How Fiction Changed Christmas

1971-toon-ghost of christmas presentI received this on my SF Canada listserv from Celu. But it fit so well into what we’ve been talking about here–that FICTION has power to change the world, that I wanted to post it. If there are errors in this posting, I apologize. I did not vet it ahead of time. The pic is from the 1971 cartoon. I grew up on this one and the Mr. Magoo version.

Merry Christmas!

_____

A CHRISTMAS CAROL: THE LITTLE GHOST STORY THAT SAVED CHRISTMAS

Not too many people are aware of the influence of Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol on the evolution of the modern Christmas holiday.

First of all– in 1843, when Dickens wrote it, the state of the Christmas Holiday was in flux. In the decades before that, Christmas celebration had been slowly falling off in Britain as a result of two factors: the residual effect of Puritanism under Cromwell’s government, which had completely shut down overt Christmas celebration in the mid-17th century, and a desire to get away from the older, more raucous practices of British Christmas.

Before Cromwell’s English Revolution and the resulting Protectorate, Christmas was celebrated much differently than most today imagine. It was more akin to 12 days of Mardi Gras, dominated by the “festum fatuorum,” or Feast of Fools on January 1st and lasting until Twelfth Night— during which time people traditionally took to the streets in all manner of outlandish costumes, with the sole motivation of getting drunk and eating until one was ready to burst. Roles were often reversed during this period, with servants “taking over” households and playing the part of the Master and Mistress of the house, while the rich rubbed elbows with the poor in a way not seen during the rest of the year– a way not always to their liking. This practice dated back to Roman rule in Britain, and had mingled with various Celtic and Norse traditions to produce a great feast of plenty to end the year, a fiery masquerade to drive away the cold and dark of winter and send the ghosts of the dead off in gran

Wassailing, the act of traveling in groups and singing at houses, was less a festive entertainment than an act of robbery. Drunken mobs would move from door to door like trick-or-treaters, demanding food and spirits from every house they passed “to honor the Season.” And if the occupants of a house were not forthcoming, they could expect retribution, and the mob might even storm the building and loot it then and there.

Give us some Figgy Pudding, indeed.

This debauchery sometimes got completely out of hand and turned into drunken city-wide riots, during which shops and homes were looted indiscriminately and whole neighborhoods were burned down. Several popes and prominent clergymen passed Papal Bulls and Interdicts against the practice, and it was roundly denounced by several English monarchs.

Oliver Cromwell and his puritan Protectorate squashed all of that. But after the Restoration, people didn’t really have much left by way of tradition to apply to their Christmas celebrations. Christmas became a big party, or series of smaller parties– but the riotous drunken feasts of yore were no more.

As the Age of Reason progressed into the beginnings of the Industrial Revolution, the celebration of Christmas began to lull. Many considered it an uncouth throw-back to heathen times best forgotten, and not civilized enough for the new buttoned-down, corseted society of the dawning era of enlightened Victorianism.

Christmas had become old fashioned and passe. And was gradually fading away.

Enter Charles Dickens.

By 1843, Dickens was already a best-selling author and novelist, who had firmly gained the ear of his country and whose works were growing in international popularity. Victoria, 23 years old, had been queen for 5 years, and a new spirit of youth and vigor was abroad in the land, supported by Victoria’s rejection of the stodgy customs and arbitrary political probity of the Charlesian period which preceded her. British economic might was on the upswing, there was a hint of liberalism in the air, and things were changing.

So it was that Dickens sat down in December of 1843 to write a Christmas book. It was not entirely a charitable act for the ages– Dickens had recently had a number of monetary investments go sour on him, and needed to generate some quick cash to pay off a debt. But as was his gift, Dickens had the uncanny knack for stating in prose what the rest of his countrymen were thinking. He was England’s literary conscience. And he was able to speak directly to the hearts and minds of his readers.

The name of his story was “A Christmas Carol in Prose, Being a Ghost Story of Christmas.” Dickens himself called it his “little Christmas Book.” It was first published on December 19, 1843 with illustrations by John Leech. Despite his financial duress, Dickens didn’t believe it would do that much to bail him out– his own sentimental insistence that the novella be richly bound and copiously illustrated seemed to doom the little book to earn little in the way of profit. Still, its simple message seemed worth telling– that there was much that was good and true about the sincere celebration of the Christmas season, and that the true meaning of the holiday– forbearance, hope, brotherhood and good will to all men– still had a worthy place at the center of the ever-changing English hearth and home.

Dickens was wrong about its financial chances. Despite its brevity (Dickens was known at the time for lengthy novels published in serial form), it was a smash hit– a runaway bestseller. It completely sold out and went to reprint almost immediately, selling over six thousand copies in one week. It has never been out of print since the day it was published.

The book re-popularized Christmas in the British Isles, and the “traditional British Christmas” it represented spread far and wide to influence the rest of the world. Christmas had become civilized– indeed, NOT to celebrate the holiday had become downright UNcivilized.

What traditions did Dickens re-popularize in his little Christmas book?

Well, there are no Christmas trees in A Christmas Carol. Those had yet to be imported from Germany by Prince Albert and Queen Victoria, nor did that happen until 1848, when a woodcut featuring the Queen and Royal Consort at their Christmas tree appeared publicly, sparking a frenzy of emulation througjout England and abroad.

Santa Claus or Saint Nicholas do not appear in A Christmas Carol, either. Not in his Victorian (and later accepted British and American) form, that is.

But he DOES appear in the story in his original pagan form– The Ghost of Christmas Present— the SPIRIT of Christmas– is depicted in Dicken’s work as being essentially identical to the far older concept of “Olde Christmas” and “Master Christmas” described by Ben Jonson in the late 16th century, and believed to be older by far even than that.

The Christmas traditions Dickens reinvigorated were simply the act of giving, of generosity of the spirit, of familial togetherness and joyful celebration. Dicken asserted that Christmastime was still, and had always been, SPECIAL. And the world believed him.

Dickens’ tale is also primarily a ghost story– a fact which he adamantly asserted until the end of his days. Ghost stories are also traditionally connected with Christmas, that 12 day period being the time when the last wandering ghosts of the dead are sent by the finality of year’s end to their ultimate fates. Christmas ghost stories are very much a part of our oldest traditions, a way to bid farewell to our fallen friends and love ones, while enjoying a shudder as we consider the icy hand of death that constantly awaits, perhaps just beyond our doors.

It also bears mentioning that the events depicted in A Christmas Carol are not strictly Victorian– in fact they seem to predate Victoria by several decades, despite the fact that many modern interpretations of the tale move it forward into the mid-1800’s.

Scrooge was an old man, or at the very least middle-aged, when the ghosts visited him. The events of Christmases Past took place around the turn of the 19th century, therefore, or even earlier– which explains Fezziwig’s old style powdered Welsh wig. The events of Christmas Present, to Scrooge, take place over the holiday when the ghosts visited him– but we are later told by Dickens, who is writing in 1843, that Scrooge went on to become much-revered as a great champion of Christmas in the time following his great change of habits. So it makes sense that Scrooge was visited by the ghosts much earlier than 1843– perhaps in the 1830’s or thereabouts.

None of which really matters. The simple fact is, Christmas was a dying tradition by the time Dickens took hold of it and reinterpreted it for his Victorian audience, who took it to heart and embarked on a Victorian Christmas craze from which we today draw our most beloved and revered Christmas traditions. Dickens lit the spark– and a romantic Victorian England, hungry for the stability and emotional resonance of tradition, fanned it into a flame that has since warmed the world.

And so I raise my proverbial glass to Master Dickens, this year and every year, and toast the old fellow, whose little Christmas book reinvigorated and reinvented one of the celebrations which so many hold so near and dear to their hearts.

Well done, sir, sayeth I. Well done indeed.

____________________________________

Thanks, CELU!!

PS.  Wherever you find pics of the Ghost of Christmas Present, he’s always a hunk.

DSCF3069
carol-5

Writing Classes at Yukon College–Get Your Novels Out

Hey, Novelists!

For some of you Nanowrimo was a great experience–but what next??  Or some of you have an old novel kicking around in your closet.  Dust it off, get it ready.

I’m teaching two courses at Yukon College in the Winter, both of them are Fiction Writing Workshops.  You can read more about them if you click on Writing Classes up on the Menu Bar.

In brief:  Monday night is for novels that are more realistic–they don’t have magic, or time travel, or science fiction, or monsters in them.  They are set in this world, working with people as we know them.  They can be set in the past.

If you have at least 3/4 of a novel manuscript through a first draft, you are welcome to join the course.  If you don’t have that much done, that’s okay to join too, as long as you know that a majority of people will be working on novels, and that class time discussion will be focussed on longer story arcs.  People with novels are required to workshop 3 chapters over the course of the semester, comment on other people’s chapters, and with a group, present one novel to the class, one of the ones that we will be reading (we have three on the schedule), and  turning in to the class a synopsis of your novel.

The practical side is that in April you will need one synopsis and the first three chapters of your novel ready to show editors who are coming to the Yukon!!  Don’t pass up this opportunity. BIG name people are coming to look for manuscripts and help people move towards publication.  They will take our class to the next level, much farther than most could take you.  They will also take you to that next level if you AREN’T a part of the class–the Editor’s Weekend is a Yukon Wide event… (oh, it won’t be named Editor’s Weekend…I just made that up….).

Tuesday nights are for those novelists with a speculative element in their novel.  There are different considerations when you are working with speculative elements and you will want people who are familiar with those elements.  The rest of the class will be VERY similar to the Monday night group–all that’s different is that we will be working with texts that are outside of realism, even just slightly.

The courses are 16 weeks long, are the cheapest prices in any college in North America (dare anyone to beat $150 per course), and I think you will get more bang for your buck.  Workshops are good to use to get a good opinion of what to look at more closely.  Only come if you are ready to receive the opinions of 15 other readers, and to consider their thoughts on your work.

Come and Join us for a good workshop experience!  CRWR 241: Fiction Writing Workshop (Mondays–realism; Tuesdays–Speculative) Starts Jan 5 at Yukon College!

Muslim Punk Rock, or What Fiction Can Do

23moth_muslimThis just in from the New York Times. Michael Muhammad Knight wrote a book about Muslim-Americans forming a punk band in Buffalo New York. From the article by Christopher Maag, “Young Muslims Build a Subculture on an Underground Book“:

Five years ago, young Muslims across the United States began reading and passing along a blurry, photocopied novel called “The Taqwacores,” about imaginary punk rock Muslims in Buffalo.

“This book helped me create my identity,” said Naina Syed, 14, a high school freshman in Coventry, Conn.

A Muslim born in Pakistan, Naina said she spent hours on the phone listening to her older sister read the novel to her. “When I finally read the book for myself,” she said, “it was an amazing experience.”

The novel is “The Catcher in the Rye” for young Muslims, said Carl W. Ernst, a professor of Islamic studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Springing from the imagination of Michael Muhammad Knight, it inspired disaffected young Muslims in the United States to form real Muslim punk bands and build their own subculture.

As a writer, the article is fascinating to me. Fiction has the power to give method and ideas to real people, helping to create reality. Now Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight isn’t gonna make vampires out of anyone–but it might make teenage girls want a chaste boyfriend. But Taqwacores imagined a reality for alienated Muslim teens in the States, a way to cope, a way to establish a new identity, a counter culture. The book empowers people. Through fiction.

Countless movies have played on the idea that a writer could create reality through writing about it–they are mostly comedies. But the concept, I think, is a powerful one. What if –instead of reflecting culture–we created it? What if we consciously created something that was not there before–something that could happen–so that it inspires others to create it?

Science Fiction often does this in reverse. Create something that we DON’T want around and then destroy it. And thank God we got rid of “it.” I think the Shine Anthology is seeking to help us imagine some creative solutions–and I still encourage you to submit. But I want to keep harping on the idea that you, as writers, can change the world. Michael M. Knight did. (I love that his name is the same as the hero from Knight Rider, the 80s TV show (with recent makeover)).

Go create something you want to see that doesn’t exist right now. Like Knight, create a subculture for disenfranchised teens. Or create the ultimate youth center in your town and inspire someone to imagine the real one. Or show oppressed people in power, how a family operates using green technology in their house, believable, doable, possible things. And then I hope your novel is photocopied and passed around and around and around. The world.

It’s a Wonderful Life, Captain Picard

270px-st-tng_tapestrySeeing that it’s Christmas, and I’m going through a midlife crisis, I thought I would further comment on the magic of “It’s a Wonderful Life.” That magic: the Re-vision of a person’s life has been played out on a number of TV shows. That 70’s Show undid a kiss, Moonlighting a meeting, etc. Each show played off the idea that life could be revised differently, playing to our many regrets. All of us have wondered from time to time how life might have been different if we’d chosen another option.

Here’s Star Trek’s version of the Capra classic, and whether you are a Sci fi fan or not, or a Trekkie, the message in this episode is broad enough to speak about the human condition.

In “Tapestry,” Captain Picard is killed on an away mission. His artificial heart is damaged and it fails him. He meets up with Q as an afterlife. Q is the Trek Universe’s answer to God–an amoral, irresponsible, uncompassionate God. Omnipotence with no ethics. Clarence with no caring. Q offers to change one aspect of Picard’s life, and he uncovers a pivotal moment when Picard loses his real heart in a fight with badass aliens, when he was a young officer. Picard never realizes that the moment is pivotal. Q transports him back in time to play out that moment when he was stabbed. Q forces him to either accept death, or find a way not to get stabbed and see what his life would have been like with a real heart instead of an artificial one.

Picard replays the days leading up to the argument, to the fight, to the stabbing, to avoid violence. To do this, he has to stop his friends from defending their honor, and in doing so, loses his friends–but gains his life. Q transports him back to the future–or to the present. Picard finds that he has a completely different life. A life void of risk, completely safe. And by playing it safe, Picard has become a Lt. Astrophysics analyst, who transports data back and forth to senior officers.

If you want the whole episode, go to Youtube and begin here.

But I think the end has the meat of the message. Watch here.

The difference here is not that Picard is pivotal in the lives of others. Undoubtedly he was. But that our risks bring about a person who can lead. Our risks, or lack of them, define us. George Bailey’s sacrifices define him. Picard’s daring defines him. What defines you?

For another take on this idea, here’s a heartwarming video by Garth Brooks called “Standing Outside the Fire.” Pardon me mixing Star Trek and country music, but the themes are nice together.

The Wonderfulness of “It’s A Wonderful Life”

jamesstewart460This is my favorite Christmas movie.  So I’m a bit palled by recent articles that this is a dark film, or that George Bailey should never have been born.  Mainly, this is a response to a NYT article (and a short video commentary) about the “dark side” of “It’s a Wonderful Life.”  (But you can also see the seething condescension for Capra’s human vision in this article, “It’s a Wonderful Lie”)

Wonderful? Sorry, George, It’s a Pitiful Dreadful Life! by Wendell Jamieson revises, or attempts to revise the viewer’s reception of this movie, by making us concentrate on how miserable George’s life really was.

<“It’s a Wonderful Life” is a terrifying, asphyxiating story about growing up and relinquishing your dreams, of seeing your father driven to the grave before his time, of living among bitter, small-minded people. It is a story of being trapped, of compromising, of watching others move ahead and away, of becoming so filled with rage that you verbally abuse your children, their teacher and your oppressively perfect wife. It is also a nightmare account of an endless home renovation.>

While these are George’s circumstances, this not the point of the movie.  Coming out in 1946, this movie exemplifies the self-sacrifice that many Americans made during the war and the depression to get their families through.  Undoubtedly it was a paean to all those people who had sacrificed what they wanted for what was good for the country.  George Bailey still stands as an exemplary “citizen” who sacrifices his dreams–which if you look at them closely are founded on the idea of escape, and a small opinion of his small town–to care for the people of his town.  This film, for 1946, has a strong inclusive argument for immigrants.  Potter hates them; Bailey wants to give them a chance.  Certainly Capra’s viewers would have seen many immigrants in the 30s and 40s struggling with them in hard times.

The movie is also about the power of one man to fight against the greed and power of another man.  Bailey and Potter are two sides of this coin of power: Potter would rule Bedford Falls without George in his way.  But to do something great requires sacrifice.

Sadly, Jamieson doesn’t see the point of self-sacrifice.  I admire George for giving away his Honeymoon money to help the town stay afloat.  I admire Mary Bailey for all the reasons that Jamieson discounts her.  He calls her “oppressively perfect.”  I’m not sure WHO she’s oppressing.  She wants George to stay at home and raise a family, sure.  But she’s also willing to make the sacrifices and understands George’s need to help others.  She’s also the force that goes door to door to help raise funds for him.

Bedford Falls is not perfect—but it’s not stultifying.  Certainly it is better than Pottersville.  Jamieson disagrees:

Here’s the thing about Pottersville that struck me when I was 15: It looks like much more fun than stultifying Bedford Falls — the women are hot, the music swings, and the fun times go on all night. If anything, Pottersville captures just the type of excitement George had long been seeking

He later makes the point that Pottersville would have been a “resort town” and would have survived the latest crashes on Wall Street. Resort town?  Who’s he kidding.  No one looked happy or having “fun times.”  No one is happy in this version; not Mary, not Violet, not Bert or Ernie.  No one has a better life in the de-Georged version.  I saw bars and dance halls, triple X movie theatres, and people were in these places not because they were happy–they were there to drown themselves.  It wasn’t excitement.  I saw chaos.  Everyone was angry, bitter, frightened.
Jamieson catalogues George’s set of woes as if he is making a criminal case against God himself (or fate):

Soon enough, though, the darkness sets in. George’s brother, Harry (Todd Karns), almost drowns in a childhood accident; Mr. Gower, a pharmacist, nearly poisons a sick child; and then George, a head taller than everyone else, becomes the pathetic older sibling creepily hanging around Harry’s high school graduation party. That night George humiliates his future wife, Mary (Donna Reed), by forcing her to hide behind a bush naked, and the evening ends with his father’s sudden death.

Okay, I have never thought of the flirting scene with Mary as a humiliating moment with Mary, but merely of two kids who are teasing each other.  I don’t know what lens Jamieson sees this movie, but it is a twisted one–bringing out the dark elements and calling them the point.

I admire this film because it reminds us to think of others.  It is a lesson to the viewer who might be a George–that they DO count, that they have made a difference–and a template for those who might know a George on how to be a friend in times of need.  Everyone at the end sacrifices their small needs for George.  While Jamieson makes the case that George would still have been libel for the stolen money—no one in the film has accused anyone yet.  While the bank examiner has a warrant for George’s arrest–the policeman rips it in two a the party.  If they supply the $8000 back, then the money never went missing–especially if the bank examiner and the police are conspirators on forgetting the whole thing.

George Bailey is canonized in the hearts of Americans because he does good for others for the sake of doing good.  While, yes, his human rage at having been denied so many things gets the better of him at the beginning, it’s all the more to remind us how fragile our saints can be–that George is not a God nor a robot, but a man who makes the better choices each time.  Until, he can’t do them any more.

Writing a story, an author is told to torture his main character.  Good plots do this well–by taking away what our characters hold dear.  “Wonderful Life” just follows that pattern–taking away from George until he is laid bare on the night when his life could be destroyed.  His miracle is less a miracle than a vision.  It works so well as a device because despite the hocus-pocus of Becoming Pottersville, the idea is something we can actually envision for ourselves.  Each of us can imagine our own Pottersville in the wake of our disappearance–and this can reassure us in our darkest times.  I think we have all been on the bridge, looking at that swirling water.  We may need a Clarence to point out our worth, a human Clarence, which requires us to step up.  But in the end “It’s a Wonderful Life” is about the value of community–and for all George’s sacrifices he gained a community that loved him.  Don’t discount this.  In our heady, Me-oriented societies–we’re losing the idea of our community.  And when we get to the bridge, I’m afraid we won’t have a Clarence, and we won’t have the vision to see that we made any difference in the lives of others if we don’t practice self-sacrifice.  I’m not one to talk–having not done much—but I am one to watch and learn from George Bailey.

How Science Fiction has influenced Space exploration: video

s124e009982_lThe European Space Agency has a wonderful educational video (which you can hear in any language you like) that tracks the inspiration of science fiction on space exploration. Going back to Jules Verne, the ESA makes the case that inspiration pushes science. “A lot of space scientists are actually science fiction writers.” And vice versa: Working scientists become sci fi writers, and help Science make the Leap. Let’s not underestimate inspiration–without it, people don’t think of launching rockets into space, and sometimes a writer can shake out a problem that science faces by making those leaps–but don’t take my word for it. Watch the video. It’s really good and only 6 minutes long. Here’s the link.

Or if you can’t reach that link–here’s the address:

http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Space_In_Bytes/SEMNJ0STGOF_0.html

If you are a teacher, on the right at the website you’ll see lesson plans to go with the video. Inspire your students to write science fiction that will inspire scientists, or inspire your future scientists to read science fiction. We’ll all benefit from the cross pollination of ideas.

(I found this link on http://www.planet-x.com. Thanks!)

Clarion 2009 open for submission Jan 2-Mar 1

Announcing the

2009 Clarion Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers’ Workshop

@ UC San Diego

June 28 to August 8, 2009

The Clarion Workshop is widely recognized as the premier training ground for aspiring writers of fantasy and science fiction short stories. Many graduates have become well-known writers, and a large number have won major awards. Instructors are among the most respected writers and editors working in the field today. The 2009 writers in residence are Holly Black, Larissa Lai, Robert Crais, Kim Stanley Robinson, Elizabeth Hand, and Paul Park. The six-week workshop is held on the beautiful beachside campus of the University of California at San Diego .

Since its inception in 1968, Clarion has been known as the “boot camp” for writers of speculative fiction. Each year 18-20 students, ranging in age from late teens to those in mid-career, are selected from applicants who have the potential for highly successful writing careers. Students are expected to write several new short stories during the six-week workshop, and to give and receive constructive criticism. Instructors and students reside together in campus apartments throughout the intensive six-week program.

The application period for the 2009 workshop is January 2 – March 1. Applicants must submit two short stories with their application. Scholarships are available. Additional information can be found here.

For my testimonial, click on Clarion Page above.

Hearing me read my story in On Spec [online]

os_spr07Hey, you can hear me reading from my science fiction story, “Why the Poets were Banned from the City” online at On Spec: Follow this link here.

It originally appeared in the Spring 2007 issue that you see on the left. What I loved about the cover art by Robert Pasternak is that it is a wave of white horses, exactly how Whitehorse was named (for the rapids and their uncanny resemblance to white horses). It was a nice piece of synchronicity for me as a writer.

The piece is only 5 minutes long, but you can read the rest in the Spring 2007 back issue.

Much gratitude to Diane Walton and Colin Lynch of On Spec for asking me to do it. And for a great friend who helped me record it. Thanks!

On Spec is dedicated to publishing Canadian Speculative Fiction and is always looking for more. Hop around on their website this holiday and see what they’ve got.

Jon Stewart on Canadian Politics

Jon Stewart sees beautiful PLOT  up here in Canada –Yes, kids, Canadian Politics can be unpredictable! fun! full of intrigue!!  I’m learning more about Canada in this political showdown than ever before.  And if you watch Stewart, you’ll learn a bit about what his audience knows about Canada.  Apparently they don’t understand the whole GG Connection thing either!

Why You Should Subscribe to New Scientist, and why you have to put it down

phpthumbScience Fiction writers have a strange relationship to science. To write compelling science fiction, I think a writer has to do some research. Where would Crichton’s Jurassic Park have been without Chaos theory and real-life paleontologists? And you want your ideas to be ahead of the game, so get yourself some subscriptions.

I know, we are poor bastards and we can’t afford very much–certainly not expensive subscriptions.

I don’t think I could get more (Big) bang for my buck than through New Scientist. You can too.

1. It’s weekly. Meaning that when science is advancing, New Scientist doesn’t have to wait two months to come out with an issue. Discover is a monthly, and it’s a nice mag. But it can’t compete with 65-75 pages a week chock full of insightful articles.

2. It’s got short blurbs and longer indepth articles, and these can be read–some of them–online. Let me give you a sample of what’s out right now:

Why the Universe may be teeming with Aliens

Are Daughters-in-Law to blame for Menopause?

A healthy planet? Top 10 articles on the Environment in 2008

The glass universe: where astronomy meets art

Creationists Declare War on the Brain

These are the longer in-depth articles, yes, but the magazine is FULL of shorter articles. Shorter articles stimulate creativity in a way that is beneficial for a creative writer. You want a magazine that has plenty of short articles on broad topics–a whole mess of ’em.

3. It covers a lot of areas: space, environment, sex, health, physics and math, tech articles…. that’s good. Coming out once a week, it allows the magazine to be current on several areas. It allows you to cross-pollinate ideas.

4. It’s cheap. Yep, it’s from Britain, but it’s 36 bucks for 6 months or 24 issues. You can sign up online here for a subscription. Or you can browse the website first. With a subscription you get the magazine delivered to your door in uninterrupted service, and you get online access to back issues 24hrs a day. It’s cheap and it comes to you. If I had to have just one subscription to a science magazine, I would keep this one.

Writers of science fiction should certainly start with the stimulation that comes from reading science magazines–BUT, and this is where it gets interesting, I think they shouldn’t be bogged down in the details. If you are predicting the future, look how fast the present changes. I just did a radio piece talking about dark energy–which is about to be out of fashion, passé, even illusory–but in twenty years?? In fifty years?? It may be all the rage.

Science fiction writers need to be able to extrapolate from data, yes, but they also need to be able to make the Leap. Leaps are about prediction beyond what can be extrapolated. Go someplace wild with the information. Don’t be afraid to be wrong in twenty years, or in two weeks. Make it believable. But not predictable by any physics grad student. Combine fields, combine theories, and then move beyond them. Sure, it’s not real. But that’s the point of writing fiction–to be brave enough to make the leaps that science isn’t allowed to without hard fact.

If science fiction actually does lead the way in technology and science–then we’ve got to lead by going beyond what the best scientists can predict, and certainly past what the public can imagine. That’s our job–to help people imagine a believable, but still surprising and entertaining, future. That’s where your stimulated brain comes in handy……

You can start seeing that future by picking up a New Scientist issue, but you can’t create it till you’ve put the issue down.