productive
sovay asked why I was particularly happy with "Spindleshanks (New Orleans, 1956)" and "The Road of Pins," in response to something I said in yesterdy's entry. By the time I saw her comment, I was well on my way to sleep, but I wrote:I know the answer to that, but I'm not entirely certain that I can articulate it. It's something in their tone and restraint. Like, some part of me wishes everything I wrote were like that, even though it's something that only comes to me occasionally. In both, the menace is more "off-screen" than on. There's more suggestion and less actually seen. Also, there's hardly anything like resolution. In both, the "paranormal" encounters, if that's what they are, more closely resemble actual encounters with inexplicable phenomena. As I said in To Charles Fort, With Love (I think I said it there), it disturbs me that actual inexplicable encounters are generally, well, inexplicable, while fictional inexplicable encounters are usually explained or resolved. It's that whole Ann Radcliffe-Scooby Doo, see, this is what's going on and it's not so scary after all thing, which I think subverts rather than explores the inexplicable. It's late. I hope that made any sense at all.
I'm putting this here as a reminder to myself that this is something I'd like to talk about in more detail, on some day when I have considerably less work waiting for me, as I think it's very much at the heart of my fiction. So. Self, I'm reminding you...
No particulars complaints about yesterday. It went well. I spent the late afternoon and early evening proofing "Orpheus on Mount Pangaeum" and "Pony." The former was a breeze, but there was a rather nasty continuity problem in the latter, relating to its nonlinear narrative, arising from its nonlinear narrative, which had to be dealt with. That wore on my nerves a bit. Seeing that I've made a mistake of any considerable magnitude always wears on me, and I must admit it happens with alarming regularity. Today, I'll do another read-through on "Pony" (just to be sure) and maybe "Bainbridge," along with the layout for Sirenia Digest #2. Then I'll send it off to Gordon for PDFing (which may not have been a verb before this moment, but it is now). Vince sent me the final version of the illustration for "Orpheus on Mount Pangaeum" late last night. Today, he's bound for the Sundance Film Festival where, on January 24 at 1:00 PM., he'll be doing a panel with Nik Fackler and Bill Plympton. Go Vince.
And my hair is now about 25% red (Spooky's estimate).
There was yummy, tongue-blistering Thai and a little sushi for dinner last night, as I'd been craving sushi for days and days.
Later today, or maybe tonight, I'm going to post a poll asking Sirenia Digest readers, and those who've read Frog Toes and Tentacles, which vignette from FT&T would be most likely to attract new subscribers if it were posted online as a free sample. Please vote. I have a plan. I'd like to attract an additional 81 subscribers in the next month or two, to raise monies which will be set aside for the "Help Get Caitlín and Spooky the Hell Out of Atlanta" fund. Of course, if you're already a subscriber, you can help just by mentioning Sirenia Digest in your LJ or blog or to anyone whom you think might be interested in such peculiar fare. So, anyway, please watch for the poll later today. Thanks. Meanwhile, here's the link to the letter Z auction. That's right. I'm auctioning off the letter Z. If you're the winning bidder, no one may legally use "z" in any word or mathematical equation without first acquiring your written permission. Just think of the possibilities...