s post is less art and more business. I’m going to very briefly touch on why I self-publish.
I didn’t start out as a proponenet of self-publishing. When I first knew I wanted to grow up to be a writer, it was simply “vanity publishing,” and to be honest that’s still out there. Vanity publishing was expensive and mostly low-quality material that couldn’t get a second look from “real” publishers. Those who used a vanity press rarely made money and were not taken very seriously.
That’s changed now, and there are a lot of reasons why self-publishing is now “legit.” And I’m not even talking about admitted outliers like Hugh Howey making $150,000/month and walking away from seven-figure offers. Sure, those success stories are awesome and I applaud! but there are other benefits to self-publishing as well. Continue reading
A page from the mysterious Voynich manuscript, which is undeciphered to this day. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
I respect books. I hate to see books damaged, even — especially — in the name of decor. At a decorators’ show house recently, my sister, mother, and I looked in horror at shelf art made of cut up books. “Oh, thank goodness,” my sister soon identified, “they’re just Reader’s Digest Condensed Books.”
Walking through a decorating fair using vintage books and paper as disposable materials makes my blood run dark. The current trend of tearing up old books to get aged or interesting paper is infuriating and wholly unnecessary. My mother has decorated her bathroom with delightful antique book illustrations, everything from Sinbad to Sherlock Holmes, all color-copied from the originals for a neat aesthetic with no damage. Continue reading
(Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Sorry, guys, this post isn’t hilarious or touching, just necessary. If you follow on Facebook, please note the following.
Facebook is openly reducing the “reach” or exposure of pages. While originally a Facebook user could “like” a page and see its updates in their feed, now those updates are not often shown unless the page pays to promote the post. This means users simply aren’t seeing updates. Continue reading
Okay, I’m gonna pull some hate for this one, I know. But.
Disney’s Frozen could have been amazing, but its script got in the way and made it, not a glittering glorious castle of ice, but that splashy muddy sludge left after snow melts. It had good moments, but given its individual parts, the sum should have been much better.
Gerda in The Snow Queen, Vilhelm Pedersen illustration. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
I’m not even talking about the internet rage at the de-feminizing of The Snow Queen, a fairy tale which featured a nearly entirely female cast and a girl actually rescuing a boy. I’m talking purely internal plot problems. And yeah, there’s gonna be lots of spoilers ahead, so be warned. Continue reading
Shard & Shield undergoing color-coded revisions. Spoilers probably available if your monitor is sufficiently awesome.
A friend joked about my copious free time. “I mean, what do you have to do, really? You’re self-employed, so you can totally slack off there. And you’re writing a book, and that can’t be hard. I mean, really, how long can that take?”
He was joking about all of it, of course, which is why he’s still breathing. But he put forth a question which many people do ask less ironically — how long can writing a book take, really? (Seriously, just look at fans complaining about George R. R. Martin or Patrick Rothfuss needing time.)
That’s the wrong question — as NaNoWriMo and the 8-Hour Book Challenge prove, writing a story may not take long at all. But writing a good story does. Continue reading
The problem with writing is that it’s wholly subjective. Qualitative. No hard data.
ClickStats, my clicker-training data-keeping app
Where we can do quantitative analysis, we can make reasonable judgments even when our emotions aren’t in alignment. “I felt great about this today, but we actually had only a 70% success rate.” Or, “Oh, man, today has been a total downer and I hated this session, but we nailed it with a 90% success ratio.”
That’s very nice for behavior analysis and free throws. Not so useful with writing.
Bert knows this is wrong.
You know when you hit upon something that’s just so jaw-droppingly, amazingly awful that you just have to inflict it on someone else?
(That was your only warning.) Continue reading
Today’s post features a rude game of airplane footsie and some sociological pronouncements. Continue reading