Alastair Reynolds

Question 1 [Not in the video – to see a full introduction of Alastair Reynolds, scroll to the bottom]: You once said that you think of fiction as requiring the intersection of a minimum set of nonobvious ideas. Short stories need at least two, while novels are like stirring stews.

My guess is that for Revelation Space, two of the ideas were: the constraint of non-faster-than-light travel, which hadn’t been really explored in Scifi before, + the existence of the inhibitors being your response to the Fermi Paradox, but can you share with us more about what ideas when into the origin of this book, and when you went back to revising it in 1997, how did you change it to make it ready for publication?

[00:00:03.18] – Alastair Reynolds

…the way that book [Revelation Space] developed was… There wasn’t really much of a plan, and I didn’t really have all my big intellectual ideas about science fiction lined up in my head when I started writing it. So the way I think about writing now is, in a way that’s the end product of having written that novel and a few books after it and a few short stories. So I didn’t really have a clear sense. I didn’t really know what I was doing is the short answer. I knew I wanted to write a science fiction book, and I guess I’d read a lot of science fiction at that point. I had a pretty good understanding of where the field was in terms of the new stuff. And I don’t even know if it’s possible now, but back in the late ’80s, mid to late ’80s, which is when I really started thinking seriously about writing a novel, you could keep up with the field. You could read all the stuff that people were getting excited about. So you could have an overview of what was happening in the genre. I’m not really sure that’s possible now because the field is so diverse, so many more publishing outlets.

[00:01:30.09] – Alastair Reynolds

I can’t imagine that any one person could, say, read all the significant science fiction books that come out in a year, let alone the short fiction. But back then, it felt like you could. There weren’t that many magazines, so you could keep abreast of the short fiction field, and you can see the trends that were developing. I’d been very much excited by, I suppose, the American movement of cyberpunk. So that something that was happening in the early ’80s. So you had the early short stories of William Gibson, and then there’s a bunch of other writers. It was really fresh and exciting science fiction, and it was really about the the world present day, if you like, or the very near future. It wasn’t science fantasy. It wasn’t about space travel. It was about artificial intelligence and genetic engineering and computer networks and things like that. So it felt way more immediate than a lot of the other science fiction that was around at the time. And I really responded to it, and I really felt excited about the possibilities of cyberpunk. But I guess at the same time, I was also deeply in love with big Galactic scale science fiction because I’d grown up reading, apart from Arthur C.

[00:02:51.24] – Alastair Reynolds

Clarke, the other big influence of me growing up was probably Asimov. And I read all these Galactic Empire books and the foundation sequence and all that, and a bunch of other writers who were playing on the same canvas. And I loved that big, expansive scale that you could get from that stuff. And there were some significant, so of space operatic SF novels that came out towards the end of the ’80s that were an important part of the conversation. David Brin was publishing stuff around that as well. But the The big ones for me that really made me think that you could still do something exciting with the form was, first of all, it was Hyperion, which came out right at the end of the ’80s. I think I got hold of a copy in 1990. And then there was Neverness, which is a big science fiction novel by David Zindal, which some of you may have heard of. And that was also round about then. And I remember reading a review of it in Interzone, which was the magazine where I was first published. And it was the review that made me want to go and order the book.

[00:04:03.13] – Alastair Reynolds

I went to my bookshop and I put an order in it, and then they got hold of it. Otherwise, it probably wouldn’t have appeared on the shelves, but I got hold of an issue of it as soon as it was published. And then there was also The first science fiction, first venture into science fiction of Ian Banks with Consider Phlebas. That was 1987. Then I think he followed it up with a sequel, Player of Games, also in the ’80s. Then there was use of in the ’90s. There was a lot of stuff going on, but I felt I could see a niche where no one was operating. And that was like, as I think you alluded, there was space opera and there was cyber punk, and there wasn’t an awful lot of crossover between the two. And there certainly wasn’t… No one seemed to be trying to do space opera with slow and the light framework. So I thought maybe there was something I could do in that area of science fiction that hadn’t been done before. So that was really all I had. I didn’t really have a clear strategy, like a five-year plan.

[00:05:10.03] – Alastair Reynolds

I just thought, Hey, I could… It’s more like I’d really like to read a book, and I had a book in my imagination. And seeing as I wasn’t aware that anyone had written such a book, I thought I’d better have a go at writing it myself. And I think a lot of what drives me as a writer is just seeing having that sense of an itch, that, Oh, I’d really like to read something like that, but I’m not aware that anyone’s doing it, therefore I’ll have a go at writing it myself. And that was pretty much the roots of Revelation Space.

[00:05:43.01] – John Knych

And so before… Sorry to jump in, Brandon, before your question, do you remember if you… Because I know this is almost 30 years ago. Did you start writing the space opera aspect, and then when you revised it in 1997, you made it more cyberpunky, or was it just 1997, bringing everything that you would read together to create something new?

[00:06:06.08] – Alastair Reynolds

Well, the origin of that book is messy even for me, because I’d started writing a novella way back in about 1986, so when I was still a student, so I was living in New Castle, and I started writing a novella, and many of the ideas in that novella actually ended up being transplanted into Revelation space. All the stuff about Neutron star supercomputer, that’s all in that novella, and a dead alien race, and space archeologists, and things like that. The roots of it are a little bit muddled. What it was, there was a competition being run by Writers of the Future, which is like an organization that’s affiliated with Scientology and all that. I didn’t really care. I just thought, Well, they’re offering money. It was like $1,000 if you won this novella competition. So that was a lot of money, potentially a lot of money for a student. So I thought I’ll enter it and I’ll maybe have a chance at it, but I overshot. So I wrote this thing that became way too long to submit, and it was heading in the direction of being a novel, but I never finished it. And then I relocated to Scotland at the end of the ’80s, and I had a I have a go at writing a novel, which again incorporates some of the ideas that found a way into a revelation space.

[00:07:36.23] – Alastair Reynolds

But again, that one I never finished. And I went to a publisher’s party just after I’d sold my first short story. So it was in 1990, maybe even 1989. I went to a party, and I met an editor there, and I was introduced to the editor by the editor of the magazine, and he said, Oh, this is Al, and we bought I have a couple of stories off him. He’s showing promise. And this editor said to me, Well, are you working on a novel? I said, Well, yeah, I’ve got a novel I’ve been working on over the summer. She said, Well, send me some sample chapters. And I said, Oh, it’s not ready yet. She said, Oh, send me them. And so I printed off three chapters of this thing, sent it to her, and then she read it and the synopsis, and then came back to me and said, You’ve got potential, but you’re not there There’s a lot of development needed before you got the chops to sell a novel. I took it on the chin. I thought, Yeah, she’s probably right. I didn’t even feel I was ready to be a writer at that point.

[00:08:44.14] – Alastair Reynolds

I could It was quite a short story, but a novel was a much bigger undertaking. So again, I sat on that early prototype of Revelation Space. I abandoned it, knowing that I needed more time to find myself as a writer. And then I moved abroad. So there was another reset. So in 1991, I went to live in the Netherlands. And moving to another country, there was a lot of stuff I had to take care of in my personal life before I could think about writing, when it was my first proper job, and I had to adjust to living in a foreign country. I had to start taking language lessons. Couldn’t even drive, so I had to start taking driving lessons and cook for myself for the first time and just generally take care of lots of lots of aspects of life. So again, there was a period, probably about a year before I felt sufficiently settled to begin to think about writing again. And that’s when I really started work on what I would say is properly the first draft of a revelation space. I didn’t bother trying to make use of anything I’d written up until that point.

[00:09:55.00] – Alastair Reynolds

I just said, Well, I know the ideas are all in my head, and I know what I’ve tried to write, and I know where it went, where it I didn’t go. So I’m just going to sit down with a blank piece of paper. And it was literally… I didn’t have access to a computer, even though I’d used a computer before, I didn’t have access to one then. So it was back to using a manual typewriter. And I thought, Well, this is good in a way because it’s like a fresh break. It’s like a clean break. I’m not referring back to old word processor files. I’m just starting afresh. Let’s just see where it goes. So I really started writing what became Revelation Space in about 1992. And I put as much effort as I could into it over about 18 months in the evenings. And then I finished a draft of it in early ’94, printed it out, got a few friends to read it. And then I, I don’t know, I knew it wasn’t there yet, and I lost interest in it and fiddled around with a few other projects. And as you said, in 1997, I had a renewed desire to make something of it.

[00:11:07.17] – Alastair Reynolds

So I had a period of unemployment which helped as well. So I had the time to, first of all, get this typed manuscript onto a computer, tighten it up a bit more, and then prepare three sample chapters. So again, I did that thing of sending it to an editor. And then there was a period of two years, really mostly because the publishing company was going through a bit of a turmoil itself. So they were being taken over and they weren’t allowed to acquire any material. But it actually worked to my advantage because it meant I could just get on with other stuff in that two years. So when they finally came back to me at the start of 1999 and said, We’re interested in talking to you about publishing this book, even though it needs work, the next question was, Have you written anything else? I said, Well, yeah, I wrote another novel last summer, which is in the same universe. And that’s when they got really interested because I think they could see, I’m not a one-trick pony, because I think they probably deal with a lot of writers who’ve only… They’ve got one novel in them, and maybe that’s their baby, but they haven’t really got big plans beyond that.

[00:12:16.07] – Alastair Reynolds

Whereas I had ideas for other books, so they were interested. So that helped. Everything just worked to my advantage, that delay, and off it went.

[00:12:28.06] – John Knych

Thank you. Now, thank you for sharing that backstory. I mean, it’s just a masterpiece. And what’s surprising is it’s considered a science fiction masterwork classic. When I saw this, I thought, wait, he’s still alive.

[00:12:49.17] – Alastair Reynolds

I know. Obviously, it’s not going to be a big secret if I say I can see some flaws in that book because I’ve lived with it, I wrote the thing, I’ve seen it from both sides. And to me, I’m very proud of it in the sense that it was my first novel, and it did well and it’s still in print, and it developed a readership for me that meant I could have some success as a writer over time. But at the same time, I know it’s not… I could point to 20 other books from 1999 or 2000, I think, a better than Revelation Space. But I’m not going to shoot myself in the foot by denying the advantages that come with having a Masterworks edition or something like that. So I’m very happy that it has that afterlife. And it’s been in print ever since, which is really something not to be taken for granted at all. But it does blow my mind slightly. To me, it feels like yesterday when I was working on it.

[00:13:58.00] – John Knych

Excellent, Brandon. I’ve monopolized this. You’re good to ask a question.

[00:14:02.23] – Brandon

First of all, I want to say I’m a huge fan. Thanks. It really means a lot when you take time out of your day to speak with us.

[00:14:11.11] – Alastair Reynolds

It’s a pleasure. I really appreciate that. Believe me. Like most writers, I’m pretty much a hermit. So when I get a chance to speak to people, I jump at the opportunity.

[00:14:21.16] – Brandon

So I guess my question is, I’ve heard in other interviews that you’ve said you’re either taking a break or moving on from the Revelation Space Universe. So after all the novels and stories you’ve written, do you feel like you accomplished what you wanted to in the series?

[00:14:43.03] – Alastair Reynolds

Again, I see it from I can only see it from my side of the creative process. And to me, it’s like a big, messy thing, that inconsistent, sprawling thing that didn’t have a plan. And as Jack said, When people started talking about it as a series, I resisted that a little bit because I think when you talk about something like Game of Thrones, where you have a narrative arc that’s proceeding towards some conclusion, people think there’s always going to be a book that rounds everything off. That was never part of the plan. It was just like, I’ve got this future history in my head, bits of it anyway, and I’d like to write a story here and a story there and a story There’s a lot of things that are there, and they might have some connective tissue between them. They might not. But it’s not going to be a linear thing that develops in a way that it’s like a multi-arc TV series, a multi-season TV series. There’s not going to be a clear beginning and a clear I went into it. I always felt I could step away from it at any point.

[00:15:50.22] – Alastair Reynolds

I think it was just before COVID, I can’t… I wrote Machine Vendetta sorry, not Machine Vendetta, Inhibitor Phase, which is returns to the core story of the nostalgia for the infinity and all that. And that had been on the back burner for a long time, that book. And I thought, Well, to me, that provided some closure to some of the narrative threads that I’ve been developing over those books. And then I’ve written the book that rounds off the narrative timeline of the Prefect subseries within that universe. And it’s not It’s not so much that I hate it and don’t want to write it again. It’s just I felt I’ve done enough of it lately. And I never wanted to be… When I first started setting out in science fiction, I had this idea that I’d write loads of different books that would all be different from each other and try loads of different sub-genres and different narrative modes. And I still want to be like that. I don’t want to be defined by one thing. So I’m very grateful for the fact that the series is there, and I’ve been able to dip in and out But I had a sense, particularly over the last few years, that I wanted to concentrate on shorter, more independent novels because they can provide a challenge to me as a writer.

[00:17:12.19] – Alastair Reynolds

I’ve got to do something different and self-contained with them. So for me, it felt like a good point to just step away from the Revelation space stuff for a while. But I’ve tried to say it’s not like I’ll never write another story in that universe, but I’ve got no plans for the next I never think more than a year ahead anyway, so I just know that right now I’m not thinking about anything in that universe.

[00:17:36.13] – Brandon

Well, I’m excited for anything you write, so I’m eagerly awaiting your next- Oh, thank you.

[00:17:42.17] – Alastair Reynolds

Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. At the end of the day, a lot of what I write is space opera. And I think when I’m in that mode, I have the same amount of fun as when I’m writing the Revelation Spacebooks. So I get the similar kicks out of writing other stuff that I do from writing the Revelation Space stuff. But I also want to write things that are maybe set on Earth or in the near future, or maybe shade a little bit into fantasy things I couldn’t do within the framework of the Revelation spacebooks. The other thing is it just gets bloody hard. When you’ve got a future history, you’re looking for little, I think it was narrative airspace where you can slot in another story, but it gets more and more challenging just finding a place where you can do that without tangling over yourself with things you’ve set up or foreshadowed in other stories. So it does get a little bit harder as time goes on to find that possibility to slot in a new story. And I’ve never felt the need to go back and explain every single part of the world building or the backstory.

[00:18:57.22] – Alastair Reynolds

I like to leave a lot of it unresolved and implied rather than concretized.

[00:19:05.24] – Alastair Reynolds

Thank you, Brandon. I actually got an advanced copy of your novel that’s from Subpress, The Dagger.

[00:19:14.06] – Alastair Reynolds

Dagger, yeah. Yeah, okay.

[00:19:15.15] – Brandon

I did read that a couple of weeks ago. I loved it.

[00:19:19.18] – Alastair Reynolds

Oh, cool. Thank you. Well, that was a… I’m really happy you say that. What happened was, so I finished about this time last year, I finished Halsey & Years, which is my next proper novel. And I took a little break after that, and then I started working on what I thought was going to be my next book, which was going to be a standalone a bass opera, and I had a title for it and a plot and everything like that. And I was struggling to find my way into it a little bit. And then various things happened. I went to the World Science Fiction Convention in Glasgow, and that was a bit of a break away from writing, and then we had another trip. And when I came back from all that, I couldn’t reconnect with the thing I was trying to write, and I thought, I really need to reset myself. And I thought, I’ve got to be writing something. I can’t just sit faffing around all day. So I’d had this idea for a medieval thing with a medieval vibe, which was really just going to be a short story. I thought I’ll write that because I’m at least I’m writing something.

[00:20:27.00] – Alastair Reynolds

So that’s where that came from. And once I’d finished that, then I had a bit of enough distance so I could look at the thing I’d been working on or trying to work on. I thought, actually, that’s just not going to happen now. So I need to think of working on something else. So I switched my plans over once I’d written.

[00:20:47.23] – Brandon

Yeah, I really enjoyed it. Do you know when the official release date is for that?

[00:20:53.17] – Alastair Reynolds

I thought it was August, possibly September, but I’ve seen October. I would say it’s a little bit up in the air at the moment. All I know is I’m doing a number of signature sheets for it, and they’re on their way to me. It certainly won’t happen until they’ve signed them, but the wheels, that’s already happening, so they’re on their way from subpress. Normally, when I’ve signed them and sent, they ship them back, then there’s not much else to do other than they go printer and they get composited into the book. But I think they got… I don’t think it’ll be earlier than August.

[00:21:37.16] – Brandon

I’ll definitely be purchasing one of those.

[00:21:40.21] – Alastair Reynolds

Where are you based, Brandon?

[00:21:42.22] – Brandon

I’m actually in Missouri, which is Okay. The United States.

[00:21:47.01] – Alastair Reynolds

Okay. Because Subpressed are based in Michigan. Okay. And I did visit… There was a convention that was in Minneapolis, Not Minneapolis, sorry. I’ve been there as well. It was near Detroit, but I can’t quite remember whether… But anyway, they, Subpress, hosted me at that convention for a few days, and it was really cold as well. I remember that. But they’re really great people, and they’ve been really supportive of me over easily a decade. It’s Bill Schafer and everyone at Subterránea.

[00:22:26.22] – Brandon

Yeah, I’ve got their additions of your Revelation Yeah.

[00:22:31.03] – Alastair Reynolds

Well, it’s really… I’m really happy that they’re doing those, and then they keep pushing forward with them. So for me, it’s a very enjoyable, mutually profitable relationship with Subterránea. So I’m happy that that exists, and I’m happy that we can keep working with each other.

[00:22:55.17] – John Knych

Alastair, do you prefer Al?

[00:22:57.13] – Alastair Reynolds

Yeah, to my friends. Yeah, you’re my friends. So on the topic since Brandon is in Missouri, what do you think- Where are you, Jack?

[00:23:05.19] – JOhn Knych

I’m in Paris.

[00:23:07.15] – Alastair Reynolds

Okay, cool. All right. Okay. So it’s not terribly… I mean, Brandon, Christ, man, you must be getting up really early today.

[00:23:15.24] – BrANDON

8: 00 AM.

[00:23:16.24] – Alastair Reynolds

8: 00 AM. Oh, no. Sorry about that.

[00:23:20.04] – JOHN KNYCH

I think that’s why we have lower 10 is not expected because a lot of Americans in the chat, but this is recorded, so I’ll share it with them later. Yes. But even though I’m in Paris, Al, I’m American. I’ve been here for the last year.

[00:23:36.18] – Alastair Reynolds

Where are you from originally in the States?

[00:23:39.02] – JOHN KNYCH

Syracuse, New York.

[00:23:40.24] – Alastair Reynolds

Okay.

[00:23:42.21] – JOHN KNYCH

Average city in New York. But what do you think of European versus American Sci-Fi? Meaning American Sci-Fi like Andy Weir, Ann Leckie, Ted Chiang. I don’t know if you read them versus Adrian Tchaikovsky. I was recently wondering whether there’s an essay to write, like looking at the two worldviews of European Sci-Fi and American Sci-Fi. Have you thought of that, or have any opinions on?

[00:24:13.11] – Alastair Reynolds

Well, I thought of it, but only in a very shallow context, in that when I was reading science fiction, I just read omniverously, and I wasn’t really that bothered. I I would say a lot of the science fiction I was reading, even if it was written by people from the British Isles, was written in an American idiom. When I was growing up, there was Clark, and his stuff was internationalist and outlook, and often had American protagonists. Then I liked James White, who was a Northern Irish writer. But again, they were writing… They had a view on the American magazine markets as well. I think they were Just to earn their bread and butter, they were often writing broadly in an American idiom. And the writers who emerge in the ’60s with a distinct British voice like J. G. Ballard and Michael Mohawk, and all the other significant writers of the British New Wave. I didn’t really connect with them until way later in my reading. Probably later than I should have, but I wasn’t really reading that distinctly British strain of science fiction until my own tastes and habits as a writer and a reader were already fully formed.

[00:25:39.14] – Alastair Reynolds

My first couple of stories were in a British science fiction magazine, Interzone, as you mentioned, and I had a long association with Interzone, and to some extent, I still feel that that association is in place. But the next thing for me, obviously, I felt in order to prove myself as a writer, I wanted to get Americans interested in what I was writing, because to me, that was the hallmark of success. You’ve made it if you can sell stories to the States. So I put a lot of energy into breaking into the American market in the ’90s, and And my main target was an editor called Garden of the Zouar, who unfortunately passed away a few years ago. But he was the editor of Isaac Asimov’s Science Fiction magazine, which I’d seen on New Stand, so I knew it existed. And he was also the guy who compiled the year’s best science fiction. And when I started taking real interest in contemporary science fiction, again in the mid ’80s, it was his curating of that collection that shaped my tastes as a writer, as a reader. So a lot of the writers that I connected with in the ’80s, of that newer generation of writers were filtered through Garner’s tastes.

[00:26:58.05] – Speaker 1

So I Whatever he liked, I liked, basically. I came to regard him as a reliable barometer of what was good in science fiction. So I really wanted to impress him. It took a while, but eventually, he did buy some of my stories. And then I had a And there’s a race association with the American market after that. I’ve never really, consciously or not, I’ve never thought of myself as a particularly British writer, because I’ve lived abroad for a very long time anyway. I lived in the Netherlands. So my outlook is on that level, it’s European rather than Anglo-centric. But I’ve also always felt quite comfortable in the American idiom as a writer. I mean, a lot of my favorite science fiction writers were American. So I feel, speaking for myself, I’m quite happy to swim in both seas, if you and not be overly concerned about where my roots are as a writer.

[00:28:10.08] – Speaker 2

Alister, it’s a platitude to say that Sci-Fi is prophetic and predicts the future. But in your Revelation Space series, you have beta simulations, AI, neural links, all these things that we’re seeing happen. Do you follow AI progress now, and the science and what’s being published? And I recently read two days ago, there’s a New York Times technology writer who said, We will achieve AGI by 2027. Do you think we’re on the cusp of an AI revolution? Are you fearful of AI? What’s your current opinion on that?

[00:28:54.23] – Alastair Reynolds

Well, it’s an interesting question. Question to, how do I position myself? Because I wrote a bunch of, as you say, there’s a load of ideas in Revelation space that touch on ideas about artificial intelligence, uploaded consciousness, and how we might differentiate between different grades of consciousness. But none of it was based on any real scholarly thinking. Over 20 years since I wrote that, I kept an eye on what was going on in artificial intelligence research through the lens of popular science. Nothing more deep than that. I was very interested in, shall we say, We’ve progressed towards AI in the classical sense, in that people were focused on neural networks for learning and the idea that we were moving towards, how 9000 version of AI, where you have a computer or a network that is actually emulating consciousness on some level. But the discourse around AI now is, to me, it’s been hijacked by the debate around large language models, which are really… I mean, as sophisticated as they are, they’re really just a very, very amped up predictive text generator, aren’t they? I mean, I see it as interesting. It’s technically impressive, but it’s not what I would have called AI at any point over the last 20 or 30 years if you’d pin me down.

[00:30:48.04] – Alastair Reynolds

But perhaps that’s perhaps what, as you say, when we get AGI, if we get it, will it emerge from just further developments in large language models, or is it going to come from some completely different direction? I don’t have enough sense of what’s going on in the real world. I’m only an amateur, and I only read about AI developments on a popular science level. And I’ve had to be really frank with people about this because I think just this year I’ve been invited to give speeches and panels at three different AI conferences. And I said, I don’t know shit about this stuff. I’m just making it up. And to me, AI is In the sense that I’ve been using it in my books, it’s an interesting set of narrative ideas that can generate stories and can create moral conflicts with the characters that generate narrative possibility. But there’s no deeper thinking to it than that. I would feel like a bit of a fraud if I was to put myself in a public space and claim that I had some There was some deeper authority to my thinking than that. I’ve always been resistant to the…

[00:32:21.11] – Alastair Reynolds

I mean, generally speaking, I think a lot of science fiction writers fall into the… They’re too easily lured into becoming guru gurus on a particular topic. And I’m never going to be a guru about anything. What I know is probably no deeper than the average reader who just consumes a bit of popular science. I think I can refract it through fiction, and I can play with those ideas in a way that is fertile and creates interesting storytelling possibilities. But that doesn’t mean I have any basis to speak authoritatively on these topics. And AI is the current one. I’ve had to just say, look, sorry, but I’m vaguely interested in AI, but I don’t have anything really useful to contribute to the conversation at the moment. And there’s so much noise. There’s so much heat around the discussion. I think the last thing you need is yet another uninformed opinion, which was just what my opinion would be at this point.

[00:33:23.23] – John Knych

So you’re not going to pull a Ron Hubbard and create a Scientology cult around your books?

[00:33:30.07] – Alastair Reynolds

No. Just on a pragmatic level, I could point to a few dozen science fiction writers whose careers I looked at from a distance, and they had a lot of success, and then they got sucked into this, the guru thing, where you’re more talking about science fiction ideas than actually writing science fiction. And if you’re not careful, that just takes over and you fall silent as a writer. And I thought, I don’t want that. I still feel like I’ve got a lot of energy in myself as a writer, and I’ve got lots of ideas I want to play with. So I just want to… I’m very interested in these ideas, but all I can do is play with them through the lens of fiction rather than just stand up and prognosticate about AI. It’s not just that. It’s also like space travel or climate change or genetic engineering. I have nothing really useful to say as an individual. Everything that I might have of worth is what I put into my fiction. Where do you stand on it? Do you think we’re heading? Do you think that the AGI is something that will happen in that time frame?

[00:34:39.04] – John Knych

There’s an essay I recommend to both of you called your Your Romantic AI Lover Will Change You. It’s published a week ago, New Yorker by Jaron Lanier. A very interesting man who works for Safari. It felt like he has his finger on the pulse right now. But I think, and actually, I was around, I wanted to say this to you at some point in this conversation that I read a book of your short stories, and there’s one of them. The title it’s escaping me now, but it’s where you have the giant machine on Mars that does work. And then there is a girl that gets lost, or she ends up on the machine. Anyway, there’s just a little detail on that, which is a sign of a great writer, as it gives me ideas to explore on my own. And she was doing a journal with her sister, who I think was back on Earth, in that they would both upload to the journal and be able to stay in touch, because the time lag with Mars would prevent the relationship from deteriorating, but uploading to the journal allow them to stay in touch. And I thought that’s what’s going to happen very soon, where people create these journals, AIs that will be We like friends or will just be helpers.

[00:36:05.00] – Alastair Reynolds

I think that’s the- I love the New Yorker, and I had a subscription to it, but after a while, I just couldn’t keep up with it.

[00:36:11.16] – Alastair Reynolds

But I keep thinking I should resubscribe. But you’re probably aware of this article. I think it was in The Atlantic a few weeks ago where there’s a library of pirated material that Metta had been using to scraping to train its AI. This is not in dispute. What the Atlantic have done is provide you a portal so you can search that library now to see what is in there. It doesn’t unambiguously mean that material was in there at the point it was scraped. They can’t say that for sure. But 20 of my novels are in there, these 20 of my titles, I think maybe more. And I’m really infuriated by this. And I mean, just this morning. So I have a very hands-off approach to social media. I try not to use it any more than I absolutely need to. So I don’t have a Facebook account, don’t use Twitter. But I have been forced into using WhatsApp for, I would say, community organization. So my running group, all the coordination is done on WhatsApp. So if I took myself off WhatsApp, I wouldn’t be able to get involved on the volunteering side of that. I’m in a community theater group, all our coordination is done on WhatsApp.

[00:37:42.24] – Alastair Reynolds

And there’s other groups that I’m involved in that there’ll be some social cost to me from disengaging with WhatsApp. And I’ve accepted it like, Okay, so it’s part of meta, but it’s not Facebook, and it’s just a messaging tool. But this morning when I I was a bit puzzled. I hadn’t had any WhatsApp notifications for 24 hours, so I was fiddling around with it. And it immediately put into the top of my WhatsApp timeline Meta’s AI tool. I was really annoyed by this because I thought it was like, it’s really in my face now. This utility that I use to communicate with my friends is now innerts, strictly linked into this other aspect of Metai that has been meta, that has been scraping my intellectual content to train its AI. So I had a real spasm, and if I could get off it, I would, but the personal cost to me would be too high. And I was looking around other alternatives to WhatsApp that aren’t meta, and of course, Signal came up straight away, and we all know about that now. But the trouble is, it’s no good me being on Signal if everybody else has to be on as well or it’s useless.

[00:39:05.17] – Alastair Reynolds

So I can’t suddenly say to all my people in the running community, Hey, guys, I know you don’t personally have a problem with Facebook and Zuckerberg and Metta, but would you mind coming off that platform and joining me on Signal or whatever else? It’s just not going to happen. So I just have to suck it up for now and just take it. But it really annoys me on a profound level. There It’s like some movement towards some legal action against Metta for the scraping of this content. There’s a number of high-profile writers in the UK who are calling on the government to take action. But I’m just a low-level nobody in this whole thing. There’s nothing I can say or do that would have any influence on it. All I can do is just feel deep moral outrage.

[00:39:54.24] – John Knych

Brandon, I’ll bring it back to you. Sometimes it’s all we can do is just be pissed off and just move Yeah, I agree.

[00:40:01.20] – Brandon

It’s just a language model.

[00:40:08.13] – Alastair Reynolds

I’m not an absolute. Where I see AI will have genuine utility, and there are beginning to be steps in that direction is in looking at, say, large scale medical databases and picking out correlations that maybe no human could ever detect, and that might lead to different therapeutic approaches. And I think there’s already been some little advances in that direction that we can attribute to AI. So I’m not against the LLM model of AI in its entirety. I think there are good social applications, but where I am obviously against it is where it begins to erode the creative process we get between the human creator and the human consumer. I have this perception that if you look at, say, Amazon unlimited, Kindle unlimited, there’s a substantial market out there for fiction that is just at the basic level, the most basic landfill quality fiction. There are people out there who just want to read anything, and they don’t care if it’s… It just has to meet some minimum criteria, and they’ll read it. And to me, that’s really upsetting as a creator, because you try and craft every sentence. You try and work to some aspiration of quality.

[00:41:59.14] – Alastair Reynolds

And there’s There’s a market out there for basically just churn or slop, and AI can make that 20 million times worse. So when the AI flop just takes over everything, whether there’s still enough… Still an economic model that allows actual creators to produce actual content and have it met by a consumer, I don’t know. It probably worries me more than it would have a few years ago. I used to think that the one career that was basically safe from automation was anything in the creative arts. But AI can generate stuff that’s passable, whether it’s art or prose?

[00:42:51.21] – Brandon

There is quite a bit of backlash in the book community on AI, so I’m hopeful that it take over.

[00:43:01.22] – Alastair Reynolds

Yeah. I don’t want to read anything that’s got any AI media. I don’t want to look at AI-generated art. I don’t want to look at AI-generated movies. I don’t want to listen to AI-generated music. And I don’t care if I can’t tell the difference. I still don’t want it. I don’t want it in my life. I want a living, breathing human being in that creative process at some point.

[00:43:24.10] – Speaker 3

Yeah. I think there’s enough people out there that feel the same that hopefully will stop it from taking over.

[00:43:31.13] – Alastair Reynolds

Hopefully. We’re in a bit of a wave at the moment. There’s probably a bit of a blip and an overreaction, and we’ll be the next… We’ll all be worried about something else in a few years time.

[00:43:44.04] – John Knych

Yeah, I agree with that. And I think to a value, part of a value of a work of art is the knowledge that it came from a human, a soul that was able to arrive at these emotions that they’re sharing with you. So many people love artists because they know their story. Van Gogh’s life is infused in his art. And if you didn’t know who is his life story, the art experience with the art would be completely different. Yeah, I totally agree. Which AI has none of that.

[00:44:27.05] – Alastair Reynolds

I just hope there’s a percentage of people who feel the same way, and it’s enough to give me whatever’s left to my career. I can cruise on that percentage.

[00:44:38.08] – John Knych

Speaking of your career, Al, the movies, are there any of Some of your work optioned? Is there a film possibility? Because your work is cinematic in a way that I think it’s cinematic. And when I saw Dune, I’m not a huge fan Man of Dune. I know the Sci-Fi community, really. Dune, for me is boring. What do you mean?

[00:45:06.24] – Alastair Reynolds

The text or the adaptation?

[00:45:10.13] – John Knych

The text. That’s just my own personal opinion. But yours just has… I don’t know. Your Revelation Space, to me, just has more tension. So has there been movie options for- The way I say it, there’s a conversation.

[00:45:29.14] – Alastair Reynolds

There’s always a conversation going on about Revelation Space, the bigger universe of books, and then a lot of my other stuff as well. The particular conversation about Revelation Space has been going on for about probably way more than a decade now with the same partners. But they’re not the people who can make it happen, if you like. They’re the people who have to talk to other people, get them infused. And it’s something that it could happen at any point, but it could also not happen. I have no real traction on that conversation. There’s been a couple of times where What happened a few years ago was there was very, very strong interest in adapting one particular short story from the Revelation Space Universe by a film company. They had all the right credentials, and they also had a strong track record of whenever they had optioned anything, they would make it. There was very little doubt that it would make it, but they were only interested in that one story. And on my side of the creative conversation with my agent and other people. We didn’t want to separate it out from the Revelation Space universe because then you start fragmenting everything, and then you devalue the enterprise as a whole.

[00:46:55.18] – Alastair Reynolds

So you make it harder for anyone else to take an interest in it. So we backed away from that. So there’s been things we’ve not done where we could have, but I think they’ve been smart strategic decisions in the long run. For myself, I’m pessimistic about the chances of it ever happening. I think I’ve just been around the block too many times. I’ve had too many conversations, and I know that no matter how well meaning the people you work with, it doesn’t mean that they can push the or over the hill. And it depends how other science fiction properties are doing at the same time. If science fiction is having a boom, then obviously it makes it more likely that someone might take an interest in Revelation Space. But if these big, expensive productions are struggling to find an audience, then they’re not necessarily going to be looking for another one. And it is expensive. No matter how you look at it, Revelation Space would be quite an expensive production to do. But there is still a conversation. The conversation is still going on. From my point of view, it’s pretty positive because I get the renewal money, the option money is very nice.

[00:48:13.15] – Alastair Reynolds

So just the fact that there are people out there who remain interested is a source of income for me, hopefully in a non-cynical way. But I’m perfectly happy with that status quo.

[00:48:25.21] – John Knych

Yeah, personally, I’d love to see Denis Villneuve make a Relevation Space because his next movie is Rendezvous with Rama.

[00:48:32.07] – Alastair Reynolds

Yes. Well, I don’t know. Occasionally, you get a nibble of interest. You hear that someone likes your stuff, but I don’t know if I’m on that guy’s radar at all.

[00:48:45.12] – John Knych

You’re the type of writer-artist that you let your agent navigate all that in that you’re not pushing your agent to say, Hey, can you find…

[00:48:57.03] – Alastair Reynolds

No, not really. No. Occasionally, I So I have a literary agent, then I have a film agent, and a film agent will… They get a lot of inquiries that are not serious, if you know what I’m talking about. So I’m not always introduced to the conversation until it’s worthwhile introducing me. But yeah, I don’t go… Maybe I should be more pushy. I don’t know. It’s just not in me to put myself out there, which is a bit of a drawback these days because I think more and more as writers, we are expected to basically be our own PR machines. But there you are, it just doesn’t fit with my outlook and my personality as a writer, it’s just what will happen will happen. The other thing is I don’t tend to talk about these things unless there’s something worth mentioning. We had the two Netflix adaptations for Love, Death, robots. And again, that deal took about seven years before they actually made the animations. It was a hell of a long time, but I never mentioned it until there was actually a trailer out there. I thought, Well, now it’s actually going to happen. But There’s been…

[00:50:16.06] – Alastair Reynolds

I mean, I had probably about eight or nine years ago, it was real interest in doing a TV series based on a short story, not Revelation Space, but it looked really likely that it would happen. And I got really excited about it. And then I had that crash where it over about a year, it just fizzled off. And I thought, I’m never getting on that emotional roller coaster again. I’m just going to be detached and disinterested about the whole process. And that’s a much healthier place to be.

[00:50:47.13] – John Knych

Yes. And to swing away from the vanity film, I want to make sure I get this last content question. The role of accident and error in your work. You just mentioned the love, death, and robots. The beyond the Achilles rift, right? Person by accident just ends up another part. And when I read the beginning of Revelation Space, Cory’s timeline, she’s separated from her husband by accident, and it’s just spent on this epic journey. Is that this idea? Have you consciously grappled with it? Or has the idea of an accident leading to these long journeys- Yeah, I don’t think I’ve really thought about that before, but I’m sure you’re right.

[00:51:43.14] – Alastair Reynolds

I’m sure it’s a theme that’s You could find it in other short stories and novels of mine. And I guess it’s a reflection of this idea that the universe just doesn’t care. It’ll do things to us, whether we’re good people or bad people. And you can’t petition it, you can’t with the universe. It’s just going to do this stuff to you, and then you just have to find a way to live with the consequences. I guess I do enjoy that as a narrative driver. And I guess I probably enjoy it in other forms of writing as well. I like that sense of the intubation of just cruel fate and how you deal with it afterwards.

[00:52:26.09] – John KNych

Yeah, because existentially, it’s a twist because you your novels and stories have such scope that these little things the universe do just lead to rabbit holes and long journey that you think, Yeah.

[00:52:47.14] – Alastair Reynolds

The danger is now, what happens is if I become aware of a trope in my writing, I think, Oh, I can’t use that again now. But I think there’s probably a lot mileage in that. I’m trying to think about what I’m writing at the moment. I think even Daga Rinvichi has got an element of that in that the protagonist stop for They make an uneventful stop along a country road because one of them needs a toilet break, and then they meet a soldier. Now, if they hadn’t stopped, they wouldn’t have met the soldier, and then the soldier has a favor for them to do, and then everything spirals from that moment. But it’s a random encounter in the night that is just driven by sheer coincidence. So I think that’s probably- Yeah.

[00:53:38.19] – John Knych

And it connects to what you said about Revelation Space, how that wasn’t really planned, you said. It Was this pulling from what you want to read with what you’ve already read.

[00:53:51.08] – Alastair Reynolds

Yeah. It’s just a sense that, oh, there’s an area of science fiction that no one’s written into, and I’d like to try and do something in that area. That governs a lot of what I do. I mean, a lot of the creative itches that propel me as a writer just come from a sense that you have a vague sense that there’s a shape of story that you’ve not seen before, or a setting, or a mood. It probably has been done before, but you’re just not aware of it. And it’s enough of a motivator. It gets you working through the creative process until you produce something. And then you will inevitably put your own original stamp on whatever you’ve produced for better or worse. You’ve created some piece of art that wouldn’t have existed before.

[00:54:33.14] – JOhn KNych

Yes. So I know I promised an hour, Al. I don’t want to take up too much of your time. You can have more time if you’d like.

[00:54:42.23] – Alastair Reynolds

Okay. Excellent.

[00:54:44.03] – John Knych

Because I know I don’t.

[00:54:45.21] – Alastair Reynolds

We had some trouble at the start as well, so I’m well aware of that. So yeah. Thank you. If you want another half hour, it’s not a problem. Okay.

[00:54:54.02] – John Knych

Super. Brandon, I have two, three more questions, or do you have a question you want to ask?

[00:55:00.12] – Brandon

Sure. You have a lot of creative characters in Revelation Space, in particular the Hyperpigs. How did you come up with the Hyperpigs? Was it inspired by something in particular? Why pigs?

[00:55:18.09] – Alastair Reynolds

Well, again, it just reflects that a lot of my stuff is just not planned. I was writing a short story. We’re going back to about 1997, and I hadn’t sold a novel at this point, but I had sold a few stories to Interzone magazine. There’d been a period where they weren’t buying anything off me. And then I loosened up as a writer, and I stopped agonizing over every word. And that was like a breakthrough. And suddenly, everything I wrote did sell. It was really weird. It’s like the less I fret over it, the more I’m saleable when my material comes. So anyway, I had to spell them where they were buying a load of stuff off me. I booked myself to go on a writing retreat. So there’s this thing called Milford, which is an American institution. It’s like a writer’s workshop where everyone meets as equals for a week or a long weekend, and you bring some material that you’re working on, and you just sit in around Robin and you critique it. There’s this complete democracy of Union, and they started a satellite of Milford in the UK. I only ever went to one Milford, but I felt it was like a rite of passage that I wanted to do as a writer.

[00:56:41.09] – Alastair Reynolds

So I signed up to go to Milford, and of course, you have to take something with you. So I had this idea that I would write a short story, but I really struggled. And eventually, I took a messy, unformed, fragmented manuscript to Milford, and it was an early draft of the story Galactic North, which I did eventually sell to Interzone. I’d read a few, should we say prototypes for that story in other types of science fiction story. And there’s a particular story by Joe Helderman, which I really loved. It’s a short story, and it’s called Tricentennial. And he wrote it in probably about 1976 because it was written for this bicentennial year. It was tricentennial. And what I loved about it is it’s a pretty short story, but it spans about 3,000 years, and it’s just like little vignettes, and you’re time jumping from one thing to another, and the scope and scale of it just gets crazy. And I thought, I really like this. And there were a bunch of other short stories that used the same structure of just a massive span of time compressed into a few thousand words, and I loved it.

[00:58:01.09] – Alastair Reynolds

So I thought, I’d really like to write one of those. So that was my attempted Galactic North. And I had to put some space pirates into this story. Everything I wrote at the time, I was trying to not do what everybody else was doing So I thought, Well, I now have space pirates, but I don’t want them to be regular space pirates. I want them to be weird. And I just said, Okay, I’ll make the main spice pirate a genetically engineered pig. So I just threw this in as a random plot in a lot of detail, that there’d been these experiments on uplifting pigs, and they’d created these genetic and engineered pigs, and one of them had gone rogue, and now he was a space pirate in the year 3000 or something. And that was it. There was no real deeper thought to it than that. But by the time I’d written my first novel, and I was starting to market it, and then I’d written the other one in the following summer, and there was a bunch of other bits of short fiction I was working on, I was starting to think about all of this stuff fitting into a future history.

[00:59:01.17] – Alastair Reynolds

I realized that somehow or other, I’ve got the pigs now. The pigs are a part of that future history, so they’ve got to come up, they’ve got to show up in other stories, or it’s a bit weird. I don’t know if they’re mentioning ejapolation space. I think they’re maybe not or are best in passing.

[00:59:20.24] – Johh Knych

The redemption art.

[00:59:24.13] – Alastair Reynolds

I think maybe Chasm City as well is like a throwaway remark, mention of pigs or something like that. But Sure, the big story that really digs into the backstory is redemption art. But it was all because I just created this pig character as a throwaway in a weirdness in a short story. So again, it was just like back to front. There was no There was no deeper thinking beyond that. And then, of course, the pig character. Everybody, for some reason, people like the pig characters. Oh, yeah, Scorpio. He’s our favorite character. And then I created another one in the prefect sequence, Spava, who’s the pig prefect. And he gets lots of good reactions from readers. They like Spava. Somehow I created this thing that I wasn’t really planning on. Then the pig’s become quite a recognizable motif in the Revelation Space universe. But there was absolutely no deep thinking behind it at all. It was just a random weird detail that I thought would make one story cool for about a minute.

[01:00:32.14] – Brandon

Thank you. It worked out. It worked out great.

[01:00:35.15] – Alastair Reynolds

Thank you.

[01:00:37.05] – John Knych

Before Al, we asked you about AI. You shared that you’re not an expert. You’ve been asked to do panels, but you use it for fiction. In the same sense, can you talk to us a little bit about Mars? Because I read this interview of you in The Guardian, where you made me laugh. You called the Mars trilogy as the fuck off Mars. But what surprised me about you is that a lot of sci-fi writers and scientists, for example, the last talk we had with Kim Stanley Robinson. He’s very like, We should not go. There’s all these issues, but you’re fairly open about it, correct me if I’m wrong, that you think we can and should go if we have the ability. What are your thoughts now on humans?

[01:01:26.09] – Alastair Reynolds

Yeah, well, I know Stan pretty well because he’s a great guy and he’s very a nice figure in the science fiction community, and he’s been very kind to me, and I respect his opinions. And my own thoughts are probably not set in stone. But the way I’ve I walk myself around thinking about human activity on Mars, setting aside whether it’s SpaceX and Elon Musk that should be doing this, that’s a separate thing. That speaks to our present at the moment, but taking a more longer term view of whether we should go to Mars. I actually think it wouldn’t be a bad idea if we had a 200-year moratorium where we don’t send anything to Mars, because the risks of In my opinion, there may be a story to be learned about the early history of life in the Solar System on Mars. There may even be life still present there. At the moment, we We’ve possibly contaminated that story a little bit with the exploration we’ve done over the last 50 years, but maybe not to a huge degree, and maybe not at all. It depends how good our sterilization procedures have been. But we only knew as much as we thought we did at the time.

[01:02:47.04] – Alastair Reynolds

Now we know that some of the sterilization procedures weren’t maybe adequate for, say, Viking and things like that. I think in the grand history of the human race, not setting foot on Mars for, say, 200 years while we do a little bit more soul searching and think a little bit more deeply, wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world. We’re not saying you can never go there. That’s just not rush. There doesn’t have to be this stampede to put a human presence on every body in the Solar System. I’m not so worried about the moon because by its nature, it’s a sterile surface. But Mars, I think there’s a good argument for just not doing anything for a little while. As a species, we can develop a little bit more maturity, a little bit more wisdom, and a little bit more scientific insight into what would actually be the consequences of exploring Mars. I’m probably more… I think when Stan wrote the original trilogy, I think he was actually a bit of an enthusiast for Martian colonization. I think, okay, he maybe Maybe he wanted to frame the Terraforming as an either or argument so he could have both sides of their debate in the book.

[01:04:04.24] – Alastair Reynolds

I think there was no doubt that he liked the idea of putting human witnesses into this landscape. I understand that impulse. And although I I had no personal desire to go to Mars, I always expected it would happen in my lifetime, and I was excited about that possibility. But I do think maybe it’s just a side effect of getting older, but I do think a little bit of caution wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world.

[01:04:30.19] – John Knych

So you don’t feel existential threat for humanity, which is right. Spacex is big thing.

[01:04:37.09] – Alastair Reynolds

Not really, no. My slightly flippant counterargument to that. They say, It’s always this thing about the moment we have all our eggs in one basket and we need to establish a human presence off Earth. But I always think that’s something of a flawed argument because my rebuttal is that every advancement in capability that enables you to put people somewhere else also increases your capability to do harm to them. You never really escape that circle. Sure, we could put people on Mars, but there’d be no guarantee that we couldn’t You could send a nuclear strike to Mars and wipe out the Mars colony, or we could have an epidemic or a nanotechnology meltdown on Mars or something like that, very easily. As soon as you have the capability to put people somewhere else, I think you also have the capability to anihilate them. So I think that eggs in one basket thing is a bit of… It’s a little bit misleading, and I think we have to learn to… We either manage Earth properly and learn how to live on this planet peacefully, or we don’t. And I think proliferating ourselves from the universe is never going to solve that problem.

[01:05:55.06] – Alastair Reynolds

If we can’t live equibly on one planet, then it’s not going to be any better when we live on six planets or 20.

[01:06:03.18] – John knych

Thank you. Brandon, do you have any more questions?

[01:06:07.23] – Brandon

I have a question about your novel Blue-Remembered Earth.

[01:06:12.24] – Alastair Reynolds

Okay.

[01:06:13.19] – Brandon

I really like the African elephant angle.

[01:06:18.02] – Alastair Reynolds

Yeah, cool.

[01:06:19.08] – Brandon

You wonder, are we going to have African elephants in the wild 50 years from now? What What was your process behind that storyline?

[01:06:33.14] – Alastair Reynolds

Well, that book was written out of a real period of personal optimism, I think, and also a sense of the moment that we were in when I wrote it also felt like an optimistic moment. The genesis of the trilogy, broadly speaking, goes back to the first time I ever went to Kennedy Space Center. So way back, I think it was 2007, possibly 2008. But through science fiction, and this is why science fiction is sometimes a wonderful thing, I got to meet someone. We did a panel together, And there was a very nice lady, and she was involved in the shuttle program, and she was involved in crew training. So she’d work with a particular shuttle crew and get them up to speed and familiarize Asian with the ship. And she said to me at the end of the panel, we had a cup of coffee, and she said, Well, if you ever like to see a launch, tell me. I thought, That’s very kind. I’d love to see a launch one day. Well, a few years went by, and then they announced the termination of the shuttle program, which was still a few years in the future, but it was clear that it was going to end at some point.

[01:07:51.08] – Alastair Reynolds

So I wrote back to this friend and said, Well, I’m going to call you on that now because I’d love to see a launch. And there were a few other… I met an astronaut around about the same time who was also involved in the shuttle program, who was a reader. So there were a number of factors playing into my wife and I getting an invitation to go and see a shuttle launch. In fact, we went to Florida, and we didn’t see a shuttle launch because it was scrubbed. In fact, it was scrubbed before we even got on the plane and flew to Florida. We knew it wasn’t going to happen, but we booked our tickets. We thought, Yeah, to hell with it. We’ll go to Florida. So we went to Kennedy Space Center, and we did actually see a launch the year later. That’s another story. But we had a really nice time visiting the Space Center. And this was around the time of the There was a lot of optimism about returning to the Moon by 2019. I think it was the original Orion program, and it was the early… It was like Obama had just come in and There was a renewed sense of optimism about human space flight, and that all fizzled out, unfortunately.

[01:09:05.23] – Alastair Reynolds

But at that point, it felt like a really exciting time where we were going to recapitulate the achievement. The the successes of Apollo. We were going to do it all again, but bigger and better. We were going to be on the Moon by 2019, and then obviously establish some more permanent human presence on the Moon And then inevitable talk about going to Mars, and it all seemed to be happening and beginning again. And I was really excited because I’d had this dangled in front of me my whole life, the idea of a return to the moon. And it never seemed to be happening, but all of a And all of a sudden it was on the cards again. And there were mockups to the spacecraft you could see and things like that. And you go, Yeah, it’s going to happen. We’re going to go out into the solar system. And I was really excited about this. I thought, I want to write a science fiction book that takes it captured the enthusiasm and optimism and positivity I felt about that as a human challenge. I had this crazy thing that it was going to be a logarithmic timeline.

[01:10:16.12] – Alastair Reynolds

So the first book was going to be the next 100 years, and then it was going to be the next 1,000 years, and then it was going to be the next 10,000 years, and we’d go out into the universe and the galaxy and all that. And it was going to be a multi-generational family saga. And as soon as I sat down to write it, I thought, I can’t do it. If you’re going to tell a multi-generational family saga over a 1,000 years, you’re dealing with the great, great, great, great, great grandchildren, whoever was in the first book. And I thought, I just didn’t have the chops as writer to pull that off. So I compressed the whole thing. Okay, let’s make it over 300 years, not 10,000. And then I started thinking about the characters and where they were in society and what we’d achieved in society. And I wanted part of the book to be about going to the moon and Mars and human settlement in the solar system and all the possibilities of that. But I also wanted to counterpoint it by saying that doesn’t mean we’ve abandoned Earth, so there’s still a sense of custodian leadership and stewardship about Earth.

[01:11:16.02] – Alastair Reynolds

I thought, I’ll make one of the characters, he’s not really interested in all that stuff. He’s more focused on the inner space of the animal mind. My wife had worked on… She’d worked at an elephant rehabilitation Center. So she came back from that with stories about elephants, and it interested me. And I thought, well, I’ve watched a few TV programs about elephants with her. I’ve read a few books. So I’ve got the basic rudimentary understanding that I can just about pull this off. So that was where that stuff came from. But it was also… The elephants then became a motif that played through the other books, and they obviously I took them in different directions and maybe directions I hadn’t had in mind when I first started the first book. For me, I enjoyed playing with that theme, and it was a little bit polarizing. Some readers said, The Elephant books, glad you’re not writing those anymore. I’m glad you finished with that stuff. But I was like, Well, come on. The elephants were only a small… They were just a subplot. They weren’t the main part of the book. It’s not like you had to suffer thousands of pages of elephants, but I enjoyed writing them.

[01:12:27.09] – Alastair Reynolds

It just came out of that positive state of mind I was in.

[01:12:32.18] – Brandon

Yeah, I really enjoyed that story. And for anyone watching, I would recommend checking it out.

[01:12:41.01] – Alastair Reynolds

Thank you. The books So nothing ever goes to plan. And I had this idea for a trilogy, and I’d sold it to my editor, and it was going to be this big thing. And then my editor left. So the first book was slightly off And then the second book had a different editor, and then the third book had a different editor. So it would have been maybe a different thing if there had been continuity in the production process and the editorial process across all three books, but they were a struggle for me because every step, there was a big reset where I was learning to work with the new editor, and they had no real emotional involvement in the preceding book because they hadn’t edited it. So it helps when you have a long, stable relationship with an editor because they get to know your ideas, they know your working methods, they know how you think and how you plan. And we didn’t have that across those three books. So that’s why it was certainly a more tortuous process than I thought it would be at the time I started writing them. And I was bloody glad to be done with it as well, actually.

[01:13:50.05] – Alastair Reynolds

And I said, as much as I’ve enjoyed some aspects of writing that trilogy, I’m never going to do another trilogy again. And then I almost immediately started writing another trilogy. But that’s it. No more trilogies.

[01:14:07.24] – John Knych

I hear you. I was muted. A toilet is being installed in my house now. That’s why I’m muted. That’s actually the last question I want to ask you, Al, that circles back to the beginning of the conversation and the introduction in that I found it very interesting that you prefer revising and polishing to actual writing, and that contradicts other authors I’ve had for this channel. For example, like Adrian Tchaikovsky says, he hates revising. He just likes to world build and write. A lot of fantasy sci-fi authors, that tends to be the case. Can you talk with us about this? Because also people who will watch this later, there are a lot of writers and creators who I think will be interested in this. You’re also prolific, you publish a lot. Do you just pump out what you think is just garbage and then spend the majority of the time fine-tuning it? Could you just talk to us about your revision process?

[01:15:11.09] – Alastair Reynolds

Nothing I write is garbage. How can you possibly say that? No, I think it comes down to whether you’re… What do they say? Like a plotter or a panzer, this thing that some writers will spend six months mapping out the architecture of a novel before they write one I’ve learned. I’m a much more restless writer, and I need to be writing stuff, or I feel a deep sense of… I don’t feel any self-worth as an individual unless I’m writing. That’s my job. And for better or worse, if I can write a thousand words or a three thousand words a day, I can point to it and say, Well, at least I’ve done something today. So I like to be in that creative flow where I’m generating prose, but I’m not When I start writing a book, it is really just a stream of garbage, and I get to the end, and I think of it as… And it’s a metaphor I’ve used before, so I apologize to anyone who’s heard this before, but it’s like you’ve got to get across a chasm, and you need to get a bridge across the chasm. You can’t just have a bridge.

[01:16:18.16] – Alastair Reynolds

You’ve got to start with… You throw a flimsy rope, and there’s someone on the other side that catches the rope. And once you’ve got that flimsy rope across, you can then pull a more sturdy rope across, and then you can start You’re building a rope bridge, and then you build another bridge. But you don’t get anywhere until you’ve got that first flimsy rope across the chasm. And that’s how I see a first draft. It’s just get something down and get to the end. And there will be bits of that first draft that are not bad, but where it’s lacking from my point of view is in that, I don’t know what you call it, but the meta level where you You have cross-connections between aspects of the story. You have foreshadowing, the payoff of things that maybe aren’t obvious early on. I can’t plan any of that stuff. All I can do is write and let those intertextual connections arise. It’s almost like a subconscious process, but I need to have a draft complete And then I can go back and begin to do the stuff that I find fun, which is when you set up that long distance connections between parts of the story, the payoff and foreshadowing and all that.

[01:17:46.12] – Alastair Reynolds

And that’s where the real joy lies for me in writing is when you find those connections. Often it’s like your subconscious, you’ll get to a point in the story and it’s like, now I really need I really need to have set something up in chapter three that I can… And you think, ‘Oh, hang on. I did do that thing in chapter three. I don’t know why I did it, but I did it. And now I can use that. ‘Oh, wow. It’s almost like I knew I was going to have to do that later on. And that for me is the joy of writing. That’s where it is. It’s not in the first draft, and it’s not in the editing, the publication. It’s in those creative breakthroughs that you get, as I say, sometimes at 2: 00 in the morning on a cold, wet night, where you just suddenly realize that You’ve given yourself… You’ve set something up in the story, and you didn’t even realize you’d set it up, and now you can make a magnificent payoff. But that’s where I get all the pleasure, and it’s all in that creative process of rewriting and tightening.

[01:18:53.15] – Alastair Reynolds

Everyone’s going to be different, but for me, that’s where I get my worth as a writer comes at that point. I hate everything after that. I hate editing. I hate being edited.

[01:19:08.13] – John Knych

That makes sense because your books have this sense of being honed and crafted, but are also spontaneous and organic. I think you can often tell with a writer when every single thing is planned out beforehand, it just feels too formulaic, almost.

[01:19:27.18] – Alastair Reynolds

I have I enjoyed doing that, and I’ve written a couple of books where they were structured and plotted in quite a detailed way in advance, but it took some of the joy out of it for me. I didn’t enjoy it. On my level, you take That way the anxiety because you know you’ve got a story mapped out. You don’t have to worry about how the hell am I going to resolve this thing. But I also found that, actually, I like the fear. I enjoy it. And I was watching an interview with Colson Whitehead, who’s one of my favorite contemporary writers, and he was saying, he talked about the fear. When you’re writing a novel, there’s that fear at the back of your mind. Am I actually going to pull this off? And I thought it was reassuring to hear someone else talk about it, because it does get you. It’s two in the morning, you wake up in a cold sweat thinking, How the hell am I going to make this function, this story? But I wouldn’t want it any other way. I couldn’t work as an architect who plans a story months and months in advance.

[01:20:38.21] – Alastair Reynolds

And it’s no reflection on the quality. I mean, some of the best writers work that way. Peter Hamilton, who’s a friend of mine, He’s much more of a spend a year world building and planning and plotting before he actually writes a page. But I just want to get going, just dive into the thing.

[01:20:55.11] – John Knych

Any other sci-fi authors you want to shout out living who you think we should have on this channel?

[01:21:03.04] – Alastair Reynolds

Well, from this side of the pond, my oldest colleague in science fiction is Paul McCauley, who’s a wonderful writer and a very varied writer. And like me, he came up through the magazine markets. He was living in America, actually, at the time when he first started publishing science fiction. And he had an American publisher. But we met because I was He was a lecturer in St Andrews University while I was doing my PhD, and we were both published in Interzone. So the editor said, Do you realize you live next in the same little town as this Reynalds guy? So we met, and I learned a lot about the side aspects of publishing from Paul, and he’s a very good writer. What’s his name?

[01:21:51.12] – John Knych

Can you say it again, Paul?

[01:21:52.24] – Speaker 1

Paul McCauley. M-c-a-u-l-e-y. Yeah, very good writer. And His background is… He’s like a plant biologist, but he’s got a wide interest in cosmology and artificial intelligence and things like that play into his writing. And he writes He writes across a lot of different disciplines within science fiction. He does the far future stuff. Are you a fan of Gene Wolfe by any chance?

[01:22:21.24] – John Knych

I’ve read him a little bit.

[01:22:23.18] – Alastair Reynolds

Yeah. I think Paul and I are both big Jean Wolf fans, and there’s that Working in that mode. And I guess then the antecedence to Jean Wolf, like Jack Vance, and then maybe going all the way back to William Hope Hodgston, that strand is something that we both relate to a lot as writers. Stephen Baxter has been a very good friend of mine almost since I first ventured into science fiction. He collaborated with Arthur C. Clarke when Clarke was alive, he collaborated with Terry Thatcher. And then Steve and I did a collaborative novel, The Medusa Chronicles, which is we took a short story by Arthur C. Clarke and then wrote a novel-length sequel to it with the permission of the Clarke estate. So we enjoyed doing that. And Steve lives the other side of the country for me, so we don’t see each other very often, but we communicate a lot. And then obviously, Peter Hamilton is a very good friend of mine. We used to live quite near, so we maybe meet up, do a bit of hill walking once or twice a year, but he’s the other side of the country again now, so we don’t see each other quite as often as we used to, but still a very good writer, good friend.

[01:23:38.09] – John Knych

Excellent. Well, thank you so much, Al. Do you have anything else, Brandon, you want to add?

[01:23:45.04] – Brandon

Thank you. Yeah, this has been great. I guess what’s in the future for you? I know you mentioned a novel earlier. Do you have an estimated date Is it possible for that to come out?

[01:24:01.23] – Alastair Reynolds

Yeah. So the book I wrote last year, that should come out this summer. It’s called Halcyon Years, and it’s a standalone, and it’s a 1940s Raymond Chandler murder mystery set aboard a Generation starship. So it’s in my head, it’s like if you took Greater Los Angeles of the big sleep and rolled it into a tube and sent it into space, then you just told a murder mystery on that ship. That’s what it’s all about. So it’s a bit of a conscious homage to that, but also a science fiction story. It’s quite short and awful as well. It’s just over 100,000 words. So I wrote your version, which is… Jack showed the French cover of it. That was one of my shorter novels at the time. And that, for me, is the mode I want to operate in, is relatively short novels that are stand-alone and self contained. So that’s been off my desk for nearly a year, apart from edits. But what I’m working on now is, over the last 20 years, more than that now, I wrote four short stories with one protagonist called Merlin, and they’re far future space opera, not connected to anything else, but they are linked stories.

[01:25:24.10] – Alastair Reynolds

And he travels the universe looking for something, and along the he gets into mishaps and adventures. And he’s a bit of a braggadocio. He’s full of himself, but he’s got some redeeming qualities as well. So I’ve written these Merlin stories, and for at least a decade, probably more, we’ve been talking about maybe publishing them as one book. So the next thing is the Merlin Chronicles. But it’s not just four short stories It’s like the whole thing remixed into a novel with probably about 30,000 words of additional material. So that’s what I’m working on now, and that’s coming near the end now. And once that’s off my desk, I’ll have a reset and talk with my agent and my editor about what they want from me next and remind myself when the deadline for that is. But basically, I’m always working on something, and I like to be busy. And if I’m not working on a novel, then I’ll try and be working on a short story or something. I’m not very good at many things or anything, really, apart from I can just about write science fiction, so I might as well write as much of it as I can.

[01:26:47.12] – Alastair Reynolds

That’s my philosophical outlook on life. So I just generate as much stuff while you still can write a lot. Don’t taper off. So I’m still enjoying what I’m doing, and I still got, hopefully, a for more things and different modes to work in. I’m hoping not to slow down for a bit.

[01:27:08.08] – John Knych

Thank you.

[01:27:08.24] – Brandon

I’ll be looking out for those and I’ll be first in the pre-order line.

[01:27:14.22] – Speaker 1

Oh, thank you. I really appreciate it.

[01:27:17.11] – John Knych

We really appreciate this. I’ll share it with the group. I’ll send you an email with the video later as well. But this has been a pleasure. Thank you so much.

[01:27:28.16] – Alastair Reynolds

Well, thank you. My pleasure, too. Thank you.

[01:27:30.20] – Brandon

Thank you.

[01:27:31.21] – Alastair Reynolds

Have a good day. Cheers.

[01:27:33.17] – john Knych

Thank you.

Alastair Reynolds Introduction:

Born in Barry, South Wales, Alastair Reynolds started writing Scifi in his teens, received a PHD in astronomy from University of St. Andrews in Scotland, then started working for the European Space Agency as an astrophyicist in 1991.

His first publication was in Interzone in 1990, Ninivak Snowflakes. And while he thought he had cracked into the industry with a small, as he called, rash of short story sales in the early 90s, it wasn’t until 1997 that he returned to a book-in-progress to polish it for submission – Revelation Space. This book then took two years to sell, before it was published in 2000, 25 years ago.

Since then he has published 20 novels, over 70 pieces of shorter fiction, he famously received a 10 book, 1 million pound 10 year publishing deal back in 2008. He’s won Locus, Hugo, and BFSA awards. Revelation Space is part of a universe that Reynolds says isn’t really a series but rather a mosaic. With interweaving settings and characters.

Two of his short stories were adapted for Netflix animated episodes, Zima Blue and Beyond the Aquila Rift. I’m hoping more of his work will be made into film, maybe we can talk about that later.

He enjoys rewriting more than the act of first putting words down. Another topic I’m curious about. He’s a keen runner, having run the Cardiff half-marathon last year for an Alzehimer’s charity, and he is a guitar enthuastist, last year taking weekly lessons. 

But last thing I’ll say before my question is that I discovered Alastair Reynolds through House of Suns, which I thoroughly enjoyed, it’s epic, the ending is gut-punch, but when I read Revelation Space was I just blown away. The scope and language are, I believe just unprecedented, I don’t even like calling it Scifi, but rather, just high and profound literature, that I’m practically certain will stand the test of time.

Kim Stanley Robinson

Transcript Below:

Chapters/Topics:

Introduction – 00:00

Research and Writing Process for the Mars Trilogy – 02:05

Moving Towards a Dystopian Future? – 10:00

Relationship with Melville/Moby Dick – 19:00

Humanity in spite of Earth vs. Humanity for sake of Earth? – 31:00

Process for the novel: Shaman – 44:20

Have Mars’ Scientists Contacted You For Help?/Thoughts on today’s Mars’ Research and Elon Musk – 55:37

[00:00:00.00] – John Knych – Introduction

Kim Stanley Robinson, a towering figure in the Sci-Fi genre. He has published over 20 novels and won basically every Sci-Fi award there is to win in a career that spans over 40 years. Since AI is prophetically prevalent in all three Mars books, I asked ChatGPT and Deep Seek, who are the greatest living Sci-Fi authors? And Stan appears on both lists. He completed his PhD in English from the University of California in 1982, writing a dissertation on Philip K. Dick under the Marxist scholar, Frederick Jameson. He was also taught by Ursula K. Le Guin. Red Mars was his sixth novel, and the series collectively won the Nebula, BSFA, Hugo Twice, and Locus Award. Published over 30 years ago, this trilogy marked Stan as one of the leading pioneers of the hard sci-fi genre, which has been steadily gaining popularity since he blazed the path. The trilogy has resonated globally and with successive generations. As I just said to some of the people here, I live in Paris, and since I started reading the trilogy last summer, I’ve seen three strangers reading the series in public and encountered enthusiasm for the trilogy amongst this sci-fi reading group.

[00:01:11.19] 

I saw in an interview that Stan said that the Mars series was sparked by information obtained by the Viking probe in the late 1970s, along with knowledge of Terraforming, published by Carl Sagan. And Stan took the ideas and, quote, jumped off the diving board. He does all his writing outdoors on his front patio, shaded by a tarp year round. He loves to hike and backpack, and he estimates that he has spent cumulatively two years of his life in the wilderness. And lastly, let’s jump into this roundtable discussion. My first question to you Stan has to do with research, process, and writing. You mentioned in the interview that when you started working on the series, you had every Mars book that was ever written, and it was on two book shelves. I was completely blown away that you wrote this before the Internet. Did you do the majority of your research in the ’80s before writing this series? Were you writing and researching simultaneously? Can you just start with talking about your process for this series?

[00:02:09.14] – Kim Stanley Robinson – Writing and Research Process

Yes, and thank you for this. It’s a pleasure for me to talk about the Mars trilogy, even though it’s now almost 30 years since I finished it. It was long before then when I began thinking about it. It really was the Viking lander and orbiter of ’76 that handed Mars to us on a plate. It’s startling to think how ignorant we were of Mars before the mariner and Viking satellite missions in ’69 and ’76. There was really a dearth of information about the surface and conditions and landscape and everything. But then suddenly it was all there. I said millions of times more information, and I think that’s accurate. I was a young science fiction writer. I had fallen in love with it as an undergraduate at UC San Diego, and I was reading it as an English major in a second track. Ordinary English major, on the one hand, science fiction autodidact, and on the other hand, in writing science fiction short stories, selling them to a great science fiction editor and teacher named Damon Knight. I love Damon and his wife, Kate, he was a superb teacher. He had been in science fiction from the time of Asimov, say the so-called golden age, 1940s, although Damon himself was younger, wrote mostly social science fiction like Philip K. Dick in the 1950s…

[00:03:48.15] – Kim Stanley Robinson

…and then became an editor really prominent in the new wave in America in the 1960s and 1970s. I was by no means I mean, I was one of many of his students whom he bought and published for the first time, and then in a patron system, mentored us through the first 5 or 10 years of our careers. There’s a lot of us like me in that respect. I was already working on science fiction short stories and interested in the solar system. There was also Voyager giving us the Jupiter and Saturn, Uranus and Neptune on its way out of the solar system. It was exciting times for what became my zone of interest, which was the next couple of centuries in the solar system. So I mean, understand that science fiction is big field, big genre, and it could be far future. It can go out millions of years. It can cross galaxies, et cetera, space opera, or it can be the day after tomorrow, like cyberpunk when I was young. But in between that zone was a zone that I liked, and I wasn’t the only one writing in it. There were older writers like Frederick Poehl or contemporaries of mine like Michael Swannwick, for whom the Solar System was an interesting story space and even seemed like we could go there.

[00:05:22.01] – Kim Stanley Robinson

And then Mars, boom, the obvious space for visiting, being closest to us, and also being most like Earth. At the same time we learned everything about Mars, the idea of terraforming came about. This was, I think, a dual action. Because if you were thinking, oh, a science fiction thought, could we turn a planet somewhat like ours, but desolate? Could we give it life? Could we terraform it and make it Earth-like? Well, the reason people began to think of that was because it was clear there was frozen water on Mars. It had 37% our gravity. It was a candidate for terraforming in an example right from the start. There was a group of people called The Case for Mars. They were undergraduate students at University of Colorado, Boulder, studying planetology. Chris McKay, Penny Boston, Carol Stoker, Bob Zubrin. They were a club, and they ran a conference at Boulder, and they published gigantic casebooks out of these conferences that would include 20 articles per book, giant turquoise trade paperbacks. I read those books. I contacted those people, especially Chris McKay, and I began to think the story of Terraforming Mars would make a great novel. I thought of it as a single novel.

[00:06:46.04] – Kim Stanley Robinson

I still do, but of course, trilogies have… Sometimes they’re just a really long novel. Other times, they’re three novels with gaps in between that are significant and differences, et cetera. You see it all. In my case, I was thinking of a single novel to be called Green Mars. So not to go on too long about it in this one, but I did want to give you the backdrop. From ’76 till I started writing in 1989, so 13 years, I was always reading about Mars. I was talking to scientists like Chris McKay, reading the technical literature from their group, and even writing some short stories, exploring Castle Canyon, the novella called Green Mars, which is a climbing story that doesn’t even appear in the novel. I wanted to grab the title. The title struck me as so obvious that I realized by the time I got to it, to writing my novel because I was writing other novels at the time, and I was still trying to figure out how to do it to tell a story 200 years long. I grabbed the title, and there was maybe a couple other… No, maybe not. Those two stories represented my actual writing got my flag on the ground.

[00:08:04.08] – kim Stanley Robinson

Of course, you can’t copyright titles, but you can be the first one to use them, which is significant. That’s what I did with that story, which came out in, say, 84 or 85. In 1989, I had finished my California trilogy. I was set and ready to go. I conceived of the structure as being these chapter long chapters that were from the third-person point of view of a character in the first group on Mars, roving around. This is a style out of Philip K. Dick. You see it also in William Faulkner. It’s not unique to me by any means. Sometimes called free and direct, sometimes called third person limited, depends on which tradition you’re coming out of. But once I had the in mind, I began to write it in ’89. I finished Blue Mars in October of ’95, so it was six years, and a very, very intense and absorbing six years. I’ll leave it at that, and we can go on from that description.

[00:09:20.07] – John Knych

Thank you, Stan. Fascinating. Josh, we can move to you for your question.

[00:09:25.16] – Josh – Moving Towards a Dystopian Future?

Sure. Hi. I I had a very interesting one looking back at the Red Miles in particular, which was formational for me in terms of politics, environment, and just centering my thoughts. But I was thinking the other day, so in Red Mars, particularly, you have the growing power of big corporations, transnationals, metanats, as the main antagonist.

[00:10:00.00] – Josh

In the 30 years since the books have come out, we’ve now got global companies like Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, with over $2 trillion in worth, which is, I think, just short of the UK’s entire GDP. Are we speed running into the dystopian future that red Mars starts with back on Earth?

[00:10:24.15] – Kim Stanley RObinson

Well, I don’t know, but thank you for asking, and I appreciate this angle on it. I can say this. The ’80s were a shocking time for a young leftist literary person like myself. Recall the ’60s, the time of enormous social upheaval, and then the ’70s were an attempt to consolidate the liberatory impulses the anti-Vietnam War protests, the hippie movement. I was a young hippie and trained by Frederick Jameson, a Marxist, to regard political economy as the most important way of seeing history, what was happening at the economic level. In 1980, you can call this now the beginning of neoliberalism with the Reagan-Thatcher counterrevolution. Reagan and Thatcher between them was a seizure of government by the right, by business interests, and a dismantling of the Keynesian social state that had been dominant from the Great Depression up through 1980, somewhat falling apart with the leaving of the gold standard and the economic crisis of the gas crisis of 1973, which is maybe partly the war between the Arab States and Israel. All these things happening, and at the time in a feeling of chaos, that anything could happen. That’s a hard feeling to reproduce now, I think, or to remember well, that anything could happen next.

[00:12:12.05] – Kim Stanley Robinson

Nothing was more surprising than the anything being the return of the right and the destruction of the Keynesian social state by way of neoliberalism. By the time I began to write in 1989, that had been going on for 10 years. It was clear that if you regard history as a struggle between the state and finance, between government and business, between public and private, between private money and the public good, these various ways of describing our current moment in history as a struggle. Sometimes you could call this a class struggle, although that’s a complication that I think is confusing at this point. Class, but you still can use it. It still has power. The people who have capital and the people who don’t, they have different interests in this world as to how the world should be run. The people who have capital have definitely dominated the battle since 1980, and I feel like that fell apart only in 2020 with the pandemic, with a heavy duty precursor being the crash of 2008. But also in that time was the of the Soviet Union and the end of state socialism or communist countries, whatever you want to call it, except for in China.

[00:13:40.03] – Kim Stanley Robinson

I know you understand that all this is oversimplifying for the sake of I’m having an answer. But by the time I wrote Red Mars, it didn’t need any predictive powers on my part, which I don’t have. But it did require a good analysis of the present, which I did have that was given to me by Jameson and by other people I was learning from, like Le Guin, like Gary Snyder, the Buddhist poet, putting together out of my education a sense of what was important and then putting it into Red Mars. I can say this, writing about a whole new society on Red Mars allowed me a miniaturization or a mirror a modeling system where I could rehearse all these forces in play in a offshoot story that might illustrate what was going on back on Earth. We have described the transnationals, and then the multinationals as corporations that are more powerful than many nation states, and the states being, in my book, represented by the United Nations, and that now seems quite wrong. But on the other hand, the United Nations is still a player of some sort. On a place like Mars, which was on the Outer Space Treaty, it would have been regarded as a commons, all these things were put into play.

[00:15:16.04] – Kim Stanley Robinson

I could also bring in the role of science and scientists as being a a proto utopian space, not capitalist, not looking for profit, but looking for knowledge or increased safety and comfort for humans. That’s not really what Mars is about. Yet without the scientific world’s achievements, you couldn’t get to Mars nor survive there. Somehow science was in play. Indeed, John soon in his big speech up on Olympus Mons at the end of Chapter 5, right before his assassination. We can talk later about the structure of Red Mars It’s a temporal structure. But in his speech, I think he says, Now it is a case of democracy versus capitalism. Okay, I wrote that in 1989. This is something that people were saying in 1880, so it isn’t like I was any diagnostician, but I was expressing a particular ideological reading of what was going on in world history that was a leftist claim, a leftist diagnosis, and a defense of science, democracy, and environmentalism as being a bundled group of value systems opposed to raw capitalism. So I’ll leave it at that. But I think that gives me another step along the way as to what I was doing in that book.

[00:16:56.03] – Josh

That’s really interesting. I will have to reflect look back, especially what you said about 1880, to see that pattern. It sounds like I haven’t recognized that pattern going a lot further back than the last 50 years.

[00:17:13.23] – Kim Stanley Robinson

It’s true. Actually, Actually, and what you say is important to remember that there are analysis that talk about capitalism and democracy as opposed to autocratic fascist systems that are also collective or communists. In other words, saying a democracy and capitalism are not a match but are opponents, this is not obvious, nor is it generally agreed upon. It’s one analysis amongst others. And very often you’ll see people like, I don’t know, Martin Wolf at the Financial Times that will talk about a democracy and capitalism being a paired enterprise coming out of the the Protestant revolution in the industrial revolution. It’s not at all uncommon to say democracy and capitalism are a paired system. But then what the Marxist analysis would say is that capital rules and democracy is a false front in front of an oligarchy that really runs things. That debate goes on, and I wouldn’t want to… When I talked about 1880, I mean really the second international, that Marxism in general as something beyond Karl Marx, began to say this right from the start and advocate for proletariat control, the worker state, communism, socialism, et cetera. So again, this is all polemical and ideological diagnosis.

[00:18:47.12] – Kim Stanley Robinson

Not something that is settled at all, but just one statement amongst the rest.

[00:18:56.07] – Josh

Thank you.

[00:18:58.09] – John Knych

That’s the thing. Thank you, Stan. Virginie, would you like to ask your question now?

[00:19:01.13] – Virginie Actis – Relationship with Melville/Moby Dick

Yes, I had the first question. For the French reader who I am, reading a Ministry for the Future really made me think, and especially the way you entangle argumentation, philosophical essay and fiction made me think, and it’s not an original question, I assume, but I’m dying to ask you this question, made me feel of Herman Melville’s prose. I’d like to know, for me, if it was a creative response, a remote dialogue with Melveill. I’d like to know what is your relation to Moby Dick or Herman Melville’s work, and your definition of the art of fiction, merci, art of fiction.

[00:19:59.10] – Kim Stanley Robinson

Yeah, Well, thank you for that, Virginie. I love Melville. I noticed the Moby Dick behind John, that’s the Rockwell Kent version with woodblock prints by the great Rockwell Kent. And of course, let me just say immediately that Moby Dick is a strange and bizarre, but a work of transcendent genius and impossible to match. The skill, the sheer gift of his inventiveness in language, I reread the book on a rolling basis in our house in Maine. My wife’s mom came from the Coast of Maine. We have a little cabin there on a lake, on an island in the ocean. Moby Dick just sits there. When I live there, I read it. When I finish, I start over again. Some of those chapters, particularly The Line, they are beautiful philosophical essays sometimes. They’re crazy instructional manuals, like in how to take the blubber off a dead whale. You know Moby Dick. It’s in everything. What he did there was he showed that the novel is a really capacious and powerful genre that you can toss in big chunks, like in a stew, big chunks of non-fiction or those little dramatized passages where it’s presented as a play where the sailors are speaking as in a play.

[00:21:36.19] – Kim Stanley Robinson

All of these things, the plot of Moby Dick could be written on the back of an envelope. But here it is this vast piece of life with the archetypal ending, the spacy fantasy novel ending of Moby Dick, of nailing a Hawk to the mast as the ship goes down. I mean, this is a surrealism, along with everything else. It is highly symbolical and surreal and bold as hell and a beautiful achievement, even though it’s also a hodgepodge and a mess. I flatly disbelived that Melville had a strong sense of what he was doing. He had to just trust the material, and he’s writing in longhand and not revising hugely like we can on computers. It was inspired and beautiful. Of course, I took inspiration from it in a most general way for my whole life as a novelist is, do whatever you can think of and don’t worry. The form is going to be okay. Even if you don’t know how this book will hit readers, you can never know that. So don’t worry about that part of it. You can just do your best, throw it out there like a roll of the dice or a dropping of a bunch of Euro stocks on the floor, like in fortune telling in the Dao De Jing or the Yi Jing, and you throw it on the…

[00:23:15.10] – Kim Stanley Robinson

And then you leave it to the readers to recreate in their own minds by their own creative effort. And this is another beauty of novels. Someone assigns you Moby Dick in a class in high school, and you’re thinking, This is the stupidest thing I’ve ever read. I hate it. I’m bored. I’m never going to read a novel again. You aren’t ready for it, and you haven’t brought yourself to it. But if you come to it and you realize that the first five chapters of Moby Dick are hilarious, that they are a comedy, a deadpan comedy of accidents before they get on the ship, everything in that port town is played for comedy. Even a a gay a comedy, a comedy of a homo-sociality, you might say, that was entirely transgressive. So that in the 20 years after Moby Dick came out, the main readers of it were British sailors who read through the code and realized this was a book about them and their homosocial and homosexual lives. They would come visit Melville in his old age and say, Oh, will you sign your book? I love your book. At that point, it had out of print and forgotten in America for at least 30 years.

[00:24:33.16] – Kim Stanley RObinson

I suppose Melville probably appreciated these young British men dropping by. But to conclude, it’s been very important to me, as you can tell. I’ve loved it. It’s part of my life. Also what he teaches you is trust the reader, don’t worry, do something crazy, and it’ll either work or it won’t. But he teaches courage for the novel, and he brought it off. He’s a true poet, a true philosopher, and a true novelist. Yet, like Pierre, the book that followed, or the theory books that preceded it, they are not as good. There’s some good Melville that isn’t in Moby Dick, but it sits head and shoulders above all the rest of his production. I say that having read them all hoping for and sometimes just thinking, Okay, he made a roll of dice there, and that came up zero. That is an unreadable mess. Why did Moby Dick work? It was his life’s experiences. He knew this stuff. He put his life into a novel as well as all this philosophy and material. All these were lessons and a permanent support system in my life or a source of joy and also of courage, just like, hey, Melville did it.

[00:26:00.21] – Kim Stanley Robinson

His career crashed. He spent the whole second half of his life as a customs inspector. I actually have a novella in mind that maybe I will write called Hermann Melville, Customs Inspector, that will be about his I think quite dangerous life on the docks of New York as the only honest customs inspector. Surely his life was endangered from both sides. If I write this novella, you’ll learn more about it of my love for Melville. But what an achievement, really. He also taught me, You know what? You’ve got a story that’s going to take 200 years here, and it’s about all kinds of things. Go ahead and be patient. Explain everything. Admit that you’re in a long novel, that it’s going to be a trilogy because of how thick books can be has a limit. And don’t worry about it. It’s going to be long. Trust the material. Don’t stress. Don’t try to compress. Try to expand. So this is also like Proust. Proust is another novelist God to me who, just with his own life, again, the seven volumes, at least in English, it’s seven volumes, the three volumes, In Search of Lost Time, again, gives me courage to think that this neurotic housebound social hangar on could write one of the greatest novels ever, simply by being patient and making characters and trusting the material.

[00:27:45.07] – Kim Stanley Robinson

I bring up Proust, and maybe later we can also talk about Michel, Michel Duval, the French man who is one of the first hundreds, and one of my favorites in many ways. That was a gesture. My foreign language was French when I was an English major. Jamieson was a French professor. I had been tasked to read in particular my favorite Camus, but also Sart and Levie Strauss, and that whole tradition that Jamieson was intensely interested in. He was basically the professor that brought the French theory from start to the present to the American and English reading audiences. So all these things were tied together for me. And I think they show in the Mars trilogy, I couldn’t have written it without Jamieson and Camus and Proust and Melville. Not that I’m claiming any equivalence here because one can never know, but in terms of my own sense of courage and procedure, like what to do These were all really important.

[00:29:04.09] – Virginie Actis

Thank you for this wonderful answer for me. I also read that you were familiar with Jeunet and all this, so Barth Jeunet. Oh, yes.

[00:29:15.24] – Kim Stanley Robinson

Yeah, Gérard Genet has a book that in English is called Narrative Discourse. I think in French, it was Figures, One and Two. What he was was a structuralist of the novel. Maybe the rest of you know this, maybe Virginie already does. But I want to say it. His book is an analysis of the structures of novels that is very good on If you’re an analytical type thinker, on things like chronology and point of view, et cetera. Very technical. His examples for how these things work, every single example is out of Proust’s novel. It’s a a joke. It’s a Proust study, but it’s also, Oh, novels can do this, novels can do that. What do I mean by that? Well, let’s look at page 820 of Proust’s novel, and you’ll see what I mean here. I’ve always loved that book. I have a marked-up copy of it that I lost for a while, and I re-found it, I guess. I hope. But Jeanette was really, in terms of technical criticism, he was, for me, the critical figure and Jameson was always puzzled by this. For him, Jeannette is barely worth a page in his… Say he’s got 500 pages on French theory.

[00:30:40.11] – Kim Stanley Robinson

There’s only one page for Jeannette, but for me, that was the important theorist of all that crowd.

[00:30:49.05] – Virginie Actis

Thank you so much.

[00:30:50.06] – John Knych

Thank you, Virginie. That’s probably the best Melville tribute I’ve ever heard or read in my life. We’ll move on to John. John, for your question.

[00:31:03.06] – John HelkenN – Humanity in spite of Earth vs. Humanity For the Sake of Earth?

First of all, I’m fanboining out really hard right now. I read Red Mars when I was 13, I think it was my first introduction into hard I, a lot of it went over the head at that moment, but I’ve reread the series since, as well as a lot more of your works since then. I noticed a lot of the similarities and the between Ministry of the Future and the Mars trilogy. The Mars trilogy, or at least red Mars being humanity in spite of Earth, whereas the Ministry of the Future has become humanity for the sake of Earth. I’m curious as to the dichotomy, and I see this in a lot of your other works, of going out and exploring the massive system of systems and change that’s needed in creating worlds and societies and functioning ecosystems elsewhere versus coming home and fixing our current system and climate and how do you balance those out in your process and create a plan to tell that human experience through that vehicle?

[00:32:30.13] – Kim Stanley Robinson

Well, thank you for that. It’s been a progression. I explained to you how I got interested in Mars and the Solar System. This is the ’70s and the ’80s. Then when I finished the Mars trilogy, I almost immediately, like the next month, went to Antarctica for the first time and gathered the observations and materials that I turned into the novel Antarctica which when it was published, some people called it White Mars because it was so filled with the Mars ethos of living off the land that you have and of making a new left cooperative political organization and battling the elements. There were similarities for sure because I was still on that trajectory. But what I saw in Antarctica made me think, Mars is going to be like this. It’s not going to be like I portrayed it in my books over the next 200 years. It’s going to be a scientific station where astronauts and scientists go up there. They live for five years. They take on this enormous load of radiation, and they come back to Earth. That seems like a more likely scenario, given everything that I saw in Antarctica, that it’s an amazing place, and yet people in the North barely regard it.

[00:33:57.19] – Kim Stanley Robinson

You don’t have fan clubs for South Pole station in the rest of the world. You don’t have people tracking what people are doing in McMurdo every day as if that’s interesting, even though it is. Mars would probably turn out to be somewhat like that, like the International Space Station, nobody’s deeply tracking what happens there. We only are interested in the place we haven’t got to, not to the places where we are. I was rocked back by that experience and that impression as to what might really happen. Then the little landers landed on… The robot landers landed on Mars around 2000. They came back with the news that the surface sand is stuffed with perchlorates. These are poisonous to humans. They use perchlorates in a solution. If they want to kill your thyroid to slow down on hyperthyroidism, they give you a perchlorate mix where the perchlorates are in the parts per billion, and it does the job on a human being. In the sands of Mars, it’s in the parts per hundred. Mars is poisonous. I did not know that. Nobody knew that when I wrote the book. They didn’t know how poisonous it was.

[00:35:16.15] – Kim Stanley Robinson

Of course, they knew it’s only 7% of our atmosphere or less, 1%, and that it’s CO₂. Essentially, you’d die the moment you were exposed to the surface. We knew that. But we didn’t know that if you If you set up a little space station there, eventually, you’d be exposed to a toxic substance that is right there in the soil that you can’t get rid of. Chris McKay, holding on to the Mars terraforming dream, says, As soon as that sand gets wet, it will transform chemically to something much safer to humans. But how do you wet the whole surface of Mars? It’s a chicken and egg problem. You can’t terraform it until you’ve terraformed it, or you can’t live there until Until you’ve done something quite radical to the entire surface that we require, as the trilogy does point out, stupendous amount of time and physical energy, heat. That rock me back as well. Then everything that was happening on Earth with climate change became equally obvious in those years, end of the ’90s, beginning of the 2000s. That Earth was in trouble is in the Mars trilogy. Notice that the end of green Mars, there’s a volcanic eruption under the West and Arctic ice sheet, and suddenly sea level is 25 feet higher, everyone on Earth, and Earth is devastated and catastrophized.

[00:36:40.09] – Kim Stanley Robinson

It’s all there in the Mars trilogy. And indeed, someone, maybe it’s Anne Clayborn at some point says disgustedly, Oh, my God, they’re terraforming Earth now. They’re trying to get control of the CO₂ problem. So I had a handle on it. I did not have to say, Oh, my God, I was wrong. I just had to keep up with what was happening and adjust my stories to the new information so that it would still be… I mean, you have to understand that from my age bracket, hard science fiction is opposed to soft science fiction or literary science fiction. Hard science fiction is Heinlein and Larry Niven. Soft science fiction is me and Ursula Le Guin. But what I did was I invaded their territory, that it could be science fictional and be leftist that it could be, in other words, hard and based on the physical sciences and no, nothing made up, but still be leftist. This confused him. I believe that in America, the phrase hard science fiction was basically blown up by me because it no longer made any sense ideologically. You couldn’t position it. That’s an older reading of this term, and I realized these terms come back and I have no control over them.

[00:37:56.21] – Kim Stanley Robinson

I hated cyberpunk. I don’t I don’t like punk used as a suffix. I don’t like soler punk. They should call themselves utopians or cooperatives or leftists. But whatever I think about names doesn’t matter because I’m not choosing the names. The names get chosen by the culture and they get stuck on you like labels. They would call me when I was young, Oh, this is literary science fiction. Well, this was a double put down. It was like an oxymoron. What literary means, Oh, God, this guy writes better than everybody else, which was not true, but it was trying to gesture to characters mattered and writing mattered. Well, theater You can’t get more beautiful than the writing of the ’40s if you get away from Heinlein, Clarke, Herbert. Whatever you think of Bradbury, I mean, his fine writing is often Purple prose, and he’s not scientific, But literary science fiction was a an attack term. Feminist science fiction was a an attack term to bracket people like Joanna Russ or Elisabeth Varnerberg from Quebec. These Well, by the name, you put them in a pigeon hole that they can’t escape and you marginalize them. I always have said, it’s not literary science fiction, it’s not soft science fiction.

[00:39:28.07] – Kim Stanley Robinson

It’s definitely not hard science fiction because the hardness was right wing. It was political hardness. I always tried to spike these subcategories. I would say, I am a science fiction writer. That’s already a pigeon hole that’s a little too small. But I’ll accept it in the way that gay people had to take on this notion of being gay or being queer. It’s an insult at first. You take it on as a flag of pride, as a way of spiking opposition to your project. Yeah, I’m a gay person. Yeah, I’m queer. What’s it to you? So I would say to the world, Yeah, I’m a science fiction writer. Science fiction is the best literature of the second half of the 20th century. What are you going to do to me? And so it was a aggressiveness. Yes, of course. And indeed, in America, when I was young, people would say, What do you do? If I said, I’m a writer, and then they would say, What do you write? And then I would say, Oh, I write science fiction. They would look at me like, Oh, but I thought you said you were a writer. As if I had said I was a comic writer or a pornographer.

[00:40:32.09] – Kim Stanley Robinson

So I quickly switched. When people asked me what I did, I’d say, I’m a science fiction writer. So it was to short circuit that bad conversation that would happen I mean, this is to go back into the past. What you asked about, John, was really more productive and future-oriented. I mean, I wrote Aurora to suggests that we can’t get to the stars. It’s technically impossible, and it would be humanly like putting people in prison. I wrote New York 2140 to suggest that we need to take care of the Earth or else it’ll be a sad place. I wrote 2312 to say the solar system is still very cool, very interesting. And in 300 years, if we take care of the Earth, or even if we don’t, the rich people might go off and make little utopias all around the solar system. And I played a game in 2312 that I probably, you noticed if you read it, they never go to Mars, except in the very last chapter. But when they’re passing it by, they say, Oh, I hear that’s an interesting story, that place. But the main Martian in 2312 is a person without gender who is only about two and a half feet tall, who is the detective in the story.

[00:41:54.23] – Kim Stanley Robinson

That person, they say, Oh, I hate that place. I was young there. I hate that place. It’s got a bunch of canals. They ruined it by terraforming it too fast, and they kicked me out. I’m in exile, so I exiled them. They zoom by Mars using it as a gravity swing. It was a way of making a joke to my Mars readers. If you’d read the Mars trilogy, you could see in 2312 that I was dodging that one in order to talk about all the rest of them and make a a joke for people who have stuck with me through all these years. So yes, it has stuck with me. I’ve tried to I’ve tried to stay true to the science. As a science fiction writer, I think one fundamental thing is trust the sciences to give you some great stories and don’t ignore the news stories that they’re telling you. If they’re telling you it’s going to be hard to become immortal, they’re right. If they’re telling you Mars is poisonous, they are right. If you continue to write in the knowledge base that we had 50 years ago, then you become a fantasy writer.

[00:43:00.21] – Kim Stanley Robinson

One thing I’ve always said to people is, I don’t like fantasy because people think science fiction, fantasy, same thing, right? Same part of the bookstore. I just say, I love fantasy. It’s like telling people your dreams. It’s just so free wheeling and bogus. I never get moved by it. I can’t get into it. It was like, wow, these guys are weird. What esthetics are that? What an ideology is that? It’s good for discussion.

[00:43:27.14] – John Knych

Thank you, Stan. Before moving on to Matt’s question, please excuse my label of you as a hard science fiction writer in the introduction. I didn’t know the background that hard was right.

[00:43:40.03] – Kim Stanley Robinson

Yeah, that’s all right. I’m used to it, and I accept everything. I’m also a cli-fi writer of all the things that make me roll my eyes. I don’t care what I’m called. Well, I do, but you see what I mean.

[00:43:51.19] – John Knych

Yes. I think we’re living through a sci-fi renaissance. I love hard sci-fi. In my definition of it, it’s just that you the writer sticks to facts and science, but I didn’t know how the label changed. But I don’t want to take up time. Matt, what’s your question for Stan?

[00:44:12.24] – Matt Bitonti

Hello.

[00:44:13.19] – Matt Bitonti

I am also a huge fan and would like to ask you about one of your early works called Shaman.

[00:44:21.13] – Matt Bitonti – Process for the novel: Shaman

This, I feel, is a beautiful underrated work. I recommend it to everyone. We were talking about categories. It’s technically not science fiction. It’s labeled as historical fiction or prehistorical fiction, if you want to go there. But the matriarchal societies, the lives of these people, for those who haven’t read it, they’re like the French cave painters, I think, from maybe 25 or 30,000 years ago. I just wanted to hear a little bit about your process for that one. That’s the one I always recommend when people ask me about your work. I appreciate that very much.

Kim Stanley Robinson

I love I love Shaman. It’s one of my favorites of my own work. It’s not early. I wrote it in 2011 or so. I guess that’s getting back there now. But it came late on in what I call the Orbit 6. I had finished my Washington DC trilogy, which was a mess and did not turn out nicely like the Mars trilogy did. Using the same format, to describe Washington DC, I lost my bearings and I got I drowned in the swamp of Washington DC, where I’d lived before I wrote that one. I was staggering around and a British editor named Tim Holman said, I’ll publish you next, and I’ll even just buy three books, and we’ll figure out later what they are, past 2312.

[00:45:50.13] – Kim Stanley Robinson

A great gesture of confidence that I totally appreciate. The second book I came to him was, I said, I’ve had this idea for a pre-historical novel, and I must say that pre-history, we don’t know what happened then except for archeology. It’s science that taught us what happened before the written record. Pre-historic fiction is a sub-genre of science fiction in in my definition, and even on the bookstore shelves. Most prehistoric novels are stuck in the science fiction section. And science fiction writers like Robert Silverberg or Michael Bishop, several others in the ’50s, would send time travelers back to the Paleolithic times to see what humans were like because we were getting a better sense of it. I mean, the Alaska cave wasn’t discovered until, I forget when, but I think it was early 20th century. Then the Chauvet Cave, which was the one that boggled my mind, was 1991 or so. So 20th century gave us prehistory as a part of Anthepology. Then the question became, why When did we evolve the way we did? When did we get language? When did we get fire? When did we get tools? When did we get hierarchy? When did we get patriarchy?

[00:47:08.23] – Kim Stanley Robinson

So it wasn’t just tools, but systems. And there it gets very science-fictional. You have to guess. And it’s like a detective story. You got a few shattered pieces of clay on the ground and a few stowing points. Oh, that was an egalitarian system. Well, there’s a lot of detective and guesswork going on in these things that I quite love. It shades into science fiction almost naturally because of the nature of the evidence not having written records and yet having at least 50,000 years of pretty clear signs on the ground of what we were doing. And that keeps getting pushed back. I was fascinated. And Tim Holman said, Go for it. I don’t care that it seems out of genre for you. You do what you want, I’ll support it. And truthfully, when Shaman came out in It must have been 2013 or so. My publisher, Hachet, the whole publishing group, one of the big five, Hachet, was in a war with amazon. Com with Jeff Bezos, just over royalty points, just over money. Who gets the most out of ebooks? The seller and distributor of Kindle or the actual publisher? They were fighting over points.

[00:48:24.12] – Kim Stanley Robinson

And in that war, Amazon for Hachet books, they began to stab them all in the back, right on Amazon. So when Shaman came out on Amazon, it said, We can deliver this book in six weeks, but you might prefer Clown of the Cave Bear instead. So this was quite bad. And Shaman had a a strangled birth, you might say, because at that point, even then, Amazon was two-thirds to three-quarters of all sales in the United States for books. So the poor book staggered around, but it has people like you for whom it’s important, for whom it speaks to how we began, about the beginnings of art, about just the adventure of living out in the world with a small band and with powerful technologies, but not that powerful compared to what we have now. I was a snow camper. I had spent a lot of time snow camping in the Sierra Nevada. That’s the only part that I could bring my own knowledge base to it was snowshoes. So naturally, there’s a big strand of snow shoe invention in Shaman, and I believe they had tremendously good gear in terms of footwear, clothing, and snow shoes.

[00:49:40.10] – Kim Stanley Robinson

But all those things rot, and we don’t have them as material traces. Except for the Iceman. The Iceman was very important to me. The guy was discovered in the ice on the border between Austria and Germany. He was called Utsi for a while. But then when the Austrians gave him back to the Italians, because he was on the Italian side of the border by about 100 yards. An amazingly civilized act, by the way, for Austria just to give him back. Now he’s in a museum in Balzano. That guy was frozen in place with all of his gear. All of his gear, except for his copper ax, was probably much like what he had for thousands of years, 50,000 years or so, of gear development and fine-tuning. His kit is about exactly the same as what I backpack with. Everything he has, we have modern equivalents for. Right down to a cigarette lighter. He had a little fire carrier where he could carry a coal through the course of a whole day on his body and then get a better lit fire that night. All this was mind boggling to me, as was the Chauvet Cave and the images inside the Chauvet Cave.

[00:50:53.23] – Kim Stanley Robinson

The French government has a website for the Chauvet Cave that shows the panel of the four horses being painted in the order they were really painted, which is the archeology that they can do, the analysis. I had such a gift of material there between my own experiences and between my interest in these ancient experiences. It struck me as part of the project, what are we and what will we become? You need to add what were we to get us to where we are now. Since our DNA is exactly the same, except for some small variants like lactose tolerance, our DNA is exactly the same as it was 30,000 years ago. You got to imagine them as just like us. The same brain, the same linguistic capacity. If we were born in the Yardesh in France 30,000 years ago, it would be IHH stuff. There would be both rhinoceroses and gigantic cave bears and lions all in Southern France in an ice age. There’s different iterations of these big creatures. But humans would be a small band of primates, like really smart technological monkeys, apes, of course. But think of them We think of ourselves as monkeys doing quite well in this context, but not by any means dominating it.

[00:52:22.10] – Kim Stanley Robinson

The art being animal-directed makes perfect sense because these animals were dominant. It was about a year in my life As I was writing, I was thinking, Okay, I just don’t want to end. I don’t want to finish writing this book. I just want to live in this book. The third wind, the narrator of the book, was just speaking through me as if I wasn’t even there. That is not a typical experience for a novelist. Usually, you’re very aware you’re there. You’re struggling, you’re trying to get out of the way, but it’s hard and it’s effortful. But with Shaman, it wasn’t anywhere near as effortful. It was Somehow I was possessed. I don’t mean to get too mystical about it. I think it’s a perfectly human thing. We often are possessed by a part of your brain or by a part of your culture that you’re not fully aware of. But also, to finish about Shaman, I realized about halfway through this culture did not have writing. They were talking. My narrator has to be talking. This has to be oral narrative. I looked up, I read a lot about the the the oral poets or shaman figures of the of the Paleolithic period that still lived on in the modern times, like in the Balkans, who would take all night to tell a story, and it was supposedly perfectly memorized.

[00:53:47.09] – Kim Stanley Robinson

But of course, it wasn’t perfectly memorized because there was nothing to check. There was no tape recorder. If someone told it different than it had been told the previous year, who was to know? So it was not memorized It was just word for word. It was a matter of technique and then the basis of a story, and then it got creative. At some point, like with the Iliad, someone wrote it down. A Homer figure wrote it down, but people had been talking it for hundreds of years at that point. In fact, the Trojan War, I think, was about a thousand years before it got written down. So these oral poets, I thought I had to go back. I threw out my first draft. I was about a third of the way through the novel when I had this which, of course, I should have had earlier, but something knocked me on the head, and I realized, I can’t write this story. I have to write down somebody talking this story. I have to take a transcript, like on one of these modern AIs that you talk into it and then you see the written record, I have to be like that AI and then just listen.

[00:54:50.05] – Kim Stanley Robinson

Well, if you look… I mean, maybe people don’t notice this like I notice this. But if you read Shaman, it does not read like the Mars trilogy. Which is a written thing or my more written book. Shaman, it seems to me, is spoken by the third wind, and therefore you can’t have expository lumps like in the Mars trilogy. You can’t have 2312. You can’t have things like in Ministry these gigantic essays. You can’t do a Melville. You need to actually go back to the Paleolithic period and talk a story like you might hear it around the fire. That was very fun. That was interesting and fun in terms of a writing process.

[00:55:37.13] – John knych

Thank you, Stan. Grant, are you there to ask a question? I know he’s in and out. I don’t think so. I have a question from someone who couldn’t be here, Sean Callahan. He wanted to ask you, Stan, have you considered that this trilogy could also be something researchers utilize in the real world when considering the challenges of colonizing Mars? I know you just said that Mars is poisonous, but the reality is, as we all, I think, no, humanity is still trying to go to Mars. Have scientists or researchers ever offered to pick your brain on the topic, and if so, what topics?

[00:56:22.09] – Kim Stanley Robinson

Well, yes, for sure, it’s well read in the space community. And I have a copy of the book, I guess it’s Blue Mars with Velcro on it because it was stuck to the wall of the International Space Station. It was read in a no-g space orbiting the Earth. The astronaut involved gave me that copy, which I’m very happy to have. I also have the Mars flag, which is red, green, and blue in vertical stripes in nylon made by the Mars Society back around 1999. For a while there, where I was obviously a luminary, and even on the board of directors for a while or board of advisors, this was not advisable for the Mars Society, which was somewhat of a mess because of the personal characteristics of the founder and leader who made it into too much of a personal club and not enough of an outreach, but also the whole Mars project, because of this, percolates and because of world history, 9/11 and other things. The day after 9/11, the Mars Society was like 100 times as interesting. So world history changed and things were not the same. And since then, Through Chris McKay, who’s always been my Mars guy, a great teacher and a friend, although we seldom have met in person, but he used to invite me down to NASA Ames, where he worked, which is in Mountainview, near Menlo Park, down in the Bay Area, near Stanford.

[00:58:04.13] – Kim Stanley Robinson

A gigantic old naval base was given to NASA, and they have a dirigible airship hangar there that they’ve stripped down to its framing, and now it’s a work of art sitting on the South Bay, and it’s still on the NASA Ames property. Conferences there, yes. Then also lunch sessions, like for Aurora. I needed to know more about orbital mechanics. And I asked Chris, he said, Come on down for lunch. And when I would get down there, there would be Mars scientists like Carol Stoker, like Larry Lemke, and John Cumbers. And they would gather for a lunchtime seminar, and I would have my laptop out, the precursor to this one, and ask them questions, and then type as fast as I could to get answers to help me as tech support. And so Mars, for all of them, is a thing from the ’90s. And And really, Elon Musk, it’s sad to talk about a person who has become crazy and dangerous and a an ugly fascist of the ADF kind in Germany, and even right now, crashing the American government for fun just as a destructo derby ego game to play with no particular plan.

[00:59:22.19] – Kim Stanley Robinson

That wasn’t true. When I met him was at the Mars Society in 1999, and he was just like a puppy with a new toy, which his McLaren car. It’s a good rocket company, SpaceX, and a good car company, Tesla. But this Mars idea of his, which I used to think of as a harmless hobby, was maybe also a symptom of delusional tendencies. He’s not going to end up on Mars. His Starship thing, if you look at the landing plan for his starship, whatever he calls it, the big fucking rocket, he called it, for going to Mars, you You wouldn’t believe how marginally safe it is and how much it has to trust everything going right, not to kill everybody on it. Because Mars is hard. The atmosphere is too thin to slow you down, but it’s thick enough to burn you up. It presents a landing problem that the Russians solved by this giant bouncing ball, which the Americans picked up on acknowledging the Russian the origin of that landing method. But you can’t land humans by dropping them onto the planet in a rubber ball where they bounce up and down 20 times. You have to have a soft landing.

[01:00:41.15] – Kim Stanley Robinson

They are harder than hell. The whole thing is now a fantasy. But now we’re realizing it’s the fantasy of a fantasist, where it’s just one of many fantasies. I thought it was just a harmless hobby, but now I think it was symptomatic of something deeper and worse, a bad I think. Even for dedicated Mars scientists like Chris McKay, the whole notion is, let’s save Earth first and Mars will still be there. It might be a beautiful place to terraform with robots in the year 4,500 AD, and it’ll still be there. If we actually get our act together on Earth, it might be a fun project. But in the meantime, at best, it’s like Antarctica. You got 10 scientists there in a station, maybe even a first hundred scientists there in stations. They won’t be having kids there. They’ll be coming back home. They’ll be radiated. They’ll have had the time of their lives, but they also may have screwed their body up big time being in 30% gravity for any length of time. Our studies of the astronauts who spent a year in near zero gravity, they’re pretty ill and damaged by that. And then they recover.

[01:02:01.18] – Kim Stanley Robinson

What Mars would do at 37%, we have no idea. Same with the moon at 16%. Meanwhile, we got a planet that we’re destroying in terms of the biosphere. Why? What is this even about? I have to say it over and over again. I like the Mars trilogy as a novel. I’m very fond of the characters. I think it’s a good novel, and novels are important. But as a plan, no, it’s not right. The plan came from 1990, and the conditions have changed.

[01:02:37.14] – John Knych

Thank you, Stan. It’s been an hour, and I know I promised you an hour. I know John John. How Ken is leaving.

[01:02:49.18] – Josh

Thank you so much, Kim. I appreciate this. Thanks, Jack. Thank you all.

[01:02:55.01] – JOhn Knych

Yeah, my name is really John, but I go by Jack. Thank you. Thank you, John. Stan, this has It’s been a pleasure. Really enjoyed this conversation. Don’t know if Matt, Josh, do you have any final questions? I don’t want to take up too much of Stan’s time.

[01:03:12.07] – Virginie Actis

No, for me, I must say that it was more It’s been a pleasure. It was an honor, and we learned so much, and it’s amazing. This interview would be in French, subtitled by me. I will do it for our French readers.

[01:03:30.06] – Kim Stanley Robinson

All good. Thank you for that. I must say, I’m not in a complete rush here, but I do want to end briefly. Just to say that in France, the Ministry for the Future came out, I guess, at the end of 2023. I lose track of time. It’s going so fast, but it’s had a wonderful response in French. I’ve always had a good career in French, a French readership that has been responsive. The translations have been mostly good. Not that my reading of French is good enough to judge style, but it’s good enough to know that it’s all there. I have some good French friends now who I keep in contact with that are mostly through the science fiction community. It’s good to hear. I’m glad if this comes out and some French readers read it, what I just said with you in this conversation, that would be great.

[01:04:26.16] – John Knych

So thank you. Yes. This is recorded. It’s going to be shared in my group. There are French readers within the Sci-Fi group as well. Side thing, I love Michel’s description of Provence when he goes home in Blue Mars. I spent some time in Provence. To me, it was perfect describing the buildings and the plazas and having a cassis, all of that was spot on. Josh, man, any other final thoughts? Thank you.

[01:04:56.04] – Josh

I just thank you so much for sharing and for for being here. As I said, I studied science at university and I left very disenfranchised with the state of events in 2013. This was the state of the world at the time and picked up Red Mars, and it really helped put into words what I was trying to say. So it’s one of those things that I’ve gone back to many times when I’m trying to formulate my thoughts. It’s all there. It’s a real honor to be chatting with you. Thank you.

[01:05:34.17] – Kim Stanley Robinson

Thank you for your time. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Have a good evening, you all, if you’re over there. It’s raining hard here, which is a blessing, but I’m going to go back to work. This has been a lovely break.

[01:05:49.24] – John knych

Awesome. Au revoir. Have a good evening. Thank you. Bye..

[01:05:52.17] – Kim Stanley Robinson

Thank you so much. Good night. Bye.

[01:06:00.21] – Josh

Thank you, John. That was really nice.

[01:06:03.04] – John Knych

Thanks, Josh. Thank you for showing up. No, I really enjoyed that. No, it’s… Yeah. Thank you for coming and asking great questions.

Makana Eyre

Chapters: Introduction – 00:00

How did you discover the archive? – 01:17

How did you sift through this enormous archive? – 03:00

Archive in 6-7 languages – 03:50

Closed-captioning? (no) – 05:30

What did your agent or editor say to cut or expand? – 06:15

Book writing more freedom – 06:40

Grim parts cut – 07:10

How was cinematic detail achieved? – 08:10

If writing is thin, get more info, S. Freedman – 10:49

Feedback from Jewish community on your book? – 12:08

Why was his story not covered? – 13:55

Talent and logic in your book – 15:30

Was he a survivor or a good man? – 17:20

Postwar years he was poor – 19:30

Need cunning to survive the camps – 20:00

Rosebery, a pure character – 23:00

How could the camps not know about the music? – 24:45

Can there be culture/art in times of immense distress? – 28:50

How much of Aleks’ music is in the archive? – 31:20

What was your historical research process? – 34:00

History relevant to characters – 35:40

Difficulty of trauma distorting history – 36:30

Aleks never got traction in Poland – 37:37

Controversial sections (being Jewish in Poland) – 38:10

Poland not a country of constant Pograms – 39:30

Writing about the violence of the camps, strategy? – 41:50

Everything was possible in the camps – 44:00

Approach was to be skeptical and verify – 45:00

Schindler’s List comparison, chip on shoulder – 46:00

Schindler profiting from saving souls – 47:10

Post-publication, did anyone reach out to you? – 48:20

Learn anything new about Aleks post-publication? – 46:15

Bad with his health – 50:15

Power of the music came through – 51:40

Must have light and air in narrative – 52:10

Impressions of sons – 53:35

Relationship with parents can be sensitive – 54:40

Did the sons believe in his mission? – 55:10

How did you organize your plan for this book? – 56:45

Explore 3 major sources – 57:42

Irony of other, competing book falling through – 59:10

Another book project? – 59:38

Hawaii! – 1:00:00

There is an interest in Hawaii – 1:01:30

Famous people from Hawaii – 1:01:50

Has music of archive been performed elsewhere? – 1:03:25

The music is unpolished, rough, gritty – 1:04:50

Books on oral tradition of displaced people? – 1:06:00

Reading anything now that you’d recommend? – 1:08:08

P. Djèlí Clark

Chapters:

How A Dead Djinn in Cairo was published – 00:00

Clark’s Double Life – 01:17

Clark’s Bio/Background – 02:00

1) Relationship between novelette and novel – 04:30

I like world building – 05:51

2) What research influenced your world building? – 08:30

3) Alternative Cairo made only from research or experience? – 14:43

4) Challenges/awards of spec. fiction to comment on social issues? – 16:30

5) What is your perspective on historical memory/purpose of history? – 20:52

Retro-futurism – 24:30

A world where the Armenian genocide never happened – 25:30

6) Microscopic code-switching intentional or studied? – 26:55

7) Through fantasy are you liberated to discuss politics and colonialism? – 30:30

Clark’s way of pushing against Orientalism – 32:40

This is not a utopia – 33:40

8) Inspiration behind writing such strong women? – 35:50

Read books by people who are like your characters – 40:20

9) Balance/marriage between science and religion? – 41:10

Djinns arrival in the world as first contact – 44:44

10) How involved were you in the audio book? – 46:30

Sweeping world, but never bogged down – 50:50

11) Process to create rich world and details – 51:20

12) Upload academic papers? – 56:30

13) Origin and reasons for the pen name? – 57:55

A Dead Djinn in Cairo taught in college – 1:03:00

14) More stories in this universe? – 1:05:20

Liberal Arts education is good – 1:07:30

15) Will you explore more Djinn-human relationship-power-magical-influence? 1:08:20

Goblins! – 1:11:33

16) Do you hate paperwork? – 1:12:00

17) Bound version of short stories in Dead Djinn universe? – 1:14:11

18) Trashy romance novel beef? – 1:15:30

19) Is Ghostface Killah or Raekwon the better emcee out of Wu-Tang? – 1:18:10

20) Who should we read now? – 1:18:55

Questions asked by: 1) John Knych 2), 3) Melissa DellaBartolomea 4) Stephanie Sabino 5) Brian Zielenski 6) Danielle 7) Eliane Boey 8) Ina Chang Torres 9) Tricia 10) Jen Ancker 11) John Knych 12) Brian Zielenski 13) Melissa DellaBartolomea 14) Ina Chang Torres 15) John Knych 16) John Knych 17) Stephanie Sabino 18) John Knych 19) John Knych 20) General

Edward Ashton

Edward Ashton discusses his most recent book, his writing path, humor, human-brain-cell-powered A.I., gene-editing, Shoguns resisting the adoption of gunpowder (poor decision), cancer research, the publishing world, books, and more!

Intro/Origin as a writer – 00:00

A Child of the 70s – 01:12

Ed’s writing hiatus – 01:51

Goodness in Ed’s books – 02:28

Publishing – 02:48

Robert Pattinson! – 04:10

Origin of Mal Goes to War – 05:34

Origin of his sense of humor – 09:12

Toning down of his humor – 11:07

Balancing humor and tragedy – 12:30

Writing is like cooking – 13:00

Constructing Mal / A.I. – 14:15

Do you think of sequels? – 16:57

Worldbuilding is hard – 19:25

Writing sequels is easier – 20:28

Tech progress resistance possible? – 21:57

A.I. structures – 24:00

Create infinite misery for A.I.s – 25:00

Shogun resistance of gunpowder – 25:45

Can’t put genie back in the bottle – 26:30

Mal’s inner-simulations – 27:00

Combat simulation innovation – 28:00

Techno-book faults – 28:25

Loved writing castle siege scene – 29:15

This book has been film optioned – 30:17

Book on film – 31:25

Enjoyed fantasy sequences – 31:51

War vs. band of friends – 32:15

Know what you know with writing – 33:05

Military Scifi – 33:37

Novel close to his heart – 34:54

Think of film while writing? – 35:22

Writing while having a job – 37:44

Founded cancer research company – 39:08

Job responsibilities – 39:50

Nothing is promised – 40:40

Grew up poor – 40:56

Write about cancer? – 41:41

Cancer therapy inspiring There Days in April – 42:30

Cancer treatment – 43:30

Energy to manage writing, job, life, how? – 46:09

My brain is weird – 46:50

Can shift focus easily – 47:30

Dialogue skill, how did you learn? – 48:30

Other writers who do dialogue well – 49:41

A.I. in daily work life – 51:10

Human personality emulators? – 52:08

Will humans gene-edit in our lifetimes? – 53:15

Scientists are playing with embryos now – 53:50

Finding neat ideas – 54:40

Reads everything – 55:30

Who do you recommend for us to read? – 55:48

New project = standalone – 57:15

The future of his career – 58:00

Sue Burke

Chapters:

Origin as a writer – 00:00

Seed idea of the book – 00:45

Nature of plants – 01:24

Plants communicate – 02:50

Rye volunteered! – 03:56

Plants are not passive! – 04:45

Do plants think? Depends – 05:20

How to add drama to plants – 06:34

Why skip generations in the story? – 07:51

Origin of pacing – 11:15

Inspiration for Stevland – 12:30

Plants as social beings – 13:15

Stevland motive – 14:45

Pando as inspiration – 15:15

Stevland is bamboo? – 16:15

Names stuck on things – 16:35

More reasons for Stevland – 17:30

Title origin – 18:20

What is your research process? – 20:18

Scientists are easy to talk to! – 22:26

Growing plants in space? – 23:33

How moss grows in space – 24:46

Andy Weir and The Martian – 25:35

Colonizing examples from history? – 26:40

Can they live in peace? – 27:51

Mistake in the book? – 28:25

Why not use Glassmaker writing in the first encounter? – 30:13

Why did the Glassmakers leave the city? – 31:04

Decisions for plant personalities? – 32:51

Origin of Stevland name – 34:18

Work as a translator informing work – 35:14

Glassmaker origin (ants/Mayans) – 36:15

Translator pitfalls – 37:45

Process of creating Glassmakers – 38:30

Ant knowledge – 39:20

World building process – 41:26

Looking for problems – 43:02

Novel = found enough problems – 44:40

Motivation for distinct generations – 47:11

Journalism work – 48:44

Generation preference? – 49:30

Poor Higgins – 49:45

Conflicts with generations – 51:30

Writing process (plan as much as possible) – 52:35

One sentence for each chapter plan – 53:40

Novel writing is complicated – 54:45

Color of floating cactus, why? – 55:25

Recommendation – 56:46

Meet Me in Another Life – 56:52

Thank you! – 58:00

How a Dead/Alive Cat in a Box is Responsible for Your Cell Phone

2.5 minute read

The technology behind cell phones is built on many theories, one of them quite bizarre. This bizarre theory is called quantum superposition.  If scientists hadn’t been able to come to a consensus concerning how this mysterious theory has practical implications, you wouldn’t be reading this on your cell phone. You’d probably be in a cave, warming your buttocks in front of a fire, and taking cover from the apocalypse. 

In 1935, Erwin Schrödinger wrote a letter to Albert Einstein. In this letter he was critiquing the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics (the prevailing theory at the time) via a dead/alive cat in a box. The Copenhagen interpretation said that quantum mechanics is inherently indeterministic. In other words, tiny objects have certain pairs of complementary properties, which cannot be observed or measured simultaneously (according to the complementarity principle). In more words: in a quantum system, an atom or a photon can exist as MULTIPLE states corresponding to DIFFERENT possible outcomes. How can a thing be multiple things? How can a state correspond to multiple states? What is this quackery? 

This indeterminism drove Schrö-Schrö and Einstein insane for a couple of reasons. Schrö-Schrö expressed his frustration with the theory by creating a thought experiment in his letter where a cat was in a box with a flask of poison and a radioactive source.

Why did you put me in here? I want tuna.

According to the Copenhagen interpretation, after a while this cat in the box will simultaneously be both alive and dead. Again: this didn’t make any sense. How could a cat be both alive and dead (in superposition) until it is observed or interacts with the external world? Basically, Schrö-Schrö’s cat experiment asks how long quantum superpositions last and when (or whether) they collapse. This question, concerning the timing, is currently unsolved in physics. Despite not being solved and the letter being a critique, Schrö-Schrö’s paradoxical thought experiment became part of the foundation of quantum mechanics. It was also the first time the term “entangled” was used, as he described the cat’s wave function as being entangled.

Quantum reality: a weird and contradictory place. The characteristics of this place meant that the physics of Einstein’s theory of relativity, which described how big things in the universe (like planets, gravity, black holes) worked, moved, and functioned, could not be applied to how little things (subatomic particles) worked, moved, and functioned. The inability to reconcile quantum mechanics and relativity would plague Einstein for the rest of his life.

People think I’m smart…but my theory isn’t complete…

How can the universe have two sets of physics’ principles, one for small things and one for big things? There must be a unifying theory that we are missing. Scientists have proposed string theory and multi-dimensions as a reconciliation, but our inability to rigorously test this theory prevents us from accepting it completely. Anyway, Schrödinger had issues with the Copenhagen theory. 

String theory, wtf is this

Unsolved question in physics: how does the quantum description of reality, which includes elements such as the superposition of states, give rise to the coherent reality we perceive? If you’d like to read an entertaining story that plays with this idea, check out Quarantine by Greg Egan, my favorite Science Fiction author.

Schrödinger shedding light on this bizarre phenomenon, reasonably and critically, allowed others to build off of his thinking. My purpose for this essay is to express how most of us are unaware of how theories, and even discussions of theories or ones not fully understood, underpin our lives. 

Enter American physicists John Bardeen, Walter Brattain, and William Shockley.

“Clashing egos until the end”

They were aware of the principles of quantum mechanics when they were working at Bell Labs in the 1940s. Their knowledge of quantum theory influenced their work on semiconductor physics. Their understanding of quantum mechanics played a CRUCIAL role in the development of the transistor (officially invented by them in 1947), as they were able to apply quantum principles (such as  quantum superposition) to manipulate the behavior of electrons in semiconductor materials.

Transistors: the building blocks of your cell phone.

Replica of the first transistor.

Transistors exploit quantum superposition by utilizing the ability of particles, such as electrons, to exist in multiple states simultaneously. In a transistor, this allows for the control of the flow of the electrons, enabling to act as a switch OR an amplifier in electronic devices. By using the principles of quantum superposition, transistors can perform complex operations. 

On average, a smart phone contains 10 billion transistors. 

So many quantum superpositions…

The existence of GPS, computer chips, lasers and electron microscopes all attest that quantum theory works beautifully.

Thank you, dead-alive cat in a box, for providing the theoretical foundation of our modern world. Without you we wouldn’t be able to watch cute cat videos, 24/7, anywhere on the planet, until our retinas burn and our neurons fry.

Subscribe below:


Sources:

cat, black/white photo and in a box photo: https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/schroedingers-cat-experiment-and-the-conundrum-that-rules-modern-physics

String theory photo: https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2020/02/26/why-string-theory-is-both-a-dream-and-a-nightmare/?sh=6ff1e2d63b1d

https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Bardeen_Shockley_Brattain_1948.JPG

Ann Leckie

Ann intro – 00:00

Translation State Pitch – 00:57

Origin as a writer – 01:37

Pivotal Point as a writer – 03:18

Upcoming Short Story Collection – 04:28

Scifi or Fantasy? – 05:22

Scifi world building challenge – 07:00

Language/Identity/History – 09:38

Language in Fantasy – 10:15

Adoption/Attachment – 11:00

Pluralism of Language – 12:16

Lack of English Translations of Taiwan texts – 13:00

Reet as a figurehead – 14:30

Irish Catholic Identity – 15:00

How did you create the politics? – 17:30

What is the Treaty? – 18:30

Writing process/scenes – 18:55

Court Room Scene – 20:00

Sword’s Point Shoutout – 20:20

Mystery of the Presgers – 21:02

The Geck – 23:06

Climax/Reality Spiral question – 23:54

Narrative Voice Choices? (1st/3rd) – 25:25

Unconscious work – 28:10

Planning vs. Spontaneous – 28:30

Walls/obstacles in writing this – 29:20

Ways to push through blocks – 30:10

My Pandemic Book – 31:45

Martha Wells Nod/Influence – 33:00

Murderbot = cousin of Breq/influence – 34:30

Spoiler – ending clarification – 37:00

Product of meshing – 37:55

Previous jobs influence – 40:00

Waiting Tables – 40:53

Land Sureying – 42:26

Trilogy Connection – 43:05

Tea Drinker – 45:13

Beginning of Ancillary Sword – 46:44

A.I. gain rights? – 47:56

Joy writing Presger Translators – 48:17

Reet – 49:29

Sphene as fan service – 51:20

Next step in the Radch universe? – 53:30

Feedback from Readers? – 54:43

Thank you! – 58:29

Recording, what tech is for – 58:59

Avez-vous besoin d’un agent ?

Choisir une représentation professionnelle


Au niveau professionnel, l’athlétisme et la course à pied sont essentiellement des sports individuels. Cependant, les athlètes bénéficient souvent du soutien d’une équipe dans la poursuite de leur carrière professionnelle. Idéalement, “l’équipe vous” s’occupe des aspects logistiques d’une carrière de coureur professionnel pendant que vous vous concentrez sur votre entraînement et vos compétitions.

Avez-vous besoin d’un agent ?

Probablement, oui. La plupart des coureurs professionnels ont intérêt à avoir un agent. Mais la décision d’engager un agent n’est pas automatique. Certains coureurs peuvent se passer d’un agent. Cependant, pour envisager de s’en passer, il faut bien comprendre quels services un agent fournit et dans quelles circonstances ces services peuvent être nécessaires.

Concurrencez avec succès sur la piste ou dans les courses sur route.
Bien que les centres d’entraînement fonctionnent différemment en fonction du financement, de l’emplacement et de l’encadrement, l’objectif est similaire : améliorer le niveau de compétition de la course de fond aux États-Unis, tant au niveau national qu’international. Les athlètes sont préparés à concourir sur la piste, sur les routes et en cross-country.

Les places étant limitées pour les athlètes dans chaque épreuve, les rencontres internationales d’athlétisme sont les plus sélectives de toutes les compétitions. Votre agent se chargera de négocier votre inscription aux rencontres, y compris les frais de participation, et vous aidera généralement à organiser votre voyage. En résumé : lorsqu’il est temps de se concentrer sur les courses au printemps et en été, vous avez besoin d’un agent pour vous faire participer aux bonnes compétitions.

Si vous envisagez une carrière sur les routes en participant au circuit USA Running, un agent est moins important. Il existe de nombreux championnats américains sur des distances allant du 5 km au marathon. L’entrée dans ces courses est moins sélective et peut facilement être accomplie sans représentant d’athlète. Les informations et les contacts pour l’inscription aux courses, ainsi que les normes de qualification et les conditions d’admissibilité applicables, sont disponibles sur le site Web de USA Track & Field.

Il convient de noter que les frais d’apparition pour les compétitions dans les grands marathons peuvent nécessiter d’importantes négociations. Bien sûr, il n’est pas aussi difficile d’entrer dans un champ de marathon que d’obtenir une place dans le 800 au Prefontaine Classic. Mais la négociation et l’optimisation de votre valeur d’apparition peuvent nécessiter l’aide d’un agent.

Les trois C : commodité, contacts et coût
Bien entendu, de nombreux coureurs professionnels participent à des événements sur piste et hors piste. Au-delà du type de carrière que vous envisagez, la décision de faire appel à un représentant d’athlètes repose en grande partie sur trois critères : commodité, contacts et coût.

  1. Commodité. Il est plus facile de laisser un agent s’occuper des détails que de le faire soi-même. Trouver des sponsors ou participer à des compétitions peut être difficile et stressant. Selon votre personnalité, un agent peut s’avérer essentiel, vous permettant de vous concentrer sur votre entraînement sans avoir à vous soucier de l’organisation de votre voyage ou de la négociation d’un contrat de chaussures.
  2. Contacts. Les agents ont des contacts avec les fabricants de chaussures et les directeurs de rencontres que la plupart des athlètes n’ont pas. Votre agent devrait être en mesure de vous mettre en relation avec les personnes et les entreprises nécessaires dans ce sport. De même, un agent peut vous faire paraître plus professionnel aux yeux des directeurs de rencontres et des sponsors potentiels. Les sponsors potentiels vous considèrent comme plus sérieux, ce qui accroît leur confiance dans la sécurité de leur investissement en vous. Votre agent doit travailler dur pour tenter d’obtenir un contrat de chaussures ou un autre contrat de sponsoring. Outre le fait de vous faire participer à des compétitions, c’est la principale responsabilité d’un agent.
  3. Le coût. Le coût d’un agent peut être important, mais un agent peut être un investissement rentable pour de nombreux coureurs professionnels. En général, un agent demande une commission de 15 % sur tout ce qu’il gagne, y compris : (a) contrat d’endossement d’une entreprise de chaussures, (b) frais de participation à une réunion ou à une course ; et (c) prix en argent. En outre, il est courant qu’un agent demande une commission de 20 % sur tous les contrats d’endossement autres que le contrat de chaussures principal. L’accord d’un athlète avec un agent – y compris les pourcentages – peut être négocié, mais la plupart des athlètes ont peu de pouvoir de négociation car le coureur professionnel moyen ne génère pas d’énormes revenus. Et malheureusement, moins vous gagnez d’argent, plus chaque dollar devient précieux. Alors qu’un athlète ayant un contrat de 1 000 000 $ peut ne pas ressentir l’impact de la commission de 15 % d’un agent, un athlète ayant un contrat de 30 000 $ fait un sacrifice beaucoup plus important en cédant 15 % à un agent. Toutefois, il convient de noter que, dans de nombreux cas, les athlètes les mieux payés subventionnent les athlètes aux revenus plus faibles. Vos commissions sont des “frais professionnels” et vous devez consulter un fiscaliste si vous n’êtes pas sûr de savoir comment profiter des déductions pour frais professionnels prévues par l’Internal Revenue Code.