**************** *** 03-02-95 *** **************** From: d.moran8@genie.geis.com To: continuing-time@umich.edu x-genie-id: 1225407 x-genie-from: d.moran8 -------- >From tLD:(just after that bathwater incident), Trent says: >"But his (Carl's) temper is at least part of the reason that >absolutely everyone you and I grew up with is *dead* today." To a greater degree than I think I realized when I wrote that scene -- when I wrote Carl -- I was writing about my father, and in writing about what Trent thought about Carl, was writing, at some level, about how I felt about my father. Trent is very much an idealized version of myself; writing him is easy, at one level, since I just figure out how *I* would handle a given situation -- which takes a day or a month or whatever -- and then have Trent do it instantly. Trent is in a very real sense the person I aspire to be. But it's not an accident that black rage is one of the distinguishing characteristics of the House of November; I've got it myself. There's a nice scene in "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress," by Heinlein, where Manny points out that nobody is in favor of legislation because *they* need it; it's always, "Pass this law to stop someone else from behaving badly." Well, I can point to one law that I'd like for my own protection; I think handguns should be controlled. If I had (or have) to walk around in a society where everybody packs a gun, I'm going to end up killing somebody. And I'd rather not. ~~~~~~~~~~ >I'm wondering why there are so few November telepaths around during both >Tyrel's and Sonya Blue's times. It would seem a great advantage for the >I'm also wondering if there are other non-November human telepaths around >in these eras. Unless all human governments in the CT are remarkably >anti-telepath No -- the House of November has done a good job of protecting its genetic code. This doesn't mean *nobody* else out there has the information to produce telepaths -- the Source does. The following is a conversation between Bodhi, Tyrel, and an avatar of the Source, from the second half of "Lord November:" The Source said, "I have wondered if the Gift is indeed a survival factor. You Novembers breed slowly; you merely replace yourself at the best of times. You have been outbred by the mass of humanity by several hundreds of billions to one. The House of November may well be wiped out in this conflict. By any biological or evolutionary standard of success, the House of November is not far from being a failure." Tyrel looked interested. "And you think that's because of the Gift?" The Source shrugged. "I could make a case. Your difficulty in interfacing with the vast bulk of humanity, and your further difficulty in breeding with them; both come from the Gift. The advantages conferred by the Gift are profound; but it may be that the disadvantages are equally profound. "But there is a further consideration. There are over two thousand species listed in the Alternities Catalog of Sentient Spacegoing Species. Only six of these species is more than a million years old, and only one is so much as eighty-five million years old; and that species is the Tamranni." Bodhi was nodding. "I know these things, Source. Either intelligent species have a lifespan, like that of individual organisms, or --" "Or something happened during the Time Wars. Yes. Ser Bodhisatva, I have seen no mechanism I find convincing that would demonstrate that all intelligent species must age and die. That some species might fail and die, of their own accord, surely -- but ? It seems unlikely." It almost seemed to Bodhi that the Source spoke the next words reluctantly. "And there is a final datum, one you Novembers might find interesting. Telepathy, telekinesis -- all the psychic gifts -- appear disproportionately among the younger intelligent species. Among those species that have survived for any length of time, a million years or more, there is no occurrance of such gifts. Not among the Tamranni, or the Dalmas, or the Slinderry. It is not a surprise that humanity, the youngest intelligent race in the explored Continuing Time, is also possessed of the most powerful telepaths, the Novembers; and that the second youngest, the K'Aillae, are possessed of the second most powerful. If you chart this relationship, you find a direct correlation between the specie's age, and the occurrance of such gifts." ~~~~~~~~~~ What sort of a weapon would *you* build to use on telepaths? **************** *** 03-02-95 *** **************** From: ap007@freenet.hsc.colorado.edu (maureen s. obrien) To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Pity the Novembers? Reply-To: ap007@Freenet.HSC.Colorado.EDU -------- >But it's not an accident that black rage is one of the distinguishing >characteristics of the House of November; I've got it myself. Well, I didn't guess this, but somehow it doesn't surprise me. It's not fun to know that you have occasional berzerker trouble. When I was a little kid, I could handle it by redirecting anger into tears. But when you're an adult, it's not much of an option. I remember when I was in college that everyone thought I was a very mild person. Then one day, I got angry. Btw, I really really like the concept that (at least in part) the Time Wars are being used to kill off telepathic races. I certainly can't complain that the Novembers haven't been given an enemy worthy of their talents.... -- Maureen S. O'Brien ap007@freenet.HSC.colorado.edu "You must begin printing books again." **************** *** 03-02-95 *** **************** From: "mike rosenberg" To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: Pity the Novembers? -------- On Mar 1, 10:19pm, Maureen S. OBrien wrote: > Btw, I really really like the concept that (at least in part) the > Time Wars are being used to kill off telepathic races. I certainly > can't complain that the Novembers haven't been given an enemy > worthy of their talents.... is that it ?!? i read the excerpt, but i didn't make the connection. if it is the case that the time wars are a struggle to preserve/destroy telepaths, well, i like it! mike **************** *** 03-02-95 *** **************** From: danthony@ksccary.com To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re[2]: Pity the Novembers? -------- Maureen>> Btw, I really really like the concept that (at least in part) the Maureen>> Time Wars are being used to kill off telepathic races.... Mike>if it is the case that the time wars are a struggle to Mike>preserve/destroy telepaths, well, i like it! It didn't sound like that to me. Summary: only one race exists older than the time wars, and: "There are over two thousand species listed in the Alternities Catalog of Sentient Spacegoing Species. Only six of these species is more than a million years old" By the context I take this to mean by "old": not the age of the species, but the length of time the species has been spacefaring. By this measure humanity could be considered the youngest. Of the spacefaring species, those who have been in space over 1 million years have no telepathic abilities. Including the one which survived the time wars. Now, it's an Alternities catalog. Does this mean it extends to other timelines than the Continuing Time? If so, Maureen may be close to right. I don't see the Time Wars as having a goal per se; more like they have an effect. (At least part of) that effect seems to be the destruction of sentient spacefaring species. And maybe lacking telepathy is a survival trait. The species that survive, survive by eliminating telepaths... Even if not, it would still imply that species don't usually survive that long, and that telepathy is a counter-survival trait for both individuals and species. The Source seems to think so, and it's supposed to be pretty smart < **************** *** 03-06-95 *** **************** From: john a mckee To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: subscribe -------- **************** *** 03-07-95 *** **************** From: d.moran8@genie.geis.com To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: STAR TREK & "Injustice" X-Genie-Id: 1034905 X-Genie-From: D.MORAN8 -------- I want to take the time to let those of you, particularly writers, thinking of dealing with the STAR TREK franchise, know about my recent experience. A couple years ago, when DS9 was young (4-5 episodes old), my friend Lynn Barker and I went down there to pitch. I took two stories with me, "Injustice," and "The Stopping Point." The individuals present at the pitch were Robert Wolf, and Evan Summers. When I finished pitching my two episodes, they were very impressed. Robert Wolf told me that "Injustice" and "Stopping Point" were the two best stories they had seen out of some 200 pitch meetings to that time. "Stopping Point" they felt needed some work; "Injustice," however, they went so far as to say, "This is going to go." (This was hardly a contract, and I didn't take it as one; neither of them had the authority to do that, and they were clear that "Injustice" would have to be approved by Michael Piller.) They asked me to leave a copy of "Injustice" with them; I wouldn't, since D.C. Fontana had warned me not to. I went home from the pitch, and there was a message waiting for me from Evan Summers. I called Paramount; Evan asked me to read "Injustice" to him again, while he typed it up. I hesitated, but went ahead -- they seemed so sure it was a sale. What was the story of "Injustice?" Chief O'Brien, having been wrongly convicted of murder by an alien race, rather than being sent to prison, has punishing memories implanted in his brain -- The story didn't go. Piller didn't like the idea, I was told. He didn't see how it could be "visualized." Evan appeared to be upset about this; he told me to hang in there, and maybe they'd be able to use it at a later date. Fast forward to last Monday, February 27, 1995. "STAR TREK: Voyager." Lt. Tom Paris is convicted of murder by an alien race, and rather than being sent to prison, has punishing memories implanted into his brain. The story credit is one "Evan Summers." Ignore the fact that I am thoroughly ticked, and let's notice the following: story credit goes for $6K. After purchasing a story, STAR TREK, the most financially successful television franchise *in history,* would have legally and honestly and ethically have had the right to rewrite the story in any fashion it chose. Instead Mr. Summers sat on my story idea for two years and then presented it to the world as his own. This may not be actionable -- ideas cannot be copyrighted. And enough changes were rung upon the premise that it is questionable that I could successfully sue Paramount (or Mr. Summers) for plagiarism. But in my own mind there is no question where Mr. Summers' premise came from -- my ironically named story "Injustice." There may be nothing I can do in this case except make the truth known, and embarrass the individuals involved, if they have any shame; but I hope I have done that much. ~~~~~~~~~~ Subscribers to the CONTINUING-TIME list -- if any of you would post the above to the appropriate newsgroups on the internet, I'd be appreciative. -- Daniel Keys Moran **************** *** 03-08-95 *** **************** From: ap007@freenet.hsc.colorado.edu (maureen s. obrien) To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: "Injustice" Reply-To: ap007@Freenet.HSC.Colorado.EDU -------- I think I speak for the list when I say I am disgusted by this happening. Unfortunately, I cannot say I am shocked or surprised. This is only the latest whiff of something rotten to waft out of the Star Trek offices. OTOH, I now understand how they managed to have a good idea on a Voyager ep! ;) I have asked my friend Andy to post this on Tri-State Freenet's Voyager group; I think he will (he liked _Dancer_!). Hmm. Where else shall I post this? -- Maureen S. O'Brien ap007@freenet.HSC.colorado.edu "You must begin printing books again." **************** *** 03-08-95 *** **************** From: dave@tso4a.can.cdc.com (dave weil) To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: "Injustice" -------- Maureen S. O'Brien writes: > I think I speak for the list when I say I am disgusted by this happening. > Unfortunately, I cannot say I am shocked or surprised. This is only the > latest whiff of something rotten to waft out of the Star Trek offices. > OTOH, I now understand how they managed to have a good idea on a > Voyager ep! ;) What she said. I've often heard rumours of this kind of thing happening; hell, DS9 is rumoured to be a rip-off of B5. But this hits a bit closer to home... > I have asked my friend Andy to post this on Tri-State Freenet's > Voyager group; I think he will (he liked _Dancer_!). Hmm. Where else > shall I post this? Has anyone posted this to r.a.sf.w? It's not quite on-topic, but not entirely off-topic either. Would it fit better elsewhere in the r.a.sf.* hierarchy? The other possibility is one of the r.a.st.* groups... (I don't know if {}.voyager has been created yet.) Does DKM want this broad a publication of his complaint/accusation? How about regional sf newsgroups? Actually, cross-posting it could be a lot of fun... Anyone got a heat-resistant mailbox? :) - Dave **************** *** 03-09-95 *** **************** From: "john c. wenn" To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: _The A. I. War_ publication date? -------- Last I heard, _The A. I. War_ was scheduled from Bantam in August '95. However, the latest forthcoming books list from "Locus" doesn't mention it. Is this a typo in the list, or has the book been rescheduled? (please, please, please let it be published ASAP). /John **************** *** 03-09-95 *** **************** From: d.moran8@genie.geis.com To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: TF X-Genie-Id: 8980425 X-Genie-From: D.MORAN8 -------- Sean asked what was going with TF: We're waiting on one last printer's bid, and also on cover artwork, and also on a final blurb (from eluki bes shahar, perhaps better known as "Rosemary Edgehill," romance/mystery writer & a buddy of mine.) Typesetting is finished, the book's been proofed, I've seen samples of cover art for the dust jacket (and it looks nice -- no painting, just a graphic, but still nice.) ~~~~~~~~~~ As to the Star Trek material, feel free to distribute it anywhere you all please. I'm not going to sue them -- knowing something & proving it are different things. I'm thinking about posting the "Injustice" outline I pitched to DS9. Haven't made up my mind about it yet. **************** *** 03-09-95 *** **************** From: ian@alg6.eecs.nwu.edu (ian sutherland) To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: "Injustice" -------- DKM wrote: > As to the Star Trek material, feel free to distribute it anywhere you all > please. I'm not going to sue them -- knowing something & proving it are > different things. Anyone know if distributing this will be grounds to BE sued (for slander or libel)? **************** *** 03-09-95 *** **************** From: me! To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Posting to r.a.st.t -------- To all, After reading DKM's post to the group about Injustice, I decided to make my first post. If anyone is interested in looking, I put it in rec.arts.startrek.tech. It's a newsgroup I like to frequent, and although it may or may not be applicable, I decided to post it anyway. That's the thing about writing, it's never really yours until it makes it to the mass market. Even then lawyers and loopholes can find ways to take it away from you. It isn't quite fair, and speaking from personal experience, I think there should be more protection to not only stories, but also to specific ideas. Maybe it would be impossible to legislate, but it would be nice all the same. I'm new, thanks for letting me in, John **************** *** 03-09-95 *** **************** From: michael.bundschuh@eng.sun.com (mike bundschuh) To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: "Injustice" X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII -------- > > Ignore the fact that I am thoroughly ticked, and let's notice the following: > story credit goes for $6K. After purchasing a story, STAR TREK, the most > financially successful television franchise *in history,* would have legally > and honestly and ethically have had the right to rewrite the story in any > fashion it chose. Instead Mr. Summers sat on my story idea for two years and > then presented it to the world as his own. > > This may not be actionable -- ideas cannot be copyrighted. And enough > changes were rung upon the premise that it is questionable that I could > successfully sue Paramount (or Mr. Summers) for plagiarism. But in my own > mind there is no question where Mr. Summers' premise came from -- my > ironically named story "Injustice." > > There may be nothing I can do in this case except make the truth known, and > embarrass the individuals involved, if they have any shame; but I hope I > have done that much. This really sucks. It makes me wonder how many other episodes have been plagiarized in this manner. Unfortunately, I am not a lawyer and cannot answer if this involved a "legal" wrongdoing on Paramount/Evan Summers part. However, I applaud the fact you posted this. It may help the next person who deals with Paramount, especially if it gets wide posting on the net. I would also urge discussing this with your lawyer, and in the very least sending Paramount a threatening letter stating your case and mentioning the names and actions of Robert Wolf and Evan Summers. It may not lead to retribution, but it makes Paramount aware they have been caught in a wrongdoing, and highlights the people responsible. Let's light a fire under their feet! _____________________________________________________________ Michael Bundschuh mjb@sun.com **************** *** 03-09-95 *** **************** From: david silberstein To: "d. k. moran list" Subject: Re: "Injustice" -------- On Wed, 8 Mar 1995 11:12:57 -0600 (CST) Ian Sutherland said: >DKM wrote: > >> As to the Star Trek material, feel free to distribute it anywhere you all >> please. I'm not going to sue them -- knowing something & proving it are >> different things. > >Anyone know if distributing this will be grounds to BE sued >(for slander or libel)? How so? DKM says that he can't sue them for plagarism - there were too many changes made. It might be considered to be an accusation of sleazy tactics - but given that all he did was state the facts of the situation, how can it be actionable? Here's my thoughts on the issue: -------------------------------- I was disappointed as anyone else to read of DKM's dealings with the Star Trek consortium, and I felt the sense of frustrated rage over the apparant callousness that Evan Summers showed. However, I was reluctant to post it to any of the Star Trek discussion groups for the following reasons: (a) I haven't *read* any of them in a long time (b) I haven't seen the episode in question - the night it aired, I was too exhausted to stay up, and I forgot to set the VCR and (c) I think something else *might* be tried first: DKM should send a letter to ALL those involved - Evan Summers, Robert Wolf and Michael Pillar at Star Trek, his friend Lynn Barker, and anyone else who might know about the whole fiasco - outlining the situation and asking "What is Star Trek going to do about it?". Now, there might be several possible outcomes: Evan Summers might write an abject apology, saying that he forgot or lost the original outline, but liked the idea so much that he simply _had_ to put it into a Star Trek story. Who knows? They might even send a check, and/or ask for more material. Unlikely, but one never knows. The other possibilities are much more likely to raise the general world cynicism level. They may ignore it, or send it into a vicious circle of bureaucracy, or send back a letter saying that since the idea was in fact changed so much, they feel little or no obligation to DKM. *Then* we can send out nasty messages that will travel all over the world and be seen by (hopefully) thousands of people, and generate so much bad feeling that Star Trek will feel the impact right in the pocketbook. Unlikely, but one never knows. :-) ------------------------------------- As I was typing this, John's message came in saying that he had posted DKM's original message to r.a.st.tech. Ah well. I still think the letter to the principals would be useful. Sigh. ----- David S **************** *** 03-09-95 *** **************** From: dave@tso4a.can.cdc.com (dave weil) To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: "Injustice" -------- David Silberstein writes: > However, I was reluctant to post it to any of the Star Trek discussion > groups for the following reasons: [...] > As I was typing this, John's message came in saying that he had posted > DKM's original message to r.a.st.tech. Ah well. I still think the letter > to the principals would be useful. Well, I've gone and posted it to r.a.sf.w, on the theory that a fair portion of the target audience (writers and potential writers who might someday deal with "the Star Trek franchise" - I like the term BTW) are most likely reachable there. So I'm afraid your suggestion that those involved on the other side be contacted before the matter is discussed publicly has been largely derailed... Oh well... - Dave **************** *** 03-09-95 *** **************** From: ap007@freenet.hsc.colorado.edu (maureen s. obrien) To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: TF Reply-To: ap007@Freenet.HSC.Colorado.EDU -------- >We're waiting on one last printer's bid, and also on cover artwork, and also >on a final blurb (from eluki bes shahar, perhaps better known as "Rosemary >Edgehill," romance/mystery writer & a buddy of mine.) eluki bes shahar is wonderful! Good short stories in Dragon, once upon a time. _Very_ good trilogy out (sf adventure, far future): _Hellflower_, Darktraders, and _Archangel Blues_, all written in the patois of the time (but not to an obnoxious extent, so fear not). Rosemary Edghill? Well, she writes regency romances which are pretty cute and have some decent adventure in them (and which don't grate upon the ear with non-Regency language!), which puts them miles ahead of most regency novels not written by Georgette Heyer. As for her mystery novels -- I haven't read them, but have heard good things. Apparently, her hero is a neo-pagan lady (but unlike Mercedes Lackey's Diana Tregarde, she solves real-world crimes instead of horror ones). Anyone else like her Hellflower trilogy? -- Maureen S. O'Brien ap007@freenet.HSC.colorado.edu "You must begin printing books again." **************** *** 03-09-95 *** **************** From: "john r. snead" To: continuing-time@umich.edu, Subject: Re: TF -------- On Thu, 9 Mar 1995, Maureen S. OBrien wrote: > > Anyone else like her Hellflower trilogy? Yep, I loved them! Never tried the romances, but I may, they sound fun to. So, anyone know if she is coming out with any more SF in the near future? -Heron jsnead@netcom.com **************** *** 03-09-95 *** **************** From: windsor d williams To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: TF -------- Recently, DKM (>>) and Maureen (>): > >We're waiting on one last printer's bid, and also on cover artwork, and also > >on a final blurb (from eluki bes shahar, perhaps better known as "Rosemary > >Edgehill," romance/mystery writer & a buddy of mine.) > > eluki bes shahar is wonderful! Good short stories in Dragon, once upon > a time. _Very_ good trilogy out (sf adventure, far future): _Hellflower_, > Darktraders, and _Archangel Blues_, all written in the patois of the > time (but not to an obnoxious extent, so fear not). [portion munched] > Anyone else like her Hellflower trilogy? Yes! At least, I've greatly enjoyed the first two, and am still looking for the third (small town = few bookstores, but Spring Break is coming!). I can see why she uses a penname, though...some stores don't seem to know whether to place books under 'B' or 'S' or both or what. Makes them hard to find, sometimes. Also, re DKM's comment about TF (Terminal Freedom, I think): What's up with this? Sounds like copies to be published? I missed some group traffic a while ago...did I miss an opportunity here? If someone could please fill me in?!? Stuff by DKM is not to be missed! Thanks! Windsor (mind jellified from a networks protocols exam) **************** *** 03-11-95 *** **************** From: d.moran8@genie.geis.com To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Terminal Freedom -- X-Genie-Id: 9677275 X-Genie-From: D.MORAN8 -------- eluki bes shahar, who I asked for a quote, came up with three: ~~~~~~~~~~ When I was very young and calculating my age in single digits or close to it; innocent enough to believe that all adults were Automatically Cool; I was standing with my mother in the basement of one of the big department stores in Oakland with an extorted dollar clutched in my hand, staring at a rack of books. The one I chose, I chose almost at random, but to this day I remember it won out by inches over a book about James Bond's nephew. It cost me 60 cents. I took it home, and read it, and was catapulted into an amazing universe of wonder and rollick and Really Neat People, all of whom had the most interesting lives I could concieve of and were frequently witty besides. I have that book to this day, though I haven't opened it in years; I must have read it a hundred times in my troubled adolescence; it was for me Tarzan's Africa, PC Wren's Algeria, Graustark, and Oz. The book was =The Butterfly Kid=, by Chester Anderson, and it gilded New York City with a glamor that it holds to this day for me, and caused me to develop an unremitting passion for Michael the Theodore Bear (much too dignified to be called Teddy, don'cha see?) Okay. So it may never make anybody's top ten list, and you already think I'm a honkweasel for giving you this long screed on a book you've never heard of. But you miss the point. This book was =magic=. The story it contained had the power to transform my life, and I don't think that's too grandiose a statement. What I want to say is this: there's only one book like that in everyone's life, and more often than not, you come to it young. But last night, reading TF, I felt just a ghost of that old magic sweep over me, and I knew then that somewhere out there, waiting without knowing it, are the people for whom TF will be that sort of touchstone; a book that becomes part of what they really are. Such books aren't grand in concept, or great art, or Literature, or even (it happens) enduring classics. But in another way they're the most important books there are. To judge whether TF is a great book might be kind of like swatting a fly with a howitzer, and I'm not good at picking enduring literary classics anyway. But I'll say this: this book is magic, and even if it doesn't happen to be your particular magic, it's still a lot of fun. ~~~~~~~~~~ Quote the Second: If Tom Clancy had written Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, the result would be Terminal Freedom. ~~~~~~~~~~ Quote the Third: Daniel Keys Moran is one of the single best writers the last quarter of the 20th century has produced, in or out of genre. He's frighteningly good, and his prose style takes no prisoners. A writer to watch and to cherish. He's young to be this good, and therefore (very occasionally) callow. He has a higher opinion of himself than most people will be comfortable with. But in Moran's case it's just a statement of the facts. Late 20th century publishing isn't kind to authors who can't be sold in a sound-bite. Moran's career has suffered most from publishing timidity and the fact that you can't get your hands on anything he's written three months after it's released. Terminal Freedom= may be the book that turns this around. It's hot, its fresh, it doesn't march in step with =anybody's= publishing program and it's =available=. If you want a sound bite, try this one: If R.A. Lafferty and William Gibson wrote a novel together. . . Do yourself a favor. Read Dan Moran. And then tell me I'm wrong -- if you can. **************** *** 03-11-95 *** **************** From: d.moran8@genie.geis.com To: continuing-time@umich.edu x-genie-id: 4898558 x-genie-from: d.moran8 -------- I passed on the comments about eluki's work to eluki, btw. **************** *** 03-12-95 *** **************** From: frederick zimmerman To: dmoran8@genie.geis.com, locus@genie.geis.com, continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: AI WAR not in march Locus list -------- Hi, I note that Daniel Keys Moran's THE AI WAR is not in the latest LOCUS list of forthcoming books for summer/fall. Tell me this is just a harmless error and AI WAR will be coming out in August as scheduled! --fred **************** *** 03-12-95 *** **************** From: ap007@freenet.hsc.colorado.edu (maureen s. obrien) To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Miscellanea Reply-To: ap007@Freenet.HSC.Colorado.EDU -------- First -- all the responses to the postings about "Injustice" have shown that people are not particularly shocked about what Paramount has done. But that doesn't mean they aren't angry... The most illustrious respondent was Mike van Pelt, on rec.arts.sf.written. Probably the most enthusiastic was my friend Andy Eigel's e-mail to me, which started "Outrage! Injustice!" and went on from there. Second -- eluki bes shahar's comments about _The Butterfly Kid_, by Chester Anderson. She's right; the sample chapters of _Terminal Freedom_ do many of the same things as BK: create a picture of an idiosyncratic yet realistic society (Greenwich Village in BK), show realistic characters (well, BK's were _based_ on real people anyway), and write the weirdest story possible (trust me - magic realism is _not_ the word. Urban sf, maybe). If you're interested, _The Butterfly Kid_ is around in the used bookstores; it's just a bitch to find. There's also a sequel, _The Unicorn Girl_ by Michael Kurland (set on the West Coast and West in several alternate universes, as well as Randall Garrett's _Lord Darcy_ universe -- so if you like Lord Darcy, you have to get this book). Michael Kurland is, of course, the aforementioned-by-shahar Michael the Theodore Bear. (Yes, the authors appear in their books as main characters, and actually work as such.) But my favorite of their works together is _Ten Years to Doomsday_, wherein characters who happen to resemble the authors are secret agents of the Federation, sent to advance a medieval-tech society to the point that it can fight off an Evil Galactic Empire -- without disrupting their culture in any fatal manner. They succeed. Unfortunately... :) A lot of fun, and good adventure too. Third -- I don't know about you, but shahar's quotes just make me want to read TF just that much more! -- Maureen S. O'Brien ap007@freenet.HSC.colorado.edu "You must begin printing books again." **************** *** 03-13-95 *** **************** From: david silberstein To: "d. k. moran list" Subject: Injustice, ST:VOY Ex Post Facto -------- Greetings all, I have spent a couple of days reading the newsgroups and browsing the 'Net for Star Trek information, and I have come up with some interesting results. I am sending the complete files on to D. K. Moran (since he only has email from Genie), but here is a summary of what I found (of course, I will email the complete files to anyone who requests them): 1) Paramount has a Web site! Check out http://paramount.com - there is a link directly into their Voyager information page (which is http://voyager.paramount.com. I pulled off the "Mission Log" for the episode "Ex Post Facto", and I am sending this on to DKM. Note that the name of the individual for the script credits is Evan Carlos Somers - spelled differently from what DKM posted (just in case anyone wants to write in) 2) Paramount has an email address! voyager@paramount.com is for sending in comments about the show. I honestly have no idea whether or not mail sent ot this address will ever reach Michael Piller, so I wouldn't rely on it to send in, say, any complaints. 3) From the ftp site ftp.ftms.com, I pulled the press release for the episode in question - I'm pretty sure it was in the dir pub/startrek/press1/press1.108 4) I found a link to the ftp site alumni.caltech.edu:pub/tlynch/voy1, which contained a thorough and comprehensive review of the episode by Timothy Lynch. Briefly put, he didn't like it much. --- David S **************** *** 03-14-95 *** **************** From: patrick bridges To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: tLR ranking in top 100 SF list... -------- Still moving up... Number 36 this week. :-) **************** *** 03-14-95 *** **************** From: "simon b. cardinale" To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: Injustice, ST:VOY Ex Post Facto -------- On Mon, 13 Mar 1995, David Silberstein wrote: [Deleted stuff] > 4) I found a link to the ftp site alumni.caltech.edu:pub/tlynch/voy1, > which contained a thorough and comprehensive review of the episode by > Timothy Lynch. Briefly put, he didn't like it much. Frankly neither did I. If I want a good detective story I'll ready one of the better detective story authors (Chandler, John MacDonald, Ross MacDonald, Gregory McDonald for fun dialogue... what's with the M(a)cDonald domination of my list you ask? Does the library only allow me to use one section of shelving? I have no good answer.) Anyway, I guess the idea of planting memories of the victim's last few seconds is a good idea, but the story was half cliche, and the other half was so predictable it might as well have been cliche. I think I'm getting tired of all the aliens who speak english, look like humans with skin disorders, and then on top of it all have a western culture. There are hundreds of societies on Earth that are more alien to me than the stuff I see in Star Trek. I only like it when they get really weird, which this one wasn't. Which brings me to a question I'd like you all to respond to at leisure: What traits if any might be common to all civilized (use whatever definition of that you like) cultures? Maybe I'm just tired (in fact I am) but I can't think of any just now. **************** *** 03-14-95 *** **************** From: greg wheatley To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Crime stories, Alien Cultures -------- That avatar of human excellence, and not coincidentally the person who sent me my copy of The Long Run, Simon Cardinale, wrote: > Frankly neither did I. If I want a good detective story I'll ready one > of the better detective story authors (Chandler, John MacDonald, Ross > MacDonald, Gregory McDonald for fun dialogue... what's with the > M(a)cDonald domination of my list you ask? Does the library only allow > me to use one section of shelving? I have no good answer.) While not disagreeing with any of the authors listed, I'd just like to stick Andrew Vachss in there as well. I speak as a devoted reader. > Anyway, I guess the idea of planting memories of the victim's last few > seconds is a good idea, but the story was half cliche, and the other half > was so predictable it might as well have been cliche. I think I'm > getting tired of all the aliens who speak english, look like humans with > skin disorders, and then on top of it all have a western culture. There > are hundreds of societies on Earth that are more alien to me than the > stuff I see in Star Trek. I only like it when they get really weird, > which this one wasn't. While agreeing with all of the above, I'd like to mention such things as budget restraints, and also the fact that any completely alien society would probably be completely incomprehensible. In all probability, we couldn't communicate in any fashion whatsoever. This is if we even noticed their existence. > Which brings me to a question I'd like you all to respond to at leisure: > What traits if any might be common to all civilized (use whatever > definition of that you like) cultures? Maybe I'm just tired (in fact I > am) but I can't think of any just now. Putting on my philosopher's hat over the top of my lawyer's hat, this question would seem incredibly difficult to answer without stricter definitions of civilized and also cultures. I know you said to use whatever definitions, but this sort of throws the question open so widely as to render it meaningless (almost as meaningless as postmodernism, which is really something :). I'd say the best we could do is come up with some list of traits common to all earth cultures, and possibly to alien cultures if we make some amazingly sweeping generalisations (which we'd have to). Quite frankly, the only trait that seems remotely likely to be so ubiquitous is the will to live. Basically, any culture lacking this would probably die out, and so it would seem reasonably necessary. If we then make these cultures civilized (using my concept of civilized which I won't go into) we might then posit some extension of the will to live which would manifest itself as a desire to imbue life with some sort of meaning. That's about as far as I'd be willing to take it. Dear old Nietzsche would then go on to say that this meaning could only really lie in the production of Art (although he's not amazingly clear on what Art is), whilst certain others (Descartes, Berkeley) would probably say that the meaning could be found in the drive to better know the mind of God. A Zen buddhist would probably say that ultimate meaning could only be found in the search for ultimate meaning, which doesn't really exist but all the other Zen buddhists would probably disagree with him. Regards, Greg (Who has gone on for a bit longer than he intended) P.s.: Apart from knowing about the actual release date of _The AI War_, does anyone know the date for release of review copies? -- " Hello, Computer Lounge. Can I take your order please?" " Aaargh!" - taken from "The Evil Jane and the Phone, a Computer Lounge Tragedy" **************** *** 03-14-95 *** **************** From: d.moran8@genie.geis.com To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Various X-Genie-Id: 0614432 X-Genie-From: D.MORAN8 -------- I'm going to let the Star Trek thing go. I don't think I've got enough to sue successfully, and I don't need the aggravation. A complaint's been filed with the Writer's Guild, though. I am not going to post my outline of Injustice. Among other things, there's a very good chance that a new SF tv series is coming shortly -- David Gerrold & Dorothy Fontana are working on it -- and if it does I've already sold them one episode; and selling Injustice, suitably modified, strikes me as quite possible. I really disliked "Ex Post Facto," the episode that borrowed from me. I'd have been predisposed to dislike it anyway, but I hardly needed the predisposition. Hate to think I was borrowed from for the sake of *that.* "Voyager" really has quite a fine cast; but its writers don't appear to understand SF -- the very first episode of this show, the space-traveling aliens didn't know how to make *water* -- "Burn the hydrogen, guys." The mystery in "Ex Post" was mediocre, and the dialog was really painful. Everything else aside, my hopes for Voyager are plummeting steadily. Babylon 5, on the other hand, is pretty cool, despite occasional lapses -- mostly the "aliens as humans" stuff that tv SF seems unable to get away from. ~~~~~~~~~~ AI War is finished; I'm making (relatively) minor revisions -- a character who lived before is going to die, and one who died is going to live. (Neither of them Trent.) It has also, don't scream, been rescheduled. I don't know the new pub date; I'll get back to you when I do. ~~~~~~~~~~ The Long Run is #36? Good job ... how many votes *is* that? And what other books are on the list? If anybody's got a whole copy of the 100 books & is willing to e-mail it to me or to the list as a whole, I'd really appreciate it. ~~~~~~~~~~ I was GOH at "Conspiracy" in Manhattan weekend before last. Only the 5th convention I've ever been to, and it turned out to be very small, maybe a hundred people total. But they were very nice and I enjoyed doing it. I'm going to be speaking at the "Coalition for Networked Information," on April 11 in Washington D.C. -- following Bruce Sterling and David Brin, who spoke in previous years. I'm very much looking forward to that. It won't be open to the public, but it will be videotaped, and copies of the videotape made available. Anyone who saw me speak at "Conspiracy" has some idea what I'm going to be talking about -- that speech is the (amazingly rough) basis of the speech I'm giving April 11. By amazingly rough I mean, maybe half the content of that speech will end up in the new one, which also has to address the future of the internet & such, and I'm not allowed to say "fuck." ~~~~~~~~~~ What Maureen said, about "Butterfly Kid." One of my & Jodi's favorite novels, when we were younger. "TF" isn't really much like it, except in the sense that both are unlike much of anything else. ~~~~~~~~~~ Things have really been extraordinarily busy of late. I've been piloting the last month on about 5-6 hours sleep, which I can do but don't like. If I've missed mail (Simon Tong, I'll get to your letter -- you're the only one I know I need to respond to) please feel free to re-send or nag. I'm not trying to ignore anyone, I've just been swamped. And April looks worse. ~~~~~~~~~~ And the Lakers -- Christ. They beat the Chicago Bulls the other night with four of their five starters on the bench. How 'bout that? :-) I gotta get a satellite dish or something. I'm living in an apartment in Manhattan, and ever since I got here I've been stuck without games to watch. It really sucks. Unfortunately I can't put a dish up on this apartment building. If the Lakers make a run in the playoffs and I miss it I'm going to be so damn ticked. It will make my annoyance with Evan Somers (sp.) & Paramount look like a small, mild thing. **************** *** 03-14-95 *** **************** From: rodrick su To: continuing-time@umich.edu, d.moran8@genie.geis.com Subject: Re: Various -------- On Tue, 14 Mar 1995 d.moran8@genie.geis.com wrote: > AI War is finished; I'm making (relatively) minor revisions -- a character > who lived before is going to die, and one who died is going to live. > (Neither of them Trent.) It has also, don't scream, been rescheduled. I > don't know the new pub date; I'll get back to you when I do. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! We have been experiencing extreme case of CT-Starving. It is closely related to data-starving. The end results are the same, victims became raving maniacs attacking anything in sight. > And the Lakers -- Christ. They beat the Chicago Bulls the other night with > four of their five starters on the bench. How 'bout that? :-) > > I gotta get a satellite dish or something. I'm living in an apartment in > Manhattan, and ever since I got here I've been stuck without games to watch. > It really sucks. Unfortunately I can't put a dish up on this apartment > building. If the Lakers make a run in the playoffs and I miss it I'm going > to be so damn ticked. It will make my annoyance with Evan Somers (sp.) & > Paramount look like a small, mild thing. > You got to believe that they will make the run. At the season's end, Jones and Cebellos should return... They will make the run. [ Rodrick Su [ If at first you don't succeed, well, so much for ] [ rsu@primenet.com [ skydiving. [ ``Games of the Hangman''] [ http://www.primenet.com/~rsu ]------------[ Victor O'Reilly ] **************** *** 03-16-95 *** **************** From: "simon b. cardinale" To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: Crime stories, Alien Cultures -------- On Tue, 14 Mar 1995, Greg Wheatley wrote: [Deleted stuff] > While agreeing with all of the above, I'd like to mention such things > as budget restraints, and also the fact that any completely alien > society would probably be completely incomprehensible. In all > probability, we couldn't communicate in any fashion whatsoever. This is > if we even noticed their existence. Sometimes they do alright. The Binars (sp?) who thought like computers were pretty alien. I agree that any real alien culture would likely be impossible to understand (Orson Scott Card's written whole books on this) but they could do better than a scene from a 1940s detective story which could have been set in San Francisco except for the funny foreheads and if the chahuaha hadn't had glued on hair. [more deleted stuff] > Putting on my philosopher's hat over the top of my lawyer's hat, this > question would seem incredibly difficult to answer without stricter > definitions of civilized and also cultures. I know you said to use > whatever definitions, but this sort of throws the question open so > widely as to render it meaningless (almost as meaningless as > postmodernism, which is really something :). I'd say the best we could > do is come up with some list of traits common to all earth cultures, and > possibly to alien cultures if we make some amazingly sweeping > generalisations (which we'd have to). Quite frankly, the only trait that > seems remotely likely to be so ubiquitous is the will to live. > Basically, any culture lacking this would probably die out, and so it > would seem reasonably necessary. If we then make these cultures > civilized (using my concept of civilized which I won't go into) we might > then posit some extension of the will to live which would manifest > itself as a desire to imbue life with some sort of meaning. That's about > as far as I'd be willing to take it. Dear old Nietzsche would then go on > to say that this meaning could only really lie in the production of Art > (although he's not amazingly clear on what Art is), whilst certain > others (Descartes, Berkeley) would probably say that the meaning could > be found in the drive to better know the mind of God. A Zen buddhist > would probably say that ultimate meaning could only be found in the > search for ultimate meaning, which doesn't really exist but all the > other Zen buddhists would probably disagree with him. What about a desire to expand? Any culture that didn't expand would be wiped out by a natural disaster eventually. What about curiosity? No technology without curiosity, right? Or maybe necessity would do it if the necessity were pretty intense. But maybe this doesn't belong on this mail group. :) **************** *** 03-16-95 *** **************** From: greg wheatley To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Off-subject Philosophical Ramblings -------- > What about a desire to expand? Any culture that didn't expand would be > wiped out by a natural disaster eventually. What about curiosity? No > technology without curiosity, right? Or maybe necessity would do it if > the necessity were pretty intense. Well I'd say that desire to expand would probably come as a result of desire to live. After all, if enough people live long enough, you're going to need more space. This is of course talking about will to live as a race rather than on the individual level. As to cultures getting wiped out by natural disaster, yep, could happen. This would also tend to posit desire to expand as part of will to live though. Unless you're trying to make the point that we won't meet such a culture if there hasn't been a desire to expand because they will have been wiped out, in which case I'd just say that meybe there hasn't yet been the requisite disaster. As to technology, I believe that we were originally talking about civilised cultures; them being techie doesn't necessarily follow from any of this (unless we meet them in space). And in this case, it might be due to a number of other factors (say will to live meeting with the fact they've populated the entire planet, or perhaps a really long war in which each side continually seeks the higher ground). Which is all basically saying that I see necessity as a possible replacement for curiosity :) > > But maybe this doesn't belong on this mail group. :) No complaints yet :) This is my disposable account, though. Regards, Greg -- " Hello, Computer Lounge. Can I take your order please?" " Aaargh!" - taken from "The Evil Jane and the Phone, a Computer Lounge Tragedy" **************** *** 03-16-95 *** **************** From: mike long To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: Crime stories, Alien Cultures Organization: Analog Devices Inc, Norwood MA, USA Reply-To: Mike Long -------- "Simon B. Cardinale" wrote: >On Tue, 14 Mar 1995, Greg Wheatley wrote: >[Deleted stuff] >> While agreeing with all of the above, I'd like to mention such things >> as budget restraints, and also the fact that any completely alien >> society would probably be completely incomprehensible. In all >> probability, we couldn't communicate in any fashion whatsoever. This is >> if we even noticed their existence. > >Sometimes they do alright. The Binars (sp?) who thought like computers >were pretty alien. I agree that any real alien culture would likely be >impossible to understand (Orson Scott Card's written whole books on this) >but they could do better than a scene from a 1940s detective story which >could have been set in San Francisco except for the funny foreheads and >if the chahuaha hadn't had glued on hair. Probably the best ALIEN aliens I've ever seen are C.J. Cherryh's knnn (methane-breathers from _Pride of Chanur_ &c.). They are total enigmas to the other species in the books, and it's practically impossible for anyone to communicate with them. Too bad the rest of her "aliens" aren't as alien. >What about a desire to expand? Any culture that didn't expand would be >wiped out by a natural disaster eventually. What about curiosity? No >technology without curiosity, right? Or maybe necessity would do it if >the necessity were pretty intense. One characteristic that I would think would be vital is the ability to tolerate each other's company. You can have a species that survives as solitary individuals (e.g. Larry Niven's starseeds), but they'll never have a culture. -- Mike Long PGP 2.6.2 public key signature: VLSI Design Engineer CCBF225E7D3F7ECB2C8F7ABB15D9BE7B Analog Devices, CPD Division Norwood, MA 02062 USA assert(*this!=opinionof(Analog)); **************** *** 03-16-95 *** **************** From: ap007@freenet.hsc.colorado.edu (maureen s. obrien) To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: Crime stories, Alien Cultures Reply-To: ap007@Freenet.HSC.Colorado.EDU -------- I think it's on-topic. After all, the Time Wars were started by the Zaradin (aliens, by and large), and a whole passel of alien races, nations, factions, conglomerates, and systems of thought will be coming down the pike fairly soon. Anyway, we're a small, friendly list; we can afford a bit of chat. Fer example, if the argument of the entire Continuing Time is as stated at the beginning of _Emerald Eyes_ (If the gods are omnipotent and care about us, why don't they get rid of evil? Either they're not omnipotent or they don't care), how do you think the argument is proceeding? -- Maureen S. O'Brien ap007@freenet.HSC.colorado.edu "You must begin printing books again." **************** *** 03-16-95 *** **************** From: (josh kaderlan) To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: RE:House of November -------- In Message Tue, 28 Feb 95 18:33:00 UTC, d.moran8@genie.geis.com writes: >When Tyrel becomes Lord November (which he does, in that book) two of his >advisers are his "brother" Zeke Harris, and his "father" Micah. Sorry since this is from so long ago, but I was away on spring break. This idea seems to me reminiscent of Arthur's situation in "The Once and Future King;" Arthur is raised by a lord who's not his father, and when he becomes king, both his "brother" and the lord become his advisors. I ask the list at large: Is this intentional, or am I just seeing something where there's no- thing? Sorry if someone else has made the same observation, but I haven't seen it. Josh **************** *** 03-16-95 *** **************** From: andrew westall To: continuing-time@umich.edu, "simon b. cardinale" Subject: Thoughts on universal traits -------- > Which brings me to a question I'd like you all to respond to at leisure: > What traits if any might be common to all civilized (use whatever > definition of that you like) cultures? Maybe I'm just tired (in fact I > am) but I can't think of any just now. I was actually thinking about this today. There are a few things that I think are common to human cultures. Speech, art, vertical social divisions, families (including friends), religion, history, innovation, music, emotions (though not true of Vulcan society I suppose.), mortality, taboo. (I think it fascinating that just about every has some form of incest taboo. Also most "civilized" cultures have a nudity taboo.) That's the key though - "civilized." What constituted a civilized culture? In our era, technology, literacy, nationalism, seem key features. Though these are definitely not prerequisites. Take the Native American cultures of European involvement for example. With plentiful resources, they had technology, yes, but by no means the advancement required to fit a modern definition of "civilized." So what do you think the difference is then? Andy Westall PS. I've been telling friends about the voyager injustice. Responses have ranged from outrage to indifference. One of my friends was even thankful they were a least plagiarizing from a good author. PPS. Being a vetran of only two DKM novels, could someone explain to me the ending of LD. I seemed to have missed the import. Granted Robert said her first kill would be "beautiful." But I think I like Trent's philsophy better. **************** *** 03-16-95 *** **************** From: felix lee To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: Thoughts on universal traits -------- book that might be useful: Human universals. / Donald E. Brown. Philadelphia, Temple University Press, c1991. I haven't read it (haven't found a copy yet), but I read a description of it, and it sounds quite interesting. the author set out to identify traits that can be found in any human culture, and the list is surprisingly long. -- **************** *** 03-16-95 *** **************** From: d.moran8@genie.geis.com To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Central Argument -- X-Genie-Id: 8797394 X-Genie-From: D.MORAN8 -------- Maureen said: >Fer example, if the argument of the entire Continuing Time is >as stated at the beginning of _Emerald Eyes_ (If the gods are >omnipotent and care about us, why don't they get rid of evil? That is indeed the central argument of the Tales -- and the question is answered, in I think a very interesting fashion, in "The Collapse of the Levels," the direct sequel to the Tales of the Continuing Time. "Collapse" is going to be a while coming; but sometime between now & then I hope to get to "The Sheriff of Shokes," which is set in the world of the Levels. ~~~~~~~~~~ Josh said: >This >idea seems to me reminiscent of Arthur's situation in "The Once and Future >King;" Arthur is raised by a lord who's not his father, and when he becomes >king, both his "brother" and the lord become his advisors. It's an interesting echo; but it wasn't intentional and I hadn't noticed it until you pointed it out. One of the differences here is that the family that raises Tyrel is "poor," by the standards of the time. They fed themselves when Tyrel was young, with some frequency, by hunting in the Dragonback mountains, for example; they either raised or hunted the great majority of what they ate. Aside from the fact that he was educated suspiciously well, for a poor mountain boy, his early days are not significantly different from those of the people he was raised with. ~~~~~~~~~ The stuff about the nature of civilization is interesting to me. I'm not running this list, but I certainly have no objection to it. **************** *** 03-17-95 *** **************** From: mace@lum.esd.sgi.com (rob mace) To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: Thoughts on universal traits -------- Andy Westall wrote: > Simon B. Cardinale wrote: > > Which brings me to a question I'd like you all to respond to at leisure: > > What traits if any might be common to all civilized (use whatever > > definition of that you like) cultures? Maybe I'm just tired (in fact I > > am) but I can't think of any just now. > > I was actually thinking about this today. There are a few things > that I think are common to human cultures. Speech, art, vertical social > ... > (I think it fascinating that just about every has some form of incest taboo. An incest taboo makes a lot of sense biologically/evolutionarily given how our reproduction works. An alien culture with similar reproduction would find an evolutionary advantage in an incest taboo. Going back to Simon's question, I think we might be surprised with how much we would share with an alien culture, if you assume an evolutionary basis for the development of these aliens and their culture. If you look at biological evolution, you will find that evolution has often come up with the same answer to a problem on multiple separate occasions. I don't see that cultural evolution would be any different. Of course, I still don't think that aliens would be as similar to us they tend to be in Star Trek. > That's the key though - "civilized." What constituted a civilized > culture? In our era, technology, literacy, nationalism, seem key > features. Though these are definitely not prerequisites. Take the Native > American cultures of European involvement for example. With plentiful > resources, they had technology, yes, but by no means the advancement > required to fit a modern definition of "civilized." So what do you think > the difference is then? The idea of a civilized culture really is relative. I am sure that if a human culture is around in a thousand years that they will look back at many of our current practices and view them as uncivilized. Also, I have never heard of a culture that looked on its self as uncivilized. Rob Mace **************** *** 03-17-95 *** **************** From: rodrick su To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: Central Argument -- -------- On Fri, 17 Mar 1995 d.moran8@genie.geis.com wrote: > Maureen said: > > >Fer example, if the argument of the entire Continuing Time is > >as stated at the beginning of _Emerald Eyes_ (If the gods are > >omnipotent and care about us, why don't they get rid of evil? > > That is indeed the central argument of the Tales -- and the question is > answered, in I think a very interesting fashion, in "The Collapse of the > Levels," the direct sequel to the Tales of the Continuing Time. > > "Collapse" is going to be a while coming; but sometime between now & then I > hope to get to "The Sheriff of Shokes," which is set in the world of the > Levels. Pray may we ask, what is the world of Levels? [ Rodrick Su [ If at first you don't succeed, well, so much for ] [ rsu@primenet.com [ skydiving. [ ``Games of the Hangman''] [ http://www.primenet.com/~rsu ]------------[ Victor O'Reilly ] **************** *** 03-17-95 *** **************** From: greg wheatley To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: The Problem of Evil -------- Maureen wrote: > I think it's on-topic. After all, the Time Wars were started by > the Zaradin (aliens, by and large), and a whole passel of alien > races, nations, factions, conglomerates, and systems of thought > will be coming down the pike fairly soon. > Well, it wasn't on-topic, but it is now. Especially as we've received the list equivalent of papal dispensation (thanks DKM :). > Anyway, we're a small, friendly list; we can afford a bit of chat. And I'm an another country to most of you so I don't have to worry about threats :) > Fer example, if the argument of the entire Continuing Time is > as stated at the beginning of _Emerald Eyes_ (If the gods are > omnipotent and care about us, why don't they get rid of evil? > Either they're not omnipotent or they don't care), how do you > think the argument is proceeding? Which is almost, but not quite, the problem of evil so beloved by philosophers. That one, of course, being that if the big G is omnipotent and omniscient, as well as being infinitely benevolent, then why is the world not a perfect place. I'd be happy to talk about this one for ages, but those not interested might get bored around the 1000 line mark. Suffice to say, if you take that argument, there seems to be no way of reconciling all the qualities attributed to God. Something has to give. This happens to give Buddhists and those that follow the Vedas a big advantage in the religious argument stakes. But what's really interesting in the argument used at the front of EE is that although it mentions the bit about benevolence and omnipotence, it makes no reference to omniscience, which leaves it perfectly open for there to be a non-omniscient God trying to eliminate evil, but not succeeding because s/he's not sure how. This would seem more analogous to that which we know of the Zaradin than the Christian example, and so a way is left out of the seeming paradox. Basically, that although the Zaradin are all-powerful, and benevolent, they just don't know how to fix things to remove evil, and thus evil's continued existence. Further, neither the Christian example nor that of Epicurus considers that the Gods might not agree as to means and/or motive. So they might be omnipotent (though the use of the word is debatable since they're of equal power), and benevolent, yet all disagree over how best to save the universe (or whether it should be saved), and so spend all their time fighting rather than trying to eliminate evil. And just as an aside, there is also the fact that at least one of my Philosophy Professors believes that it would be possible for a God to be omnipotent and yet still be constrained by the laws of logic (he didn't like the argument that travelling in time and messing with quantum states could affect logical laws :( ). If it's then a law of logic that there be evil in the world... Apart from playing around with definitions (which can net you lots and lots of argumentative outs), that's about all I can think of at the moment. Regards, Greg -- " Hello, Computer Lounge. Can I take your order please?" " Aaargh!" - taken from "The Evil Jane and the Phone, a Computer Lounge Tragedy" **************** *** 03-17-95 *** **************** From: will franqui x-sender: wfranqui@verdi To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Terminal Freedom -------- Hello, I'm new to the list, and I've been lurking for about two weeks. For about a week of that time I've seen TF, and wondered what it meant. Then I figured out it was a title. A bit of a stretch for me, but I grasped the concept. :) Today, finally, another on-line friend of mine confirmed for me what I suspected. It's a new DKM book. Hey, cool. :) Now the question part. I'm told it's not going to be available in stores, so, who do I talk to (or, more importantly, who do I send my money to) to get a copy? I need a fix, I'm about done rereading all the other DKM books I own. :) -Will **************** *** 03-17-95 *** **************** From: (josh kaderlan) To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: Thoughts on universal traits -------- In Message Fri, 17 Mar 1995 02:15:46 GMT, mace@lum.esd.sgi.com (Rob Mace) writes: >Going back to Simon's question, I think we might be surprised with how much >we would share with an alien culture, if you assume an evolutionary basis >for the development of these aliens and their culture. If you look at >biological evolution, you will find that evolution has often come up with >the same answer to a problem on multiple separate occasions. I don't see >that cultural evolution would be any different. Of course, I still don't >think that aliens would be as similar to us they tend to be in Star Trek. > But if you look at biological evolution (if I understood my bio teacher), there are often answers that are similar in result but not in purpose. For example, a bird's wings and a bee's. The result is the same (flight), but not the structures which have developed to achieve that result. It seems to me that Star Trek (and Babylon 5, to a certain extent) haven't given this any- where near as much thought as we have in the past few days - they're stuck with birds' wings, if you will, and never consider bees'. I guess I tend to be of the school of thought that says that if we do ever meet an alien species, they will be so completely different from us that no communication is possible. >The idea of a civilized culture really is relative. I am sure that if a >human culture is around in a thousand years that they will look back at many >of our current practices and view them as uncivilized. Also, I have never >heard of a culture that looked on its self as uncivilized. > Amen to that. Look at our current view of the Romans - although they seem reasonably civilized by Western standards, they did have this bloodthirsty liking for gladiatorial combats, an idea which seems completely repugnant to most people raised in the West today. (Although now that I think about it, are there any cultures still extant which regard combat to the death between two humans as entertainment?) Josh **************** *** 03-17-95 *** **************** From: andrew westall To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: a thought -------- > Fer example, if the argument of the entire Continuing Time is > as stated at the beginning of _Emerald Eyes_ (If the gods are > omnipotent and care about us, why don't they get rid of evil? > Either they're not omnipotent or they don't care), how do you > think the argument is proceeding? > I guess I think that there are more possible conclusions that either the gods don't care or aren't able to change things. What would a perfect world be? How would you have it? Euphoria and sugar cubes? If there is no violence, no murder, no pain, no dispair, no misfortune, no greed, no jealously, no perversion - if the gods eliminate all these, will we have a perfect world? Will our lives be exciting and fruitful? Will our days be joyous and prosperous? I am unsure. Certainly there is much evil we can do without, but I think we learn to be better people because of our exposure to evil. It's like the difference between being a child and an adult. Maturity comes as innocence fades. There is pain in our lives and there is need and that's what pushes us to create good. Perhaps 'a' good, all-powerful, all-knowing God purposefully leaves evil in our lives that we may become better? -Andy **************** *** 03-18-95 *** **************** From: d.moran8@genie.geis.com To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Boxing X-Genie-Id: 5581708 X-Genie-From: D.MORAN8 -------- Josh said: >(Although now that I think about it, are there any cultures still extant >which regard combat to the death between two humans as entertainment?) Ever boxed, Josh? Or watched as two men try to beat one another into unconsciousness? Fellow in England is in the hospital still, barely able to speak, after such a bout. I boxed, I *like* boxing -- but I'm skeptical that this is even a remotely civilized pasttime. I really suspect that a truly civilized society would see little difference, aside from squeamishness, between gladiatorial combat, and professional boxing. **************** *** 03-18-95 *** **************** From: david silberstein To: "d. k. moran list" Subject: Speedfreaks, short stories -------- I've been re-reading "Emerald Eyes", and one of the sections that caught my eye was the Speedfreak Rebellion of 2063. The Rebellion was referred to, with great effect, by Nathan St. Denver and Callia Sierran as an example of the PKF's ruthlessness, but after rereading the story of the Rebellion itself, I found myself wondering about why it was decided to convict the Speedfreaks of *treason*, and what the political repurcussions were. I tried to remember similar massacres of the (relatively) innocent from history. Despite the depressing events which came to mind, (and for that matter, the destruction of the Castanaveras telepaths which had occured a year earlier), I think that there were some important differences that I'd like to bring up about the Speedfreak rebellion. 1) Popular opinion was with them. The Speedfreaks travelled over nearly the entire planet, even through France (the most powerful nation in the UN, after all), and "...public sentiment was with them; the media coverage was favorable." The UN government is (in theory) democratic. So what happened after the convictions of treason? Were there no cries of outrage? Were there no attempts to impeach the officials responsible? What did Terry Shawmac have to say? 2) For that matter - all it says is that the UN "outlawed manually operated vehicles." As of when is breaking the law (which is what they were doing, after all) considered treason in any sane court of law? Did the Speedfreaks say "We are rebelling against the government", or "We are rebelling against an unjust law"? Did they at any time say that they were going to overthrow the government by force? It doesn't look that way from the excerpt. 3) How did the PKF react to this? Were they all willing to be involved in what was for all intents and purposes a massacre? Were there no feelings of guilt? Who put the Speedfreaks on trial? Who were the judge, jury, prosecutor, defender? Was there no attempt to show that the Speedfreaks were exercising their right to freedom of expression (I know that the American Constitution is theoretically null and void - but doesn't the Statement of Principles provide freedom of speech)? 4) Related to the above - in "The Long Run", it is mentioned that Elite Commander Breilleune became Mohammed Vance's enemy - and died as a result. No other details are given, except for Vance's (internal) confirmation that he had "done something about" Breilleune. Might that have something to do with the Castanaveras nuclear strike/ Speedfreak rebellion? I realize that only DKM can flesh out the story of the Speedfreak rebellion, and I'd rather he finished up the AI war. Still... that brings me to the other thing I wanted to mention: I think DKM should write more short stories. I think that, in a way, it would be like advertising: Subscribers to Fantasy & Science Fiction/ Isaac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine/Analog/OMNI etc, etc would read his stuff and want to get more. The DKM Web site works a little like this - but there are lots more SF magazine subscribers than there are people on the Internet. I know that in my case at least, the reason I became a DKM fan was because of his first published short story "All the Time in the World", which came out in 1982 in IASFM (ack! that's 13 years ago now!), and kept looking hungrily for more. It would be more satisfying for all of us - more short stories would mean we would get more DKM fixes sooner :-) , and DKM could eventually publish the resulting body of work as a collection. Anyone else out there agree with me? DKM: I did read your message saying how bushed you were - but take it under consideration, please? ---- David S **************** *** 03-18-95 *** **************** From: sean eric fagan To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: Boxing -------- >Ever boxed, Josh? Or watched as two men try to beat one another into >unconsciousness? Fellow in England is in the hospital still, barely able to >speak, after such a bout. Boxing occurred to me, but, actually, the *first* thing that occurred to me was "American Gladiators" (which I refuse to watch, really, but a friend of mine does, and it was just used on an episode of "Ellen" recently). Lots of people still watch dog and chicken fights, and bull fights are still Spain's most popular sport (I think; there's been a lot of criticism of it recently). Sean. **************** *** 03-18-95 *** **************** From: sean eric fagan To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: Speedfreaks, short stories -------- >but after >rereading the story of the Rebellion itself, I found myself wondering >about why it was decided to convict the Speedfreaks of *treason*, and >what the political repurcussions were. The Unification has major problems. There's a comment or thought by Vance in tLD, I think, something to the effect of how many people had been "executed for being idealogs" -- people who believed in something, illegal by the Unification. (The word is either "idealog" or "ideolog," I'm not sure right now, sorry.) Most of those are probably in the old USA, I suspect. Sean. **************** *** 03-18-95 *** **************** From: greg wheatley To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: a thought -------- > I guess I think that there are more possible conclusions that either the > gods don't care or aren't able to change things. What would a perfect > world be? How would you have it? Euphoria and sugar cubes? If there is no > violence, no murder, no pain, no dispair, no misfortune, no greed, no > jealously, no perversion - if the gods eliminate all these, will we have a > perfect world? Will our lives be exciting and fruitful? Will our days > be joyous and prosperous? I am unsure. Certainly there is much evil we > can do without, but I think we learn to be better people because of our > exposure to evil. It's like the difference between being a child and an > adult. Maturity comes as innocence fades. There is pain in our lives > and there is need and that's what pushes us to create good. > > Perhaps 'a' good, all-powerful, all-knowing God purposefully leaves evil > in our lives that we may become better? > > -Andy This is all very well so far as it goes, but it leaves itself wide open to the counter-argument that an omnipotent benevolent God should be able to produce a world in which there are all of the benefits but none of the negatives. Otherwise that God is not really omnipotent (unless he doesn't know how). Regards, Greg -- " Hello, Computer Lounge. Can I take your order please?" " Aaargh!" - taken from "The Evil Jane and the Phone, a Computer Lounge Tragedy" **************** *** 03-18-95 *** **************** From: ap007@freenet.hsc.colorado.edu (maureen s. obrien) To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: re: central argument Reply-To: ap007@Freenet.HSC.Colorado.EDU -------- Hmm. Apparently (according to Roderick Su) > On Fri 17 Mar 1995, dmoran8@genie.geis.com wrote: Something I have only seen in quotes. Guess the mail bounced. If someone could send me the complete text of that post, I'd be obliged. Anyway, I don't think we should be concerned with the traditional formulations of the Problem of Evil (answer: free will explicitly includes the power to do evil. And if you can't do evil or good to other people (and have them do it to you), there goes free will.)) So, big deal. That's the (version I believe in, anyway, of the) real world. On this list, we are concerned with the Multiverse of the Great Wheel and how things work _There_. (Which isn't to say that the traditional solution might not include Moran's solution as a subset, even in his Multiverse -- but that's for Moran to decide, no?) After I've read Moran's post, I'll try and post my thoughts on what he's doing.... -- Maureen S. O'Brien ap007@freenet.HSC.colorado.edu "You must begin printing books again." **************** *** 03-18-95 *** **************** From: colomon To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Players -------- Just ran across this quote: But was he good _enough_? Was he or could he ever be what he wanted most: to be a _player_? (That was the ultimate compliment you could give another human: "He's a _player_.") William Goldman, _Brothers_ He's talking about basketball, but it does seem a rather DKMish quote. -Sol **************** *** 03-19-95 *** **************** From: wesley mcdermott content-length: 393 To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: Speedfreaks -------- > 3) How did the PKF react to this? Were they all willing to be involved > in what was for all intents and purposes a massacre? Since the majority were nailed by a big (admittedly CONSTRUCTED) storm in the middle of the ocean, I'd expect few Peaceforcers to feel "personally responsible" for what happened; in times of turmoil you just "do what you're told and get on with it". (: Wesley **************** *** 03-19-95 *** **************** From: david silberstein To: "d. k. moran list" Subject: Re: Speedfreaks, short stories -------- On Fri, 17 Mar 1995 17:35:49 -0800 Sean said: >>but after >>rereading the story of the Rebellion itself, I found myself wondering >>about why it was decided to convict the Speedfreaks of *treason*, and >>what the political repurcussions were. > >The Unification has major problems. There's a comment or thought by Vance >in tLD, I think, something to the effect of how many people had been >"executed for being idealogs" -- people who believed in something, illegal >by the Unification. (The word is either "idealog" or "ideolog," I'm not >sure right now, sorry.) >From my reading, I understood "ideolog" to be pretty much synonymous with our word "terrorist", and what an earlier era called "anarchist". Not just someone who has different ideas, but someone who commits violent acts in order to bring these ideas into reality. (Although as I understand it, the "real" anarchists had nothing to do with the ones who committed acts of violence) FWIW, I checked out my French-English dictionary, and "ideologue" (with an accent over the first 'e') means "ideologist". >Most of those are probably in the old USA, I suspect. Most of them are probobly Johnny Reb or Erisian Claw. But come to think of it - are there *no* other nationalist groups who wish to throw off the yoke of the UN? Or has the Claw (which doesn't seem to have any nationalist affiliation) absorbed them all? Hmm. I just found something interesting, which may explain things a bit. Its a fragment from the OED definition of "ideology", with quotations. (Note the bit about "crazed enthusiasts" in the quote for the 2nd def ): ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ideology (aIdi:'ol&schwa.d3I). [ad. Fr. ideologie: see IDEO- and -LOGY.] 1 a The science of ideas; that department of philosophy or psychology which deals with the origin and nature of ideas. b spec. Applied to the system of the French philosopher Condillac, according to which all ideas are derived from sensations. c The study of the way in which ideas are expressed in language. 2 Ideal or abstract speculation; in a depreciatory sense, unpractical or visionary theorizing or speculation. Napoleon VI. 251 Ideology, by which nickname the French ruler [Bonaparte] used to distinguish every species of theory, which, resting in no respect upon the basis of self-interest, could, he thought, prevail with none save hot-brained boys and crazed enthusiasts. Bonaparte in Macm. Mag. XLIV. 164/2 He..put aside the whole system of false and confused thinking which had reigned since 1792, and which he called ideology. 3 = IDEALISM 1. 4 A systematic scheme of ideas, usu. relating to politics or society, or to the conduct of a class or group, and regarded as justifying actions, esp. one that is held implicitly or adopted as a whole and maintained regardless of the course of events. Also Comb. Utopia. 1939 AUDEN in I Believe (1940) 22 It is despair at finding a solution to this problem which is responsible for much of the success of Fascist blood-and-soil ideology. D. RAPHAEL Probl. Pol. Philos. i. 17 Ideology..is usually taken to mean, a prescriptive doctrine that is not supported by rational argument. _________________________________________________________________________ ---- David S **************** *** 03-19-95 *** **************** From: david silberstein To: "d. k. moran list" Subject: Re: Speedfreaks -------- On Sun, 19 Mar 1995 08:59:04 EST Wesley said: >> 3) How did the PKF react to this? Were they all willing to be involved >> in what was for all intents and purposes a massacre? > >Since the majority were nailed by a big (admittedly CONSTRUCTED) storm >in the middle of the ocean, I'd expect few Peaceforcers to feel "personally >responsible" for what happened; in times of turmoil you just "do what >you're told and get on with it". True, true. But I can't help thinking of (for example) Melissa du Bois. She seems like a decent sort. There are probably many PKF who have some feeling of humanity. They probably would "just follow orders". But mightn't there have been some point (I am thinking of the 200+ Speedfreaks who were executed, and the executions released to the boards), when *somebody's* concience might have woken up and said "Look. We've defeated these people. Most of them are already dead. So WHY are we convicting these people of treason, and killing them - when all they wanted to do was drive their vehicles in peace? Its not like they were killing anyone, or destroying property" Etc, etc. Of course, there may have been evidence that they *were* planning to violently overthrow the gov't planted by someone cynical and vicious. Perhaps by the PKF themselves (for reasons which we don't know), or perhaps by (say) the Claw or the Rebs, for the really, really bad PR this would generate against the PKF (sickening, huh?)(Probably the Rebs. They would just quote Thomas Paine at anyone who expressed shock or horror) (the bit about the summer soldier, the tree of liberty watered by the blood of patriots, etc.). ----- David S **************** *** 03-19-95 *** **************** From: ap007@freenet.hsc.colorado.edu (maureen s. obrien) To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Miscellanea Reply-To: ap007@Freenet.HSC.Colorado.EDU -------- Re: central argument -- I still haven't got a copy of Moran's post about this, but I've been thinking... So far, the biggest preventable evil we've seen is probably Eddore's nuking the Castanaveras. All that our friendly (human) neighborhood gods of the Zaradin Church had to do to prevent the deaths of their ancestors and millions of people in the Troubles was to kill Eddore (before he could issue such a shocking order as "go nuke that mansion that's practically next to our HQ".) But if Camber or Storyteller had prevented that, they might have prevented their own births. Certainly they would have broken whatever the rules are that they live by. So. Comments? Re: Appropriate quotes -- I liked the Player quote _a lot_! Here's a real good quote for TLD from Carole Nelson Douglas' _Cat on a Blue Monday_. (This is a Midnight Louie movie. Louie is a cat with attitude. Carole Nelson Douglas is a writer of sf, fantasy, mystery, and romance -- and she is pretty hard to read except when she includes humor, as is this series.) But here's the quote: "...I don't dance." "Right. You do martial arts. And the martial arts are designed to keep people at a distance. Dancing isn't." Re: Speedfreaks and Peaceforcers --- Carl got his license from the PKF. So must a lot of PKF (obviously). So, many PKF must be good drivers who like to drive fast. Remember, Emile was on Datawatch and he got datastarve. What did the PKF who chased Speedfreaks on their Long Run get? -- Maureen S. O'Brien ap007@freenet.HSC.colorado.edu "You must begin printing books again." **************** *** 03-20-95 *** **************** From: d.moran8@genie.geis.com To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Good and Evil X-Genie-Id: 2706736 X-Genie-From: D.MORAN8 -------- The nature of evil -- Central Argument of "Tales" & "Collapse" -- What's wrong with our universe, our reality? It's unjust, in a word. Good behavior does not necessarily bring good results; bad behavior does not necessarily bring bad results. So let's think about this. Assume this situation is unpalatable to you, and you've decided to change it. Okay -- *how* do you change it? Some mechanism for justice -- some basis in physical law -- has to be built into the structure of the universe, such that good is rewarded, and evil punished. In other words, the universe is *aware* of your actions. (This is true in the case of the actual universe we live in, fwiw -- see the classic double slit experiment in quantum mechanics. The wave function doesn't collapse until somebody observes it.) But I'm talking about a level of universe-person interation that's a bit beyond that -- But free will is pretty much out the window then, isn't it? Is this valuable to us? We presume so -- All right, how about a world where evil *tends* to get punished? How does this work? What mechanism is in place? The following is from a letter I sent a friend some time ago, with some stuff removed -- ~~~~~~~~~~ The Collapse of the Levels: Poison is the Wind; Winter's End; and Wild. First, the hidden background -- i.e., it doesn't appear in *any* of the stories set in the World of the Levels except, in a small way, in the concluding novel, "Wild." The last two "Continuing Time" novels are "Monument," and "The Way off the Wheel." "Monument," in fact, is subtitled "The Last Tale of the Continuing Time." We quote from C.S. Lewis: "I was with him in his last hour, and he gave me this message to your Majesty: to remember that all worlds draw to an end and that noble death is a treasure which no one is too poor to buy." ---the message of Roonwit the Centaur to King Tirian of Narnia, C.S. Lewis, "The Last Battle" In "Monument," the Chained One, who is the power source which created the Great Wheel, is freed.... Fast forward a few millennia, to "The Way off the Wheel." The universe is growing chaotic. The Continuing Time has ended and, with its power source removed, the Great Wheel of Existence is collapsing into non-existence. (This is one of my Late-Heinlein-period novels, when I get together all my favorite characters from all of my old stories and they have a party.) A Group of Stalwart Heroes get together and decide to go look for The Way off the Wheel. They build -- what else -- an Ark, the Ark of Aesop, and Venture Forth into Chaos. Aboard the Ark are a quarter million humans, some of whom you'd recognize, and some of whom you wouldn't -- There are others aboard the Ark as well, quite aside from the humans. There are Corvichi spacetime gypsies, de Nostri, K'Aillae, slissi, tangletoes, Golden People -- most of the major oxygen-breathing alien species in the Continuing Time stories, to make this list shorter. The Great Wheel of Existence collapses -- and after a long voyage through Chaos, fighting off the Serathin who want to destroy them, the Ark comes to a Place where the Serathin are unable to follow them, and sets down. There's nobody in this Place. A huge range of mountains runs north to south, several thousand miles long; on the west side of the mountains is a temperate zone, fed by rain and the runoff of rivers coming down out of the mountains. The mountains themselves are impassably high, rising up literally as high as anyone can see. Climb high enough and the atmosphere ends ... but the mountains go on rising. They are the Wall the world ends against. To the west, the lowlands trail off into desert. Eternal desert -- no matter how far anyone has ever gone into the desert, there appears to be no end. People who go past the halfway mark, where their water runs out, die. There's no moon and no stars; the nighttime sky is *dark.* But it's not a grim place; there's plenty of water, old growth forests, tillable farmland. There's no sign of who Made the Place ... no sign of the Serathin who chased them here. Someone or something is protecting them from the forces of Chaos. The last section of the Tales of the Continuing Time is called "The Failure of the Map." This refers to a mathematical principle that says that it is impossible to produce a system of math in which contradictory things cannot be said. I.e., *no representational system* can ever be wholly accurate. The map is not the thing -- Our colonists spread out across the surface of the Place, humans and aliens. And ... interesting things start happening. People find it very difficult to tell a lie; the truth is much easier. Good behavior *tends* to get rewarded; bad behavior *tends* to be punished. Not always; it's not a one-to-one relationship by any means. But often enough to be noticed. So -- if you were going to make a *better world,* where would you start? I'd start by installing actual *feedback* into the system. And weirdly enough, when you start looking at feedback in this sense, you end up with a universe that's aware of language, aware of intent ... a universe where sympathetic magic *works*, where the map *is* related to the object. And all sorts of things are maps. Language is a map, a representational system. So is painting, sculpture, music, dance ... if something can be used representationally, it can be used for purposes of magic. An evil magician is somebody who *tells lies.* Telling a lie is very difficult, because it's not supported by the actual structure of the universe. But conversely ... if you tell a lie, and *keep* telling that lie over and over again, with great conviction, the lie becomes the truth. And you've just cast a spell.... Good Magic is art, or creation. Bad Magic is lying, or destruction. So here are our million-odd immigrants to the new Place ... and some of them are pleased by the Place as they find it. Some of them aren't. And some of them are becoming Powerful. Generations pass, and eventually war breaks out. Cataclysmic war -- picture the take-no-prisoner attitudes of both pro-choice and pro-life demonstrators, for whom compromise is simply not a possibility -- compromise on a moral principle is simply treason -- transferred into a world where magic works. (I don't mean this as a precise example of the sorts of issues that end up being fought over.) So the War of the Gods breaks out, and at its end reality is broken into three fragments, three slivers, three Levels ... and two hundred thousand years pass. The Ark of Aesop is lost, and will remain lost, "to the ten thousandth generation." Nine thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine generations later, we come to the novel "The Sheriff of Shokes" -- ~~~~~~~~~~ The Sheriff of Shokes is a woman named Ravenna. Her mother was the Sheriff, and so was her mother. She lives in a relatively stable world -- picture a world (I do) stretched along the coast of the Pacific Ocean, running from Baja California in Mexico, up through California, Oregon, Washington, and into Canada. This is the World; Shokes is located (curiously) about where the city of Sherman Oaks is located in California, with much the same climate and so forth. The town of Shokes is *ancient* ... it's one of the few surviving Cities. Most of the Cities were destroyed in a War that took place so long ago it's passed into myth. The City of Shokes has about 200,000 inhabitants, supported by advanced agriculture. They don't have a "technology" as such, nothing that would scream out "tech," but they do have an old and extremely well worked out economy. Picture a world lacking electronics, but with chemistry and biology far in advance of ours ... plus a little magic, here and there. Ravenna lives in a world of three Levels. Her level is the middle world; she's never been to either of the other Levels. The three Levels are people, different cities, and different cultures. "Heaven" is the upper Level ... it's where the winners of the War ended up. (Rave's people pray to a silver-eyed goddess -- quite pragmatically, too. Prayer works.) "Hell" is the lower Level; it's where the losers ended up. The War itself is mythical ... Rave couldn't tell you whether the War actually happened or not. Virtually no one could ... maybe a few of the magicians at the College of the Arts. (Maybe.) But Rave *knows* that Heaven and Hell are real places, though she's never been to either of them; she knows people who *have.* She's had occasion to meet visitors from those places; she met an angel once, and within living memory demons came up out of Hell to raid Shokes. Rave doesn't think of herself as a "human," though she is one. (Silver-eyed, too.) She's a "walker," as the Corvichi space-time gypsies are simply "gypsies." Tangletoes (the Continuing Time name) are "ropemakers" ... not because they actually make rope, but because they look like a clothes tree with hundreds of ropes hanging off of them. The other "alien" species have similarly descriptive (or racist, if you like) names. I have four books worked out to be set against this background. The first book is "The Sheriff of Shokes," and the main character is Rave, the third of her line to be Sheriff. This book introduces us to the world of the Levels -- Rave gets to go out in the World, and give the reader some familiarity with the world. "The Sheriff of Shokes" starts with a demon coming up from Hell, kidnapping a batch of human children, and dragging them back down to Hell. Rave puts together a posse, and heads after them ... and finds, once she's gotten to Hell, that the way you come isn't the way you leave. The course of her book takes her through Hell, through Heaven, and back to Shokes again -- older, wiser, and pregnant with the child of a demon named Call. The child is a girl, and Rave names her Jake. Jake is the protagonist of the trilogy "The Collapse of the Levels." ~~~~~~~~~~ None of this addresses the nature of "evil," particularly, but that's something I can't do in one short post. An exploration of what makes for "evil" is one of the things I'm using "Collapse" for. **************** *** 03-20-95 *** **************** From: d.moran8@genie.geis.com To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Various -- X-Genie-Id: 9457272 X-Genie-From: D.MORAN8 -------- I'm thinking about writing more short fiction -- it depends entirely on my finances. Right now I can't afford to -- I simply can't recoup the time they take me, for what they pay. I wrote the three "Star Wars" short stories recently, but those will reach an audience of a million or more readers; it struck me as worth it. I've *got* a ton of CT short fiction that I could write, to be sure, ranging from old fiction needing to be rewritten ("The Mechanism of Desire," sigh) to stuff I've always wanted to write and have never gotten to. The Speedfreak stuff I'm not going to address. "Faster than the Wind" exists in a draft from 14-15 years ago, and it's pretty bad, yes -- but the broad outline of events in that story aren't implausible. The Speedfreaks were traveling in large numbers, many of them were armed -- Nathan St. Denver's comments on this subject, in TLR, are from *his* point of view. ~~~~~~~~~~ "Players" -- the word comes from basketball, yes. Or perhaps simply from black American culture; but basketball is where I first heard the word, and that's how I use it. I certainly didn't make it up. Any of you out there grow up playing basketball in Los Angeles, New York, or any other large city? You've heard that usage. ~~~~~~~~~~ Eddore didn't nuke the Castanaveras. Vance did. ~~~~~~~~~~ Melissa du Bois *is* a decent sort. A line of dialog in "AI War" has Trent telling her, "I love you. I love for what you're doing --" ~~~~~~~~~~ "Ideolog" as I've used the word doesn't mean "terrorist" -- it means someone so wedded to an ideology they've stopped thinking. Frequently those people are terrorists. It's my coinage, but it strikes me as a reasonable usage. By the time of tLR & tLD & etc., the Erisian Claw & Johnny Rebs are the principal terrorist/ideolog groups on the planet. There are other terrorist groups still -- I think "Red Army" is referred to in Japan in tLD. Not sure if I've referred to others, but there surely are others -- ideologically driven movements (religions, for example) create factions every time somebody gets ticked off. ~~~~~~~~~~ Marcus Eubanks, I've got you on the list for "Terminal Freedom." Nobody who's requested a copy be reserved will be left without one -- if six months pass after printing & I don't hear from you, it'll go on sale, but I'll wait that long. I'm not looking to inconvenience anybody. **************** *** 03-20-95 *** **************** From: pilsang park To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: "All the Time.." -------- Hi fellow DKM lovers, I was reading my recent posts from the list when I saw David Silberstein (sp?) mention the short story "All the Time in the World." I think I've downloaded all the DKM short stories from the FTP sites, and I don't recognize this one. Am I missing a connection, or is it not there? i.e., do I have to go looking for old issues of IASFM 1982 to find it? Thanks a lot! PilSang guardian@leland.stanford.edu **************** *** 03-20-95 *** **************** From: william perpetuity lewis To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Speedfreaks and treason -------- After some thought, I don't think it's all that far-fetched that the PKF would execute the surviving speedfreaks for treason. A previous poster pointed out that it is the UN's practice to execute ideolog[ue]s; though AFAIK the meaning of this term is not made completely clear in the books, I had assumed that it included those who were simply outspoken in their opposition to the government. No violent acts of sabotage necessary. Offhand comments at social gatherings, a derisive snort after listening to the party line, perhaps a newsletter quick to point out the government's errors, have at many times and places on Earth been sufficient for the government to realize that you are opposed to it, and that it might be a little bit safer if you weren't free to do as you wished. Try mentally translating "ideologue" to "dissident", another word which denotes merely state of mind and not action; or think of some of history's more enthusiastic religious governments; and I think you'll find the execution of the speedfreaks easier to believe. After all, the Long Run *was* a massive, organized, flagrant & unrepentant act of disobeyance of the new government. That they had popular support made it even more important that they be *publicly* executed. The Unification would hardly be concerned that this would fuel resentment against it; a significant fraction of the Earth's surface was under its control only after long, bloody battles. The subject populace was *already* resentful. They were subject only because the UN had the sheer military force to keep them so against their will, and what better way for the Unification to remind everyone of this than by executing a group of people who thought that the UN or its policies might not be so good for them? (This is all merely MHO, of course. And I apologize for any errors I may have made since I don't have the books with me at the moment.) **************** *** 03-21-95 *** **************** From: "simon b. cardinale" To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: The Problem of Evil -------- I don't see the logical jump here. God can be omniscient, omnipotent, and benevolent and still leave evil alone. Would a world without evil be best for humanity? Maybe, but I'm not convinced of it. Without adversity (outside or from each other) we wouldn't have left the trees. Adversity (plagues, famines, and many other evils included) drive evolution (biological, cultural, and technological). Anyway, my point is that there's no contradiction. I don't believe in God, myself, but I'm just going on a feeling, and I accept that I might be wrong. I don't think there's any logical exercise that can prove or disprove a god's existence. It's a matter of faith either way. **************** *** 03-21-95 *** **************** From: lazarus To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: deNostri -------- I've been reading this group for a few weeks and I'd like to contribute. I've been reading DKM's main novels for as long as they've been out. My copy of Armageddon Blues is just about to desintegrate, I've read it so much. By the way, I may have a line on a few copies of Armageddon Blues, almost certainly EE, and TLR. If anyone is interested give me a yell. Okay so here's my question. The de Nostri. Will they show up again, for that matter have they all disappeared. It seems to me that at the end of EE there were almost none left. Am I incorrect? Someone please help me. The reason this comes about is from what I saw in the posting from DKM about the Ark of Aesop, and how it had some de Nostri on it, and it peaked my attention. Did they come from the collapse of the Great Wheel in a converging of the heros of the continuing time (by the way, I'm in the middle of the cat who walks through walls, poignant?), or did they survive all along and I'm just confused? As an aside. The de Nostri as a whole were quite effective, mutated in design to be a perfect blend of two races, which may or may not have happened. And to be sure, they were beset from the start by speciesism, but they were unable to change who they were, even if they wanted to. But my point is, the UN and the PKF more importantly, in the end of tLD have found that the PKF Elite aren't as effective as they once were. Could a new breed of superhumans be on the way? Constructed my the UN to be the new shock troops. Just a few thoughts. Thanks, John McKee Lazarus@selway.umt.edu P.S. If I do get ahold of a few copies of DKM's stuff, I'm not looking to sell 'em. If you want 'em, just drop me a line. I'll send them to you right away. **************** *** 03-21-95 *** **************** From: daughter of galanthis To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: The Problem of Evil -------- >>>>> "Simon" == Simon B Cardinale writes: Simon> I don't see the logical jump here. God can be omniscient, Simon> omnipotent, and benevolent and still leave evil alone. Would a Simon> world without evil be best for humanity? Maybe, but I'm not Simon> convinced of it. Without adversity (outside or from each other) Simon> we wouldn't have left the trees. Adversity (plagues, famines, Simon> and many other evils included) drive evolution (biological, Simon> cultural, and technological). If God is omniscient and omnipotent, it can create a world where evil isn't necessary for any of the reasons you (Simon) mentioned. Where no one has to suffer because we don't *need* to suffer to develop. So if God is omniscient, omnipotent, and benevolent, why hasn't it done so? Jina Chan **************** *** 03-21-95 *** **************** From: bryan dunlap To: continuing-time@umich.edu, Subject: Re: The Problem of Evil -------- From: Daughter of Galanthis If God is omniscient and omnipotent, it can create a world where evil isn't necessary for any of the reasons you (Simon) mentioned. Where no one has to suffer because we don't *need* to suffer to develop. So if God is omniscient, omnipotent, and benevolent, why hasn't it done so? Such a being is no less alien to us than any fictional alien character or race. Such a being, by definition, knows information we do not, and reasons based on data unavailable to us. The motivations of an omniscient and omnipotent God are also unknown to those operating under our limitations. The lack of apparent reasons from our narrow (mortal) point of view does not preclude reasons from the deity's point of view. "Ah, this would be the *ineffable* plan, right?" -- Aziraphale, _Good Omens_, Terry Pratchett & Neil Gaiman Bryan Dunlap, OSU Physics Dept. | Giving money and power to government is bcd@mps.ohio-state.edu 614/292-3402 | like giving whiskey and car keys to 174 W. 18th Ave. Columbus OH 43210 | teenage boys. -- P.J. O'Rourke **************** *** 03-21-95 *** **************** From: d.moran8@genie.geis.com To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: WARNING -- X-Genie-Id: 0498860 X-Genie-From: D.MORAN8 -------- WARNING WARNING WARNING -- My editor at Bantam, Tom Dupree, has expressed an interest in joining this list. I'm going to send him instructions on how to do so ... but *please* be aware that from this point forward EVERYTHING that is said on this list will be read by my editor. Okay? Let's have Bantam-bashing kept to a minimum. I'm not pointing fingers at anyone; I've criticized Bantam on this list myself, and now that Tom's on it, as a courtesy (and out of pure self-interest, too) I'm going to stop. (If you want to respond to this notice, please do so in private e-mail rather than on the list ... Tom will be on this list within a day or two and I don't want him reading responses to this warning. Tom Dupree is a good guy who is not responsible for past behavior by my publisher -- and certainly isn't interested in hearing about it.) **************** *** 03-21-95 *** **************** From: felix lee To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: The Problem of Evil -------- > Would a world without evil be > best for humanity? Maybe, but I'm not convinced of it. Without adversity > (outside or from each other) we wouldn't have left the trees. umm, there's a huge difference between adversity and evil. argument 1: an omnipotent god can provide adversity without evil. argument 2: an omnipotent god can provide the benefits of adversity without adversity itself. counterargument 1: a.1 and a.2 are incompatible with free will. countercounterargument 1: omniscience is incompatible with free will. c.c.a. 2: omniscience is compatible with free will. c.c.a. 3: "free will" is a poorly-defined concept. c.a. 2: an omnipotent god _can't_ do a.1 or a.2. c.c.a. 1: why not? that's not very omnipotent, is it? c.a. 3: god works in mysterious ways. c.c.a. 1: umm, okay, sure. etc. there are plenty of other branches to explore too. (my current attitude is, why bother? omni-attributes are philosophical constructs, and I don't see any particular reason to try to reconcile them with reality. I'm not sure I understand why people think god has to be "perfect".) -- **************** *** 03-21-95 *** **************** From: d.moran8@genie.geis.com To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Apologies to list -- X-Genie-Id: 3557326 X-Genie-From: D.MORAN8 -------- IAN@ALG5.EECS.NWU.EDU said: >It seems like something of an imposition to ask the people >on this list to limit their conversations from now into the >indefinite future. It seems rather like asking someone to >come to a certain bar with you and then asking the patrons >beforehand not to speak freely. In fact, it's even worse >because the person asked to the bar in a sense never >_leaves_ the bar, but is privy to every conversation >thereafter. Hmmm ... hadn't occurred to me, but you make a good point. Wasn't trying to impose -- all I intended by that post was to point out that some relatively harsh criticism has been directed at Bantam at various times; and Tom is not the correct target for harsh criticism. That's Really All I Meant. In general people's manners on this list have been remarkable, when compared to much of what I've seen elsewhere on the various nets. But there's been a lot of frustration with Bantam (on my part as well as anyone else's); I merely didn't want to see Tom hit with that frustration, when he doesn't deserve it. It's certainly not my intention to tell anyone they can't criticize Bantam if they want to (any more than I'd have the effrontery to tell you not to criticize me if you choose to -- this *isn't* "my" list, it was here before I was.) Just to please realize that Tom isn't "Bantam" and hasn't been responsible for much of anything that's happened during my relationship with them. Is all this self-serving on my part? Sure; to date I have a very good relationship with Tom, and I'd like to keep it that way. **************** *** 03-22-95 *** **************** From: david bruce hollander To: dbh8@columbia.edu, continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: Re: The Problem of Evil -------- I feel a strange kinship with Epicurus since we both had kidney stones, so I thought I'd just provide a little historical background to this discussion. The epigraph at the beginning of EE derives from De Ira Dei, On the Anger of God, a work by the apologist Lactantius (c. 300 A.D.), "the Christian Cicero," who tutored Crispus, the eldest son of the Emperor Constantine [It would seem that Lactantius wasn't of much help to Crispus since he was later executed by his own father]. Lactantius comments on the passage of Epicurus (not elsewhere attested as far as I know) that "I know that most of the philosophers who defend [divine] providence are commonly shaken by this argument and against their wills are almost driven to admit that god does not care, which is exactly what Epicurus is looking for" [Lactantius De Ira Dei 13.22]. Lactantius argues against Epicurus and seeks to prove that god is both benevolent and angry. Epicurus himself had some rather unorthodox views about the gods such that many later accused him of being an atheist. He argues that "what is blessed and eternal neither has any troubles of its own nor provides them to others, and so is subject to neither anger nor gratitude, since everything of this nature is weak. . . god is idle. . . entangled with no serious preoccupations, undertakes no toilsome labour, but simply rejoices in his own wisdom and virtue, being certain he will always be in the midst of pleasures which are both supreme and eternal" [Cicero De Natura Deorum 1.45-51]. Another translation of the EE Epicurus epigraph (Inwood and Gerson, _Hellenistic Philosophy_): "'God,' [Epicurus] says, 'either wants to eliminate bad things and cannot, or can but does not want to, or neither wishes to nor can, or both wants to and can. If he wants to and cannot, then he is weak - and this does not apply to god. If he can but does not want to, then he is spiteful - which is equally foreign to god's nature. If he neither wants to nor can, he is both weak and spiteful and so not a god. If he wants to and can, which is the only thing fitting for a god, where then do bad things come from? Or why does he not eliminate them?'" ----Lactantius On the Anger of God 13.20-22. **************** *** 03-22-95 *** **************** From: "mike rosenberg" To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: apologies -------- dkm's editor will be a hero to everyone on the list merely by giving us an idea of when we can expect to see _ai war_ on the shelf! it's absence from locus's latest forthcoming books listing has me worried a bit, but i'm being optomistic and chalking it up to a clerical error :^) mike **************** *** 03-23-95 *** **************** From: d.moran8@genie.geis.com To: continuing-time@umich.edu Subject: GOH Speech -- X-Genie-Id: 3657638 X-Genie-From: D.MORAN8 -------- Someone asked that I post the following; it's my GOH speech at "Conspiracy." This is a little bit of a mishmash; I wrote it in about four hours the night before the speech. Nonetheless, though it wanders all over the place, it says things I believe. Justification enough. My speech to the Coalition for Networked Information, April 11, will be substantially more focused; once I've given it, I'll post that here too, if there's interest. ~~~~~~~~~~ The following is copyright 1995 by Daniel Keys Moran. THIS WORK MAY NOT BE PRINTED OR PUBLISHED IN A BOOK, MAGAZINE, ELECTRONIC OR CD-ROM STORY COLLECTION, OR VIA ANY OTHER MEDIUM NOW EXISTING OR WHICH MAY IN THE FUTURE COME INTO EXISTENCE, WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE AUTHOR. THIS WORK IS LICENSED FOR READING PURPOSES ONLY. ALL OTHER RIGHTS ARE RESERVED BY THE AUTHOR. ~~~~~~~~~~ GOH Speech at Conspiracy: Okay. The human race is doomed, everyone in this audience has a real shot at personal immortality, and our children are going to be gods-- --but we'll come back to that in a bit. I want to start by introducing myself. My name is Daniel Keys Moran and I'm a science fiction writer. I figured I'd start off with me because it's a subject I know real well and always enjoy talking about. This is my fifth or sixth science fiction convention--I've lost track. Two of them were worldcons. It's the first convention I've ever actually been invited to. Since I've never seen anyone else give a GOH speech, and therefore have no idea what GOHs usually talk about, I decided to talk about things that interest me, and among those are computers, style, lying, the fate of the human race, and Michelle Pfeiffer. Bertrand Russell said, "Men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth--more than death. Thought is subversive, and revolutionary, destructive and terrible; thought is merciless to privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habits; thought is anarchic and lawless, indifferent to authority, careless to the well-tried wisdom of the ages. Thought looks into the pit of hell and is not afraid... Thought is great and swift and free, the light of the world, and the chief glory of man." My favorite President, Thomas Jefferson, said, "Shake off all fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God, because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blind faith." I made a decision when I set out to be a writer that I was going to be as honest in my writing as I could force myself to be. Now, telling the truth, this is where it gets tough for writers. Writers, all the good ones, are Natural Born Liars. Actors, good actors, are also good liars; but actors only need to be able to lie for short bursts, while the cameras are on them. A writer who's doing his job has to build up a long lie, an extended lie over an extended period. Actors are good liars; writers are good liars with good memories. Now, to be a good writer--I won't talk about greatness, the word is overused and there would be the implication that I consider myself a great writer, when that's something no writer can ever really know about his own work--in my heart I think I am a great writer, but there is every possibility that I could be wrong about that. Anyway, good writers, ones who move people, who make a lasting impression on their readers, tell the truth about the human condition. Some of the truths about being human are embarrassing. We can be petty beyond belief. Our bodies are imperfect, our minds are imperfect. There are people who will kill other people, or themselves, rather than be embarrassed. Some truths are embarrassing, some are uplifting, and some just have no style. So when you sit down to read a story, what you get, as often as not, is a writer who's trying to look good. We're all guilty of it, I am. Not just writers, all of us--people we love, or would like to, don't return our love because we don't meet their standards; people who would like to love us, or simply to be our friends, we turn away because we're ashamed to associate with them, to be seen with them. We want to look good--even if that means behaving without style. I'm not saying that everybody actually does this or behaves this way--I am saying that impulse to do that, and worse, is there. In all of us. I've never killed anybody, but I've damn sure wanted to, I mean put a bullet in the son of a bitch. Since I was nineteen or thereabouts I've never had sex with a girl under the age of eighteen--but I've sat on the beach in Los Angeles, on a summer day, admiring the high school girls, more than once. I don't act on those desires because they're uncivilized, because the animal desires that are in all of us are so scary and so primal and damned nasty sometimes that we lie about their very existence--to other people, sure, but principally to ourselves, I think principally as a way of keeping ourselves from acting on them. And any lie that you tell over and over and over again, becomes, through transmutation, a kind of truth--for you. Believing a lie is often easier than living with the truth that as a species we're violent, we're selfish, we're lazy, we're either barely civilized or flatly uncivilized and capable of faking it some of the time. That's what I mean by the desire to look good. Most "looking good" is a lie. Not all of it--sometimes you just do look good--but most of it, I do think. That desire to look good is amazingly common--and it's fatal to writing stories about human beings in all their variety. To write well you must be willing to go naked into the world. To tell people by the hundreds of thousands, or by the millions if you're fortunate, that you are flawed. There are only two ways to characterize--to describe somebody from the outside in, and to write about yourself from the inside out. The second approach is almost always better because it's principally where resonance comes from. If you really want to know what somebody thinks about himself, look at how that person treats the people around himself--because there's no one else out there except you. I don't know what goes on inside you folks--I assume that it's the same sort of thing that goes on inside me. There's no way for me to know, but my best guess, as it must be for everyone, is that other people are pretty much like me. In fiction, one of the things this means is that villains never think they're villains. Telling the truth is important because it's dangerous. Because it's rare. Because by God the power structures not just today but through all time will nail your ass to a tree, or gun you down in the streets--for saying the wrong things, things that endanger the ability of the current power structure, whatever it may be, to stay in power. And by power structure, I don't mean Congress and the President; every one of them was bought a dozen times before they reached office. I mean the liberalmediaelites Time Magazine, and Newsweek, and ABC, and I mean Rush Limbaugh and the stations that carry Rush Limbaugh, and General Motors and IBM and Microsoft and the damned oil companies that sent our children to die in the Persian Gulf, that blew apart thousands or perhaps tens of thousands of Iraqi children, for no better reason than that the United States of America doesn't have a sane energy policy because it's cheaper not to--when people are dying before their times, it's almost always because money is involved. What the power structure is afraid of is that we're going to learn to recognize the truth when we hear it. Before Watergate and Viet Nam, the American public, as a whole, believed everything it was told, and since then it doesn't believe anything, and both of those extremes hurt us because they prevent us from recognizing the truth. The very words we use have been debased almost beyond recognition-- "truth" and "lie" are interchangeable words, because what the power structure has done is tell us to be honest, but really what they want is for us to lie, to them, sure, but most particularly to each other, because when you get lied to all the time you lose the ability to recognize the truth when it does show up. But the problem they have is, they can't tell us that they want us to lie, because that would be telling the truth, which is the last thing they want. So instead what they're forced to do is tell us to tell the truth, but do it in such a way that we know they're lying. So this is the social equation we're dealing with--we're supposed to lie and we're supposed to lie about the fact that we lie and then everything will be fine. That's "hypocrisy." It's perhaps the most distinguishing feature of American life. As an excercise, if you're wondering how valuable telling the truth is in this society, tomorrow I want you all to go to work and try telling the truth to your boss. Go to him, say just for today, sir, I'd like you to try, try really hard, to not be more of an asshole than is in your nature. Now...your nature is that you're a pretty big fuckin' jerkoff. But you're worse when you try, and I can tell the difference." Make sure your resume is up to date before you try this experiment. Probably the single most useful thing the American public could stand to be taught is that the mass media, all of them, exist to sell advertising, to convince you that you're driving the wrong car, you smell bad, and your girlfriend is ugly. How does this tie in? Question everything, Thomas Jefferson said; and whenever you run into an answer that translates to "Do it my way because I'll hurt you if you don't," you know you've found an enemy who is not civilized and whom you need not treat as though he were; whenever you run into someone who says, "This is the answer because I/We Say So," you know you're dealing with a fool, and an authoritarian one, too. Late on a weekday night, doing 120 miles per hour in the Grand National, whipping east down the 118 Freeway and out of the San Fernando Valley, to the Pasadena Freeway, and then south into Los Angeles. Some twisted bastard had left his transmission all over the Number Three lane. The transmission fluid, I'm sure; suddenly the Grand National was drifting, sliding in an eerie quiet across the lanes, turning into a spin at well over a hundred miles per hour. I steered through it while the car did a pair of slow, geometrically perfect 360s, got the nose around correctly and made the mistake of tapping the brakes. The nose dug in, followed by a quick and terrible slewing of the rear end back and forth across the freeway. Back into the spin again. Then abruptly it was quiet and I was sitting motionless in the center of the freeway, facing backward, still gripping the wheel, staring blankly at the hills rising up over Pasadena, the lights of downtown L.A. visible in my rear- view mirror. Unharmed. In Los Angeles at 3:30 a.m., even the freeways are quiet. I think better when I drive down empty freeways at night. I'm a fairly busy person, and driving at high speed slows it down. Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death. On the other side of the speed there is a quiet place where the world does not intrude. It's very strange, writing science fiction in a world that moves as fast as ours does. In The Long Run, published back in 1989, I described a scene where the novel's main character stored information in a ten terabyte infochip. In '88, when I wrote this, 386's with hundred megabyte hard drives were all the rage in small businesses. As file servers. Today, in March of 1995, a gigabyte of hard driver storage can be had for around four hundred dollars. Assume prices continue to drop as they've been, around 2008 you'll be able to put a terabyte of storage on your desktop for $2,500. And that's assuming no major breakthroughs . . . no nanotechnology, no quantum effect storage technologies, no three-dimensional optical storage. I don't believe any of those assumptions. That scene I wrote in The Long Run? It was set in the year 2069. Today I am convinced I missed the mark on that prediction by at least fifty years. It's happened to me before; once I wrote a short story which made passing reference to a laser printer--I saw my first LaserWriter at a trade show about a week after that story sold. Alvin Toffler called it future shock. I think it is more accurately present shock. Even SF writers are having trouble staying ahead of the curve. That spinout with the Grand National happened over four years ago as I write this, and the Mississippi has passed under the bridge since that day. My marriage ended, I moved a number of times, wrote a movie about homeless people, finished a book--The Last Dancer--that I'd hammered away at for two and a half years . . . and through all of these events, that spinout has stayed with me. I think of it often. It was a beautiful thing, if you were in the mood to experience it, and I was. Outside of the teacup ride at Disneyland it is a view of the world you do not often get, that gorgeous, adrenaline-slowed spin; for a brief perfect moment it made Los Angeles look beautiful. Watching the world wheel around me I felt a complete lack of fear, a complete loss of identity. This is the point of Zen; to lose yourself in the experience. To be rather than to know. This idea, what actors call "being in the moment," is a paradigm--a model, a method, a way. I don't like the word paradigm, even though I've been caught using it. It means a "conceptual model." As a culture we, and probably most of those reading this publication, are Aristotle's children. This is not a bad thing, but it has its limits, and I think it likely that those limits are going to hurt us. The parts of us that control the voice boxes, the parts of us that type away at the keyboard and read the words laid down on paper: we are the part that looks at itself. Intellectualism is not generally respected in America, and there's a reason for this: most intellectualism is a conceit, no more complex a thing than the intellect admiring itself. As my friend Steve Barnes has pointed out, there is nothing inherently useful in chess, surely the most intellectual of activities, or there would be fewer chess masters playing games in parks at a couple bucks a game to try and make their rent. There is, in short, nothing inherently valuable about our intellect, except to the degree that as a tool, it permits us to build better caves. (What do you want out of your life? To be warm and well-fed. To be strong and healthy. To love and be loved. These are the basic needs of a human organism, the things that make life worthwhile. It's obvious, but perhaps worth saying, that happiness has virtually nothing to do with the state of your intellect. Some of the unhappiest people I know are also among the brightest.) In a society that sometimes despises learning, I am reluctant to point out that we who do value it are often crippled in other ways. I've known more computer nerds than science fiction fans--I am a computer nerd myself, and I use the phrase with the greatest respect--but there are things both groups have very much in common. As a rule, those of us who get excited when the latest beta software shows up, who chatter lovingly about the latest neat hack, who are first in line for the new Star Wars or Star Trek movie, are poorly socialized, out of touch with their emotions, and need desperately to be taught how to stretch, how to breathe, how to eat, and in general, how to use their bodies as something other than a transport mechanism for their brains. I've been guilty of this myself; I am one of you. Intellectuals of this sort have existed, no doubt, in every society civilized enough to support them. Aside from the subject we have chosen, there is nothing unique about the computer nerd. It's the only difference worth mentioning. The subject. Take a step back. Forget your concerns about whether you're going to get lucky tonight, you probably won't, about what you have to do when Monday rolls around, about the contents of your bank account--take a step back and and let's look into the future together. We are reinventing the world. We've set the bitch spinning with little concern for where it ends up. There's no point in talking about the technology, except to note that everything gets bigger and smaller and faster and cheaper and more colorful. Monday's projection is Tuesday's bleeding edge, Wednesday's toaster, and Thursday's Circuit City closeout. All we can talk about meaningfully is the process. We can talk meaningfully about that. About the places we'd like to go, and how we as a culture--we, the science fiction people and computer nerds--should plan on getting there. About the places we are strong and the places we are not. Drexler's 1