A Writer’s Life

So I’ve almost finished Deathly Hallows; started it on Sunday and should have it finished later tonight. I’m enjoying it so far; the beginning is one of the best in the series and the pace is good throughout. I’m not going to give away spoilers, but there was something which caught my interest halfway through the book I’ve been thinking about.

There’s a scene where we finally learn the date that Harry’s parents, James and Lily, died. It’s not a plot point, but if you don’t want to know, stop reading now… still with us? The Date is 31 October 1981. The reason I found that interesting is because Harry is 17 - which means Deathly Hallows is set in 1996/97. It’s been a while since I’ve read the other books so I could be wrong, but I don’t remember Rowling alluding to Harry Potter being set in the past much before; there have been references, but nothing as definitive as this.

I’ve been thinking about that and I think it’s a good move; it’s subtle, but it makes it clearer for people like myself who aren’t diehard fans. And the date explains a few things. I’ve wondered why little from the modern world seems to appear in Harry Potter; I can understand it being shunned in the magical world, but even amongst Muggles there never seems to be mention of the Internet or cell phones. If Harry Potter is meant to be set in the 90s, before the net exploded and cell phones were quite as prevalent, that makes more sense. It also shows the growing differences between the magical and Muggle worlds, science and magic divulging.

But there’s something else it does - it allows Rowling to make the story as dark as she wants. Even without finishing it yet, Deathly Hallows is by far the darkest in the series; it needed to be to create the sense of fear that permeates the book. The danger in making something that’s read by millions of children so dark is that it could be too much for them. But by setting it slightly in the past (and making that more obvious), it gives the story some hope. No matter what happens to the characters, we know the world didn’t end in 97; even in its darkest and most tragic moments, the reader knows there is still light. And perhaps that’s part of the success of Harry Potter, that its readers, fans, have always sensed hope.

As a writer, there’s a lot of power in setting something in the past. I wish it was something people would pay more attention to when they think about a book; they think of it as the setting, but it’s more than that. The past offers a chance to explore themes through the prism of a particular time, accentuating feelings of nostalgia and familiarity, and often the amount of work and detail that goes into making that world feel real goes unrecognised. It’s also a tool to make a work stand out from the crowd. With CSI being so popular with its forensic tools, it’s no wonder there’s such a plethora of crime writers writing in the same vein - and so it’s interesting that Sue Grafton is so popular. She sets all of her Kinsey Milhone books in the 80s so she doesn’t have to deal with technological advances, and it also makes them different to what’s around.

I don’t think many writers consider setting works in the contemporary or recent past, though, the way Rowling has. I’m not sure why. Perhaps they think it’s a risk; they’re not certain how it will impact the story’s relevance, but sometimes it can help. Distance from current events can make themes more subtle; something like Kazuo Ishiguro’s Never Let Me Go, set in the contemporary past but a changed world, is a perfect example of a work that would not have been as powerful if set in today’s world - if anything, it feels more relevant.

So I thought it was an interesting aside, something worth mentioning; so much is being made of the sales of Deathly Hallows and whether Potter will live or die that this surprised me, made me wonder why it’s not used more often by other writers. It’s definitely helped Rowling to venture into darker areas, and while I’m sure it’ll be overlooked in the praise Rowling gets, I thought it should be mentioned - it shows how meticulously she planned the series, and how cleverly.

A few things have been going round in my head for the last few days. The first thing is that I’ve been helping my mother get set up online. She’s used computers for awhile, but she’s never really gone online more than to shop at Amazon and some fabric stores. For the last couple of months I’ve been trying to convince her to get online more, partly to talk with friends overseas, and partly because the net is changing so rapidly that in another 5 years it’ll be a lot harder to learn the basics. Finally she said she’d give it a try. Sounds good, right?

Wrong. What’s that saying from Robert Burns? The best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry (actually it’s “the best-laid schemes of mice and men gang aft agley”, but let’s not get into that). She’s getting the hang of web-surfing and email, but the problem I’ve been having is explaining netiquette to her. She uses all caps sometimes which people consider SHOUTING and she rarely uses line breaks. But the main thing has been explaining the differences between email and letters. Email is much more concise and she thinks I mean that email should be short, but that’s not what I mean. You can write longer emails (and for that matter long blog posts. as I’m doing now!); what matters is that your thoughts are clearly expressed and to the point. Email is immediate and really nothing like a letter; it’s another form of communication, with it’s own rules.

The other thing that’s been on my mind ties into this as well. My most viewed post at CJWriter so far has been the one on Creative Commons Licensing. I never expected that; I was just putting it out there as an announcement for anyone who reads my work, but it’s kind of taken on a life of it’s own. I’ve had a few comments and about as many emails regarding that post; I’m still trying to catch up on them a week later. I feel badly about that because I can’t stop thinking that I’ve violated some kind of netiquette rule - Thou Must Respond To All Messages Within 36 Hours. But if I’m being honest, I’ve never been sure what the protocol is for comments. Do you reply directly to a comment, or do you edit the comment and put your reply inside it? Are you required to acknowledge comments or are there some you just leave to speak for themselves? My posts are often more editorial-style and I’ve never expected many comments from them, so it’s something I’ve not thought about much before. Even around Wordpress there doesn’t seem to be much of a consensus.

So with this whole idea of netiquette playing on my mind, I decided I’d go and have a look at a few sources, try and clear it up. What I found was that a lot of my initial thoughts were validated but that on the whole netiquette is so complicated I don’t think many people actually understand it, let alone adhere to it. Anyone who does try is like a sherrif in one of the old Hollywood westerns; outnumbered and outgunned on a rough, unfriendly frontier.

I guess I’ve always thought of netiquette as this kind of loose concept; a guideline for social conduct that most people would recognise, even if they don’t know the term. I’ve always thought about it in quite general terms, things that make sense. Be concise and to the point in your messages. Use line breaks, don’t type in all capitals and check messages before you send them. Send or embed the whole link and check that the subject line is relevant. Delete quotes of previous messages, leaving the original. You can use emoticons to express an emotion, but don’t use them too much; don’t overuse acronyms. Likewise, abbreviations are okay (”u” for “you”), but not everybody will write like that and they will not be appropriate everywhere (particularly on Usenet). And above all, remember that nothing you post is guaranteed to remain private, so don’t include personal, hateful or confidential information.

All that seems pretty simple to me. Commonsensical. But I had a look at the official RFC 1855 netiquette guidelines and while all of that seems to fall under their considerations, you’d need to be a lawyer to understand it. There are a lot of sites which have published revised versions and synopses of netiquette as well, but even the ones on Wikipedia don’t seem accessible and some of the others are too basic. And so it’s no wonder that we have this situation where just about anything goes online.

The worst example I have seen happened in March, involving Kathy Sierra, and it came to involve much more than just netiquette. For anyone who doesn’t know, she runs a great blog called Creating Passionate Users, over at Typepad, but in March she received death threats and sexist remarks on her blog. They were so serious that she cancelled an appearance at a tech conference and suspended her blog for a time. That anyone would be subject to such treatment is disgusting and I feel really sorry for Kathy Sierra. That this kind of thing goes on should not be acceptable to anyone, and it sparked Tim O’Reilly to propose a Bloggers’ Code of Conduct which I think is a good idea but I’m not sure just how much success it will have. I guess we’ll just have to see.

So having read the articles, I feel like most of what I thought makes sense… but that none of it really matters. Far less people adhere to netiquette than I thought, if they even know it exists. And I think it’s getting worse. I’m not saying I’ve never broken netiquette rules (it took me a while to find my feet online just like everyone else), but it goes beyond that. It’s this idea people have that you can say or do whatever you like online simply because it’s not the “real world”. It’s a serious problem for respectable speech, but also for the sense of community online; if netiquette was valued, it could bring people together in much greater numbers. Maybe that’s something that will never happen, but I’ve decided to support the Support Responsible Commenting initiative anyway. I’m including the SRC button in my sidebar and I would encourage anyone else who believes in the idea of netiquette to do the same. This won’t cover everything we want it to, not by any means, but it’s a start. And maybe that’s all we can hope for.

Meanwhile I’ll keep trying to explain netiquette, because the opposite is just crazy. But what do you think? Does netiquette matter to you?

Ever wanted to try science fiction, but not sure where to start? Or had a friend ask you for something they might like? Here are 5 suggestions.

5) Ender’s Game
Orson Scott Card

4) Blood Music
Greg Bear

3) Spin
Robert Charles Wilson

2) The Man in the High Castle
Philip K. Dick

1) Never Let Me Go
Kazuo Ishiguro

Wasting Time
CJ Levinson

Sometimes I feel like I’m just wasting time again
Thought I’d be someone different by now
Everything I said keeps coming back to me
Thought I’d know the perfect words
But they never came to mind

And is that really you, standing in front of me?
Is that really you, standing in front of me?
Hold me now because I need to believe again
Remember me because I need to be free

All I’ve ever wanted seems so far away
The world barely turns
I can feel every part of me, reaching out
But the words die within me

Surrounded by this confusion
And the dying light
My only joy
Is the faint smile in your eyes

And is that really you, standing in front of me?
Is that really you, standing in front of me?
Hold me now because I need to believe again
Remember me because I need to be free

Remember me because I need to be free

Licenced under a Creative Commons Licence

Stephen King farewells Harry Potter
Just been reading this column by Stephen King. It’s an interesting perspective; King has this uncanny ability to capture what people are thinking but aren’t sure how to say, and I think (as usual) he’s right on the money. There has been so much speculation about what’s going to happen in the final book that no matter what happens, I doubt people will be satisfied. There’s so much feeling surrounding Harry Potter because it means so many different things to different people (escapism, adventure, a reminder of childhood, a measure of lost innocence); people have this idea of what is right and what isn’t right for the story. But in the end it’s possible that no ending will be right, because people are sad that it’s ending at all. I’m sure everyone’s sensed it, that kind of strange melancholy; a mix of anticipation and dread. People want to know the ending, but they don’t want the story to end. As King said, “The magic is not supposed to go away”.

For me it’s a slightly strange feeling. I’ve read all the Potter books, but have never been captivated by them as others have. I read them more because I felt like it was something I should do as a writer myself; I enjoyed them (particularly 3-6, where Rowling really aged the characters and the themes) but never quite got caught up in them the same way as the fans. I suppose I was caught between ages; without younger brothers or sisters myself, I was 2 or 3 years too old for the books when Philosopher’s Stone was first published, and my cousins were several years too young for me to enjoy the series through them. I’m not that sad to see the series ending; I’m interested to see how it finishes, and I think all good series must finish, must have that finality, to truly be remembered. But I do know the feeling fans are experiencing; I felt it with Episode III. It’s the feeling that it’s not just the end of a series, but the end of a period in your life, and you probably won’t feel the same way about something else again.

Think about the original audience of Philosopher’s Stone. Maybe you are one of them, or the parent of one, a child who was 8 years old when Philosopher’s Stone was first published. For 10 years you’ve followed the story of Harry and his friends; as they’ve aged, so have you. You’ve seen parts of your life mirrored in their stories; feelings of angst, Harry’s first kiss, Ron becoming prefect, perhaps even the death of a guardian or a loved one. Now you’re ready to leave school and be on your own - just as Harry, in his last year, prepares for his own final adventure. For you it’s more than the end of a story, it’s the end of this time in your life. Deathly Hallows marks the end of your childhood, your emergence into adulthood, and it’s completely understandable that it’s something you’d have mixed feelings about. You wouldn’t be human if you didn’t.

I think that’s what’s really surrounding the launch of Deathly Hallows. But I don’t think it’s a perspective that’s being covered much in the media. It’s easier for them to cover the predicted sales, but it’s an event which isn’t just about the sales and hype, the marketing and merchandise. It’s not even about magic or whether Harry will live or die, in the end; no, it’s about this period in the lives of millions of children drawing to a close as they move into adulthood, the beginning of a new chapter in their lives. Other books, other series, will come along, and JK Rowling may even write some of them… but for this generation, this group of children, nothing will touch them the same way. Harry Potter was with them while they were children; it touched them because Harry grew up with them. That was the magic in their lives, and now it’s the end of their journey. No wonder it’s a bitter-sweet experience.

So even though I haven’t felt that feeling, I understand it, and I’ll be in line over the weekend getting a copy of Deathly Hallows just like everyone else around the world. I’m curious to see how it ends… and yes, I’ll admit it, I’m a little bit sad too. But I’ll be watching people as I’m getting it too, to see what Harry Potter means to them, to see what part of their lives it’s been part of. I think that should be a very interesting experience. What do you think?