Great Moments in Targeted Advertising

The only Baen books I've been tempted by recently have been reprints of classic authors like Poul Anderson or Keith Laumer.

As for Locus, I was a bit dismayed by the copy editing in the Worldcon issue. They spelled Ottawa wrong a few times and it seems to me that if you're visiting a country the least you could do is spell the national capital correctly. There were a few Montreal-related details that were a bit off, too.

Connie Willis has a two-part novel coming in 2010, the first volume in February. All her stuff is the best SF.

Bujold had nearly finished the new Miles book when I was in Minneapolis for Fourth Street -- that'll be Baen.

As for Locus, I was a bit dismayed by the copy editing in the Worldcon issue.

There are always little glitches in the writing. I think that's why they're in their own Hugo category-- there's still a little bit of fanzine in the whole operation.

Bujold had nearly finished the new Miles book when I was in Minneapolis for Fourth Street -- that'll be Baen.

Bujold is just about the only Baen author I have any interest in, with the recently-picked-up PC Hodgell a possible addition (I say "possible" because all I've seen from Baen are reprints of books I already own). I'm less enthralled with the Vorkosigan books than most, though, so it wouldn't be that difficult for me to hold off buying it.

Undercover Infidels... sounds a bit prescient, no?
I guess for those on the left, the truth does hurt.

The world seems increasingly given over to the sorts of people who must appall you, Professor Orzel, but "I would rather keep company with the predators than with the prey."

Gee, Prof:

Fancy giving a semi review of a book you haven't read, out of all context and all rolled up with brilliant logical fallacy. And you a left liberal academic subscribing to a San Fran liberal arts mag, four words that naturally go together in self parody. Who would have thought?

I am shocked, shocked that left lib lecturers could ever be er, morally vain and ideologically driven. What ARE the politics of physics exactly? I'm sure you've found some...Five stars then, fluffy. You are reader of the day at steynonline com. Congratulations.

Didn't I read something amusing about you in any P.J O'Rourke, see you at zombietime com, the peoplescube com, and read ya profile at drsanity blogspot com, PJTV com, dissectleft blogspot com, lookingattheleft com, constitutionalistnc tripod com michellemalkin com and steynonline com? Believe I did...

Gosh, keep that evil Mark Steyn on the liberal enemies list for being...appealling, witty, empirically correct and vastly successful for good reasons. So liberal's like a diversity of their opinion only? Got it. Excellent. Encore. Colonel Robert Neville blogspot com.

Ps. You may look at these. Nope. Guess not. I mean liberals know most everything already, it's just not true.

Islams an expansionist totalitarian fascist political project. jihadwatchorg nctcgov brusselsjournalcom zombietimecom roadsassycom thereligionofpeacecom theprophetofdoomnet faithfreedomorg memritvorg shoebatcom stophonourkillingscom America Alone M. Steyn. While Europe Slept B.Bawer. Stealth Jihad&The Politically Incorrect Guide 2 Islam R.Spencer. B.Gabriel Why They Hate. Terror In Beslan J.Giduck. atlasshrugs wordpress com The Looming Tower L.Wright. The Al Qaeda Reader R.Ibrahim Eurabia B.Yeor

Zombietime com P.J O'ROURKE Culture of Corruption M.Malkin steynonline com michellemalkin com thepeoplescube com bestobamafacts com lookingattheleft com PJTV com drsanity blogspot com dissectleft blogspot com. margaretsanger blogspot com biggovernment com Glenn Beck, Liberal Fascism J.Goldberg.The Death Of the GrownUp D.West. America Alone M.Steyn greenhellblog com roadsassy com The Capitalist Manifesto A.Bernstein Liberty&Tyranny M.Levin eco imperialism com biggoverment com

Well, that's you told.

Aww, you mentioned Stain and found a spammer.

Isn't it cute? Such a cute little spammer! Yes you are!

Well I've bought a few Baen books, mainly those that Harry Turtledove has edited/written.

Now for how horrid, good, or mediocre the advertised book, well why not wait till it comes out. Yeah its probably going to offend some people, oh well, good writing usually does offend somebody. Bad writing does too, but just because it may offend doesn't make it bad, neither does an endorsement from any particular person.

Although I do wonder if you would stop reading any other author if you discovered Steyn liked them too.

By the way, worst book I've ever read: Genesis - Ken Shufeldt.

Seriously a painful read. Still have to find the will to finish it, if only to see how the torture concludes. If you haven't yet that could make for an interesting blog entry, "Worst book ever"

I can't speak for Chad here, but reading that blurb is enough to tell me that I have no interest in reading Kratman's book. Leave to one side the scenario, which has all sorts of political hot buttons, and focus on their up-front admission that this book is about a hero who rescues the helpless heroine from a horrible fate. I've only seen that plot line a few dozen times already--it's a staple of bad fiction. A few good writers have used it too (e.g., Heinlein in "If This Goes On..." a.k.a. Revolt in 2100, which also features a fundamentalist religious government that took over a Western country), but as one element in a much richer story line. If Kratman had written a richer story line, they would have blurbed that instead of the damsel-in-distress routine. Throw in the political overtones (if you missed them on the first read, the glowing review from Steyn is a major clue), and the probability that this is bad fiction goes from about 99% to about 99.9999%.

I can't speak for Chad here, but reading that blurb is enough to tell me that I have no interest in reading Kratman's book. Leave to one side the scenario, which has all sorts of political hot buttons, and focus on their up-front admission that this book is about a hero who rescues the helpless heroine from a horrible fate.

Don't forget the "West Point grad" combined with the prominent "US Army veteran," which is a strong hint that you're dealing with whatever the male equivalent of a "Mary Sue" is. And the "nice Christian girl sold into sex slavery by Muslims" element, which just screams "tired racial stereotyping."

The equivalent, Chad, is "Marty Stu." That said, I'm not a West Pointer.

Could you elaborate on the idea that Islam is a race, such that saying anything about it could, in any conceivable universe, be racial stereotyping, tired or otherwise? Would it equally be tired racial stereotyping if the Islamic slave dealer is blond, blue eyed, and answers to "Hans?" I mean, I realize you're a physicist, rather than a philosopher or geneticist, but doesn't it strike you as necessary for racism to have something, somewhere to do with genes and...errr...races?

As for stereotyping, generally, I invite you to look up Shaykh Saleh Al-Fawzan, a member of the Senior Council of Clerics, Saudi Arabiaâs highest religious body, a member of the Council of Religious Edicts and Research, the Imam of Prince Mitaeb Mosque in Riyadh, and a professor at Imam Mohamed Bin Saud Islamic University, the main Wahhabi center of learning in the country, who has written, "Slavery is a part of Islam. Slavery is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam..." and who attacked Muslim scholars who said otherwise maintaining, âThey are ignorant, not scholars ... They are merely writers. Whoever says such things is an infidel.â

Is there some special reason to prefer your interpetation of Islam over the Shaykh's? You majored in physics and minored in Koranic interpretation and juridprudence, perhaps?

Just curious. Y'all have a nice day.

best,

Tom

The only positive comment I have to make is with regard to Kratman - responsible for by far the worst book I ever paid money for, in a moment of apparent psychosis - is that Baen did in fact refund my money, when requested. I was sufficiently favourably impressed by that to not boycott them (as noted in the Amazon review, here: http://www.amazon.com/review/R2H4ECLNWVC7XZ/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm ).

Dear Ewan:

Yawn.

best,

Tom

I'm packing for a trip tomorrow, and SteelyKid is running a fever, so I'm really not in the best of moods. So let's all walk softly here, mmmkay?

Nothing that has been said by Mr. Kratman or his fans has done anything to shake my impression that, as I said in the post, this is not a book I would be interested in reading. Which was, after all, the point of the post-- Baen is to be commended for the clarity of their marketing, which makes it apparent from a great distance that this is Not For Me.

I don't think there's much point in further comment, but should anybody feel a burning need to get in the last word, make sure that it's a civil word. I will be quicker than usual to disemvowel or delete uncivil comments, and shut the whole thread down.

Drat! And I was so hoping for some enlightenment on just how Islam is a race. Oh, well; I'll suppose I'll just have to learn to live with the disappointment.

First things first: "WE" subscribe to Locus ??

Amusing, using the royal plural, but then snide self-superiority does seem to be a common indicator for those on the left side of the aisle.

As does a review of a book based on a blurb (gee, Baen markets to the right side of the aisle: call CNN!!) and a reviewer whose ideology you disagree with.

I would hold you to task and ask you to answer the good Colonel's very simple question, but I suspect that would cause your mindset to attempt a divide-by-zero operation on your weltanschauung, and that WOULD ruin your trip, no doubt. . .

So, instead, I will merely suggest that in the future, you judge a book by the content of its' pages, and not the blurbs on the cover. . . perhaps you've heard similar advice before ???

Well, I am happy that you had time to post about not having time to post. Thanks for the consideration.

Not that Tom

First things first: "WE" subscribe to Locus ??

You must be new around here, or you would know that Chad is (1) married (2) to a fellow science fiction fan. It would be natural, and not an instance of the royal we, for one of them to refer to this subscription as "our" subscription, whether it was under his name or hers.

You also don't seem to realize that people only have a finite amount of time and therefore can't read every book that gets published. So Chad looked at the blurb and singled out as a particularly egregious example of a book he has no interest in reading. Maybe the blurb does not serve Mr. Kratman well (I see he has already denied that his main character is a Marty Stu, although the blurb gives a strong impression to that effect), but I agree with his conclusion that a book with a blurb like that is overwhelmingly likely to be bad fiction. The political aspect doesn't help, either; pushing a political viewpoint a bit too hard is one way to write badly (Heinlein went off the rails when he started pushing his political viewpoint instead of letting the scenario guide the reader; likewise Karl Marx's analysis of the pitfalls of capitalism was prescient, but his political viewpoint made his proposed remedies incoherent).

Chad declined to answer Kratman's question about how this could be considered racism, but let me take a stab at it. There is an overwhelming tendency in this country to associate Islam with the Middle East, which was indeed its place of origin. There is also a tendency to equate Islam with its more extreme manifestations, the Wahhabi and Shi'a sects, which also originate in the Middle East. But Islam is much more diverse than that, both ethnically and in thinking. I doubt that all Muslims condone slavery--that's something that is associated more with Arab traders than the common folk of Indonesia. It's racist because it ascribes the views of some Middle Easterners to all Muslims, who are assumed to be Middle Eastern. The cleric Mr. Kratman quoted is Wahhabi; those views are not shared by most Muslims.

Eric:

Which Middle Easterners, Eric? Blond, blue-eyed Circassians and Kurds? Red-headed Iranians? Black descendents of (oh, yes) slaves in Saudi Arabia? Other blond, blue-eyed Chechnyan machine gunners of school children in Beslan? Half-Greek Alexandrians supporting the Muslim Botherhood. Phoenician descendents, either in the Levant or Tunisia?

Moreover, in the particular context, the bulk of the Muslims are of German descent.

But I understand. Racism, along with militarism, are the left's ultimate insults. Now I _am_ a militarist, and unapologetically so. But racist? My wife would be very surprised to discover this.

No matter; I long ago figured out the left's rules of racism. Here's my list of twenty:

1. If you believe that general intelligence exists, is heritable and at all testable for, you're a racist.
2. If you point out that liberal philosophies and programs intended to have a good impact have had a disproportionately bad impact on the ethnicities targeted by liberals, you're a racist.
3. If you notice that other cultures have some problems, you're a racist.
4. If you notice your own culture has had some successes, you're a racist.
5. If you try to identify subcultural problems, you're a racist. If the problems existed or got worse under liberalism, see item 2, above.
6. If you're mainstream American culture, and don't hate that culture, you're a racist.
7. If you're capable of noting unpleasant facts about subcultures and discussing them without your brain fogging, you're a racist.
8. If you won't kowtow and grovel as soon as someone accuses you of racism for one of the reasons above or below, you're a hopeless racist.
9. If you do not believe that mankind is a tabula rasa for liberals to make whatever they think would be good to make of man, this week, you're a racist.
10. If you don't take personal responsibility for all the evils of slavery, you're a racist. This is true even if you only arrived from Poland last week.
11. If you're white, you're a racist.
12. If you're white and just arrived from Poland last week and don't accept that you're a racist, you're a racist.
13. If you try to interject logical thought into a discussion of culture, you're a racist.
14. If you refuse to admit culture is a racial matter, and a liberal wants to conflate the two, you're a racist.
15. If you believe that race and culture are indistinguishable and a liberal decides that you shouldn't conflate the two, you're a racist.
16. If you believe that black or hispanic girls who are paid by liberal inspired programs from the age of 13 to have babies will have babies, you're a racist.
17. If you believe that _any_ girls of whatever color who are paid to have babies will then have babies but then, insensitively, observe that a smaller percentage of white girls do, certainly because they haven't been targetted for as much "help" from liberals, you're a racist.
18. If it doesn't bother you that the truth offends liberals, you're a racist.
19. If your name is Tom Kratman and you write and in your writing your heroes and heroines tend to be from minorities while your villains are white liberals, you're still a racist.
20. If you read The Bell Curve, you're a racist. On the other hand, if you didn't read it but wrote a scathing review on Amazon anyway you might not be a racist provided you take personal responsibility for 300 years of slavery even if you just arrived from Poland last week.

So the truth hurts, eh? No matter; back to the subject at hand.

Indeed, Islam is quite diverse, Eric. Which makes me wonder how you can hope to attach racism to it. And which Middle Easterners do you mean? Blond and blue-eyed Circassians and Kurds? Blond and blue-eyed Chechnyan machine gunners of school children. Black Saudi descendents of slaves? Black Islamic slavers in the Sudan? Half-Greek Alexandrian supporters of the Muslim brotherhood? Phoenicia's children in Tunisia and the Levant. And what about the Jews, who share race with the other Semites?

And if Islam is not a race, how does attaching Wahhabism to it make a discussion of it a manifestation of racism? Is Wahhabism (actualy Salafism) a race?

How do you know what percentages of Muslims feel about it? Does it matter what percentage feel that way now, if Salafism is the growing sect and fundamentalism the growing attitude?

Even presupposing that the view in the United States is somehow attached to racism, what the hell does that have to do with me, me being the one who has been tacitly accused of racism? Or am I of "the American race," and hence responsible for what all other members of that "race" believe? Isn't that racism, too?

By the way, and just for completeness' sake, here's a review of the book that, barring the references to the Draka and Pagan revival, is pretty accurate:

http://dprice.blogspot.com/2008/04/its-dystopia-you-twit.html

Buy the book; don't buy it. Read it; don't read it. Get it out of the library or download it from The Pirate Bay; makes little difference to my wallet. But before you accuse me of racism you ought to have a little more to go on than a fanciful notion that culture and religion are race.

We're losing sight of the big picture here. It's not just the political issues or the stereotypes here; the fundamental problem is that your blurb writers leave me wondering exactly how your manuscript made its spectacular escape from the slush pile. Since I have a finite amount of time and book-buying budget, the blurb has to convince me that I should be interested enough in the book to proceed to the reviews. Let me reproduce the blurb Chad quoted, with my annotations:

Europe 2123. Dhimmitude-- assigning second-class citizenship to non-Muslims-- has dug its claws into the continent[1]. Now a West Point grad[2] must rescue a young girl[3] sold into sexual[4] slavery[5] after her family could not pay the Christian Tax. U. S. Army vertean[6] Tom Kratman notches up another controversial thriller!

[1] This scenario happens to correspond to neoconservative nightmares of the future. The neoconservatives in particular don't have a good track record (Iraq turned into the disaster that pretty much everybody else predicted), and the scenario raises the possibility that the politics might be getting in the way of the story. You'll need a metric ton of back story to make this plausible, more than can fit in a blurb.

[2] Chad properly points out that this is a Marty Stu Yellow Alert. That doesn't mean your lead character is a Marty Stu, but if someone with your background (see point 6) had created a Marty Stu, this detail would likely be part of the biography.

[3] This was the point I originally objected to: if the blurb puts the old hero-rescues-helpless-heroine story line (a staple of bad fiction) front and center, what assurance do I have that there is more to the plot than this?

[4] Not just any kind of slavery, but sexual slavery. Either you or your blurb writer is pushing more hot buttons, this time of the form ZOMG evil non-Christians are screwing white Christian women!!!eleven! There is also the question of how this kind of slavery is tolerated in a Muslim regime--again a solvable problem with some back story, but you need to explain how a regime pious enough to institute an infidel tax is not pious enough to prohibit sexual slavery.

[5] Not only is the heroine helpless, she is suffering a horrible fate. Again, a staple of bad fiction. Also, this is the point where you are arguably playing to a stereotype of Muslim/Arab slave traders (we don't know from the blurb what role Europeans are playing here).

[6] If the novel were talking about ground-level combat, this detail would lend you some credibility. In the present context, it merely raises the Marty Stu alert level on your lead character. There is no sign in the blurb that any combat, other than possibly that involving the special forces unit to which your lead character is presumably attached (if he's on his own, raise the Marty Stu alert level to Double Red), takes place in the novel. (I don't know whether "vertean" [sic] was in the original blurb or from Chad's mistranscribing it.)

Epic fail on this blurb: it fails to convince me that this book will be entertaining. I see enough bad (nonfiction) writing in my professional life, thank you.

Oh, that's easy, Eric. It never went into a slush pile. I've never had a manuscript in a slush pile. Jim Baen recruited me to write his idea, A State of Disobedience. Since then I've had six out, all my own idea, story, and writing though three were set in John Ringo's Posleen universe. I have another one coming out in April, and two more in the editorial cue with contracts for five or six more. Hit genre best seller lists...well...only sometimes, frankly, most recently in the Wall Street Journal. (Sort of; there's a nuance to that. Frankly, I think it was dumb luck.) Get good reviews from Publishers Weekly. Best of all, I get to really annoy liberals, which is how I know I'm doing my job well. ;) For example, Ewan, above, has "socialist" in his description for his Amazon review of ASOD. Frankly, I take that one star, from a socialist, as a commendation. The only way he could have upset me is if he'd liked ASOD.

By the way, you must not be too very familiar with the Islamic world if you think most women are not pretty damned helpless there. Reality is a staple of bad fiction? Or did you really want fantasy?

[4] Not just any kind of slavery, but sexual slavery. Either you or your blurb writer is pushing more hot buttons, this time of the form ZOMG evil non-Christians are screwing white Christian women!!!eleven! There is also the question of how this kind of slavery is tolerated in a Muslim regime--again a solvable problem with some back story, but you need to explain how a regime pious enough to institute an infidel tax is not pious enough to prohibit sexual slavery.

My own reading of the Koran, after reading the interpretation published by the former Head of Islamic History Department at Cairo University, is that the more closely one adheres to the Koran, the more likely this kind of activity is. I'll go and see if I can find the actual quote.

Why, yes, I AM new here. And I see a blog purportedly written by "the miscellaneous ramblings of a physicist at a small liberal arts college." Not a physicist and his WIFE.

You see, language, like physics, has rules for describing events and objects. Had he phrased things, "At home, we both read. . ." But he didn't. Language is the tool of thought, and sloppy use of language implies sloppy thought.

Which brings us right back to the aforementioned description of snide self-superiority. . ..

I dunno, Keith, I didn't take that "we" as anything too very bad, whether it was a royal we, a we with wife or SO, or a we that included the pooch. And as far as Chad's observation that the blurb turned him off...well...as long as he was honest - and I'm sure he was - what's the issue?

No, my only objection - and the only reason I bothered to comment - is because of the personal insult of being tacitly called a racist and the intellectual sloppiness of equating culture and race.

Eric, while you're reading up, don't forget the Haditha. Remember, too, the doctrine of Abrogation. That is, the earlier 'revelations' are abrogated by the newer ones. ForEx, "there is no compulsion in religion" replaced by the later Sura of the Sword admonishing that we infidels (lucky us, that we're not generally pagan, they just get killed) the choice of convert, live as 3rd class in humiliation or die.

Do a little more reading on the Duty of Jihad, too. Then add "dar al harb" .... as the label for where you probably live.