Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!think!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-miles!chabot
From: chabot@miles.DEC
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: Kim S. Robinson
Message-ID: <1964@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 2-May-85 10:17:30 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.1964
Posted: Thu May  2 10:17:30 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 4-May-85 08:15:40 EDT
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 49

Donn Seeley
> After I thought about the incident, though, I realized that Robinson
> wasn't so obnoxious after all: EVERY author I've ever met in person has
> been thoroughly artificial in just that way.  It must be an occupational
> disease...

Hey!  I think it's about time to speak up for Wild Authors I Have Known, or
something.  Those I've inspected at close range in environs closely resembling
the native habitat behave like human beings with an apparent ease with 
language.  Others I've seen in less natural circumstances, say signing books
or lecturing, have, in my experience, conducted themselves with grace and
usually treated me with no artificiality I could ascertain.  But readings and
lectures and other large gatherings suggested by publishers or alma maters or
whatever have in their nature an element of artificiality.  (Being asked to
participate in these in an *occupational hazard*.)  Members of the audience
will ask you all sorts of questions, some of them useless ("Where do you get
your ideas?") which seem to just *beg* for silly answers ("There's this spring
in Maine and every year on March 21st I jump into it."); it's kind of an
occupational disease of audience members to want to ask these kinds of 
questions (good grief, the person up there wrote a book that got you excited--
you want to ask them something, maybe if only to try to settle the confusion
about that excitement)(or maybe you want to verify if your idea for a book
has some congruency with what a Real author does to get ideas).  Some people
deal with audiences and their questions with serious grace, others don't.
Some audience members like flip answers, some don't.

I believe the issue is not whether *authors* become artificial, but how does
anyone behave in those circumstances.  What do you do when confronted with
a large group of strangers, some of whom (by their looks?  by their questions?)
don't have the appearance of having much in common with you.  (I'd get nervous.)
What do you do when they ask strange questions you don't want to answer, can't
answer, consider ridiculous?  (I'd make up answers.)  (I admit, I'm not an
author. & I know people who are better at communicating interactively than I am.
However, communicating interactively is not something required to be an author.)

Robinson's answer sounded to me that he never intends to write more stories
in the post-holocaust environment of _The_Wild_Shore_.  To be honest, I'm
pleased.  I enjoyed the book and I think it stands well on it's own as a novel.
I don't think it needs a continuing saga.  I don't see any further problems
I'd like solved in it.  (But that's, of course, Robinson's choice.)  I realize
some ideas or realizations will take more words/volumes than others...
I'm strongly reminded of a review column by Joanna Russ in an old issue of F&SF
which I recently rediscovered and re-cherished; it ends with a paragraph
about how art ends and life ends, but escapism just goes on and on.

L S Chabot  ...decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-amber!chabot  chabot%amber.dec@decwrl.arpa

PS  And that's one reason why, although I have fondness for Vlad Taltos, I think
_To_Reign_In_Hell_ is the best Brust published so far.  --lsc