45 Comments


  • yay Bob!

    Huge congrats on the new Analog publication! And have a great reading.

    Chris

    January 25, 2005
  • Congrats on your novelette. πŸ™‚

    January 25, 2005
  • Oh, excellent. Congratulations — for the new byline and for the suh-weet workshop gig.

    January 25, 2005
  • Well, congrats! I’ll have to pick up that issue.

    January 25, 2005
  • I’ll keep an eye out for it, I’m pretty sure Jane subscribes.

    But in any case, this is great news all around. COngratulations!

    January 25, 2005
  • I’ll say again, congratulations. And I’ll definitely be there on the 7th.

    January 25, 2005
  • Re: yay Bob!

    Thank you—I’m looking forward to it.

    January 25, 2005
  • Thanks! I’m glad it found a good home.

    January 25, 2005
  • Hey, thank you, Mark. I’m pretty pleased by it, obviously.

    January 25, 2005
  • Thank you. I have no idea what issue that will be, of course.

    January 25, 2005
  • Hey, thanks, Luke. Boy, you were there when it all started.

    January 25, 2005
  • And I’ll say Thank You again! I’m looking forward to seeing you there.

    January 25, 2005
  • “Aren’t you in the wrong hall?”

    That’s what I remember as your first words to me. Hah!

    January 25, 2005
  • I was hoping you’d forgotten that particular outbreak of hoof-in-mouth disease. No chance of that, I see.

    January 25, 2005
  • <evilgrin.bmp>

    This is my retirement fund.

    No, just kidding.

    January 25, 2005
  • Anonymous

    First, Bob, congratulations on your latest publication.
    Second, for us non-writer types, what’s a “reading?”
    I’d love to attend for support, but would hate to show up and be a fish out of water.

    Bill

    January 25, 2005
  • Hey, Bill!

    I’ll manfully resist the urge to make hay with this question (All attendees must wear red trousers…). All you non-writer types have to do is show up and listen. And if I’m reading, believe me, that will be trial enough. It looks like six of us will be reading short works or excerpts. But I’d be delighted if you’d come to show the flag.

    January 25, 2005
  • Thank you, thank you, thank you. I’ll certainly post the issue information when I get it.

    January 25, 2005
  • Congrats again, Bob- and I would be happy to see you and Bill read. Can anyone go, or are group members going to invite a set number per person, like in showcases?

    January 26, 2005
  • Thank you again!

    I’m not sure yet if Bill’s reading. Because he’s the guest curator and host, he said he was going to limit his role to just that. In any case you’re welcome to come singly, in pairs, or by the busload. The only limit is that seating is on a first-come, first-served basis. I have no idea whether it will be a big crowd or not.

    January 26, 2005
  • “Manfully.”

    Hmph (she said womanfully).

    January 26, 2005
  • Well, you know, Y-Chromosomefully doesn’t have the same euphony.

    January 26, 2005
  • Please come, please come! Any and all invited!

    January 26, 2005
  • Jae promises that she will produce a huge crowd. (One wonders what exactly she’s promising…)

    January 26, 2005
  • Allow me to add my public congratulations on the Analog sale — a story we critiqued at the very first meeting of the 8th of February Group. Jolly good, Howe, well done!

    January 26, 2005
  • <Too many jokes… Can’t. Speak.>

    January 26, 2005
  • Hey! NICE icon.

    Thank you very much. Yes, that was the inaugural story—I’m really glad it found a good home.

    January 26, 2005
  • By the way, I inadvertently deleted your other post below, while I was trying to delete a duplicate post of my own. Sorry about that—I wasn’t trying to censor you.

    January 26, 2005
  • <resisting urge to urge you to try>

    January 26, 2005
  • I was looking for more motivation for the pumpkin

    Not many homes better!

    January 26, 2005
  • Congratulations on the sale!

    You go and have a great time at the reading!

    I, alas, will be traveling so will miss it, but keep me posted on the next such event (where ideally beer will be involved . . .)

    Will you ever do Ellen’s/Gavin’s KGB series for example?

    January 26, 2005
  • Anonymous

    Wow, I haven’t seen that shirt in years. Isn’t there something on the back about cutting off hands and throwing away keyboards?

    Bill

    January 26, 2005
  • Isn’t there something on the back about cutting off hands and throwing away keyboards?

    You’re close. The image on the front, a pair of hands typing on a keyboard in front of a headstone (inscribed MCMLXXXV), is a graphic representation of a line delivered during a critique: “The best thing you can do for art is cut off your hands and bury your typewriter.”

    In retrospect that may have been a bit strong.

    The back of the tee shirt says:

    Boy Are We Artists
    Boy Are We Artists
    Here’s a Bunch of Art
    Boy Are We Artists

    January 26, 2005
  • Thank you!

    Will you ever do Ellen’s/Gavin’s KGB series for example?

    Do you mean would I read at KGB? Of course. Will I be invited to do so? I don’t know. I hope so, eventually.

    January 26, 2005
  • Re: I was looking for more motivation for the pumpkin

    Ha! Unmotivated pumpkins: the scourge of speculative fiction.

    January 26, 2005
  • No problem — as long as you deleted it manfully. &ltg&gt

    January 28, 2005
  • Did that really get under your skin?

    January 28, 2005
  • Oh, just a tiny bit, and only at first. My shit, not yours. That last post, I was just trying to be funny. Apparently, I missed.

    January 28, 2005
  • No, the last post was funny, but I could tell there was some irritation there—and that irritated me.

    Here’s what I think: men and women can be equal and still have different qualities—qualities than can legitimately be described as manfully and womanly (whether those qualities are biological or cultural in origin is another matter). Calling me on the word “manfully,” especially in the tongue-in-cheek context I used it, strikes me as the kind of political correctness that gives feminism a largely undeserved reputation for humorlessness.

    I wouldn’t take note of such a seemingly minor irritation, but given the Lawrence Summers flap in the news recently, it caught my attention.

    January 30, 2005
  • Hey! I was going to reply to the subsequent comment you left, only to discover you’d deleted it—which is too bad, since I think it’s in interesting thread, and a discussion worth having. And I can’t even respond via e-mail.

    February 01, 2005
  • I heard “cut off your hands and bury your typewriter” ascribed to a Harlan Ellison Clarion critique. Odd phrasiology, as one would think doing the first would make doing the second problematic.

    February 01, 2005
  • And here I was trying not to offend again. πŸ™‚ I’ll repost it.

    February 01, 2005
  • Here’s the deleted post. For the record, my “as long as you deleted it manfully” post honestly had no irritation, and was intended to make light without rancor.

    ———

    I understand your irritation. But, possibly because of
    the Lawrence Summers flap, I find myself more
    sensitive than usual to what looks, to me, like
    institutionalized sexism.

    I don’t see what’s specifically manful about courage
    or strength, which is what “manfully” connotes. And
    yet in our culture, there’s a powerful subconscious
    undercurrent that says girls are wimps and sissies and
    boys are brave and strong. Calling a boy girly is a
    mortal insult; calling a girl boyish is, at worst, a
    hint at lesbianism (if in that context that’s seen as
    a bad thing), and at best, a sign of admiration for
    her pluck or will.

    Of course there are differences between men and women.
    I just don’t believe that innate strength of character
    is one of them, and that’s what “manfully” implies.

    Having said all that, I too get tired of enforced
    PC-ness, and this is, after all, your journal and not
    mine. You get to say whatever you like. I apologize if
    I offended you.

    February 01, 2005
  • Well, Ellison may have said it—it certainly sounds like him, which is probably why you heard it attributed to him, rather than to some anonymous Clarion ’85 student. But I definitely did say it in 1985, and I wasn’t quoting anyone. Not, mind you, that I’m proud of it: it was one of those comments meant to underscore how clever I was, and not at all helpful to the recipient. I still can’t quite believe I was that casually cruel, but alas there were seventeen witnesses.

    February 01, 2005
  • No apologies necessary. Because the Summers flap is is still in the news (the New York Times’ Clyde Haberman takes an inexpert whack at the subject today in The Girls Are Smart, Real Smart), I think this is worth discussing.

    Because I discovered I had so much to say about it, I’m going to make it a whole separate post. I’m still mulling it over, so I probably won’t post it until tomorrow.

    February 02, 2005

Leave a Comment


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Copyright © Robert J. Howe