[Welcome Charlie Stross, and Host, Paul Krugman]
[As a courtesy to our guests, please keep comments to the book. Please take other conversations to a previous thread. - bev]
The Trade of Queens: Book Six of the Merchant Princes
Charles Stross And The Family Trade
So, the obvious question: what am I, of all people, doing as host of this symposium? Shouldn’t I be writing about financial catastrophe or something?
The short answer is that Charlie Stross is one of my very favorite authors – one of the handful of living writers of whom I find myself wondering, “When’s his next book coming out? What’s he going to do this time?”
The long answer is that what drew me to science fiction, more than four decades ago – before I got into economics, and in fact part of the reason I went into economics – was a certain kind of possibility: the creation of fictional worlds, different from our own but not too different, as a way to play with ideas about who we are and where we’re going. And I do mean “play” – not being too serious, mixing ideas about society, economics, politics, and so on with derring-do and romance is crucial to keeping things light enough to tolerate.
And nobody does this better than Stross.
What Stross books should you read? All of them, if you can find the time. Is there any writer on Earth so bubbling over with ideas? His stuff ranges from more or less conventional sci-fi to the dark satire of the Laundry novels – black magic is real, but it’s based on algorithmic computations, and carried out by nerds who work for a stifling bureaucracy. (In The Jennifer Morgue we’re introduced, among other things, to a PowerPoint presentation that turns the audience into zombies. I think I’ve encountered that presentation at several conferences.) Even his short stories and novellas bear repeated rereading for their sheer intellectual cleverness – for example, nobody has made as much of the paradoxes of time travel and Stross does in his novella “Palimpset”.
But what we’re here to talk about today are the Merchant Princes novels, of whichThe Trade of Queens is, alas, the last, for now (though Stross does say that there are more story arcs in his head, which gives me hope).
I’d urge readers interested in the background to the Family Trade series to read Stross’s explanatory essay on his blog: Charlie’s Diary. In it he explains why he got into the fantasy genre, whose ideas he stole, uh, remixed, and, as I’ve already mentioned, gives us hope that there will eventually be more.
The underlying conceit in these books is that there is a family with the ability to walk between alternate universes. The universe they’re from is one in which modernization never happened and the east coast of America is at a more or less 11th-century level, ruled by Germanic warlords. The universe they go to is almost, but not quite, ours – the differences become grimly apparent by the end of The Trade of Queens. There’s also a third universe in which things went wrong in the 18th century, so that there has been an industrial revolution, but a delayed one, and representative democracy never got a toehold.
Given this conceit, Stross could have written a more or less conventional upbeat tale, in which Miriam Beckstein, his modern American protagonist (who turns out to be a long-lost member of the world-walking nobility) brings enlightenment to the downtrodden. But if he’d written that, he wouldn’t have been Charlie Stross. Instead, the novels are a tale of the remarkable ability of human societies to make the worst of opportunities. And they are, especially as you move into the later books, informed by a deep political cynicism: you should never, Stross warns us, underestimate the ability of reactionaries and authoritarians to screw things up.
So bringing modern technology from America to the Gruinmarkt, its counterpart in alternative universe #1, doesn’t bring modernization and freedom; it just reinforces the grip of a corrupt, vicious aristocracy. (Stross, unlike your typical fantasy writer, has no nostalgia for the days of kings, lords, and ladies. As he says, “If you want a modern cognate, you need to look no further than Kim Jong-Il.”) In an earlier essay on these books, I characterized them as a meditation on development economics, pointing out that the experiment of having people from an advanced society drop in on less-developed nations actually happens all the time – and that in many cases, all you get is feudalism with cell phones.
Meanwhile, in (almost) our America, the world-walkers use their talent to … smuggle drugs, with a certain Dick Cheney as their protector and enabler.
And when Miriam tries to show them another, better way, her efforts – although it seems for a while that they might be succeeding – eventually go for naught: the reactionary faction sabotages her efforts because it doesn’t want any changes that will undermine its power. And it goes downhill from there: because the reactionaries can’t be bothered to understand what makes a more advanced society tick, they bring on their own – and almost everyone else’s – destruction.
So far this might sound like it’s all about the evil of right-wingers, of various vintages – but this being Stross, it’s not that simple: there are, as he writes in his essay, no unambiguous good guys. In New Britain, alternate universe #3, the awful monarchy is overthrown by brave revolutionaries – and the result is a mess, with the clear risk that the new regime will turn out even worse than the old.
But I realize, as I write this, that it’s starting to sound as if there no sympathetic characters. In fact there are: Miriam and her growing circle of friends and allies are enormously appealing, and the novels end on a note of hope amid the disaster.
I also realize that I may be making these books sound didactic, when they’re anything but. That’s the point of great science fiction: you can have fun with ideas while having fun across the board. And Charlie Stross writes great science fiction. Read it, and enjoy.



188 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Charlie, Welcome to the Lake.
Paul, Thank you for Hosting today’s Book Salon.
Welcome to Firedoglake – glad to have you here!
Hi!
I’m pleased to be here, and many thanks to our kind hosts for setting up this chat.
And I’m open for questions …
Paul Krugman…?
Now…? Today…?
You gotta be kidding me…
Hi Charlie
So, how does it feel to do bookblogging right in the middle of a huge legislative debate? (sorry, couldn’t resist)
(NB: Earlier this week I wrote a post mortem report on the writing of this series over on my own blog: essay here.)
Good afternoon Charlie and Paul and welcome to FDL.
Charlie, I have not had a chance to read your books but based on this intro, they’re going on the “to read” list. I’ve read a lot of sci-fi over the years and am always impressed by folks who can creat entire universes out of their heads. Add in cross dimension and you hit a number of my buttons.
Welcome Charlie, really enjoy your writing. I’m at book 4 in “the Family Trade” and looking forward to reading book 5 and 6.
I really liked your spy/occult service books (Atrocity Archives, Jennifer Morgue). You’re working on more along those lines?
Well, full disclosure requires me to ‘fess up that I’m not actually American: I’m writing this in Scotland.
And I’ve been watching the whole healthcare reform debate you folks are having with the kind of baffled puzzlement that most people over here feel when they contemplate American politics. What’s the problem?
(Yes, yes, I know. It’s not about healthcare reform; it’s really about insurance industry regulation. But that’s not the point, is it?)
To the readers — actually, I need therapy and distraction right now — we didn’t plan on this timing. Meanwhile, serious question to Charlie: in the Merchant Princes novels you portray an utterly, utterly corrupt US political system. How close is that to your real perception of how things are in this universe, as opposed to the alternate one in which Dick Cheney is conspiring with extradimensional drug smugglers?
I liked the Eschaton novels too, but you’ve said no more unless you’re persuaded by large piles of incentive?
wmd1961: Yes, I am. In fact, the third book in the series, “The Fuller Memorandum”, is due out on July 6th. (And I hope there will be more.)
Prof. Krugman, thanks for introducing me to a series of books I’m now looking forward to reading! Thanks, Mr. Stross, for being here.
As a technical note, there is a “Reply” button in the lower right of each comment. When replying to a specific comment, just press the reply and it will pre-fill the commenter name and the comment number so all can follow the conversation.
(Note: if you refresh the page, some browsers don’t like the reply if you try it before the page has finished loading completely)
Wow, what a combo.
Actually this is JUST what we need today, thanks to the both of you!
Thank you Dr. Krugman and welcome to you and Charlie Stross. I’m intrigued by this from Paul:
That sounds strangely familiar, as if taken from the front pages of the NYT or a Frank Rich column. Please tell us that in at least one of the alternate universes, there is some hope of escaping this result. Are you, in the end, optimistic about our fate?
Let me say that I’ve read The Fuller Memorandum — connections have their privileges — and it’s as good as the previous Laundry novels, which is very good indeed.
Welcome and thanks to Mr. Krugman and Mr. Stross.
It’s more about US political insanity on all sides. Americans find it easy to get our blood up and then dig in.
I hope that’s a question for Charlie. It’s more or less what I want to know too.
Aloha, Charlie and Paul…! Mahalo for being here at the Lake…!
Paul, were you a big fan of Heinlein…?
Very pleased to hear that, high praise given the quality of the first two books.
I don’t think any political system recognizable as such — where political negotiations prevail, rather than the rule of gun and knife — can be 100% corrupt; but something’s clearly gone wrong, not only in the US, but in the other democracies. We see a lot of primary legislation surfacing in the wake of opaque international treaties that are hammered out and signed into law before anyone in the respective legislatures has much of a clue what’s going on; we see lawmakers in the US Congress putting forward bills that have basically been written for them by lobbyists: those who hold the purse strings have the ability to buy popularity, and that’s never a good thing.
On the other hand, the real point I was making about politics in the Merchant Princes books is that there are different models; one where politics is personal (in aristocratic/feudal/monarchical systems) and one where it’s semi-mechanized, as in our contemporary democratic frameworks. In the Merchant Princes books, it barely matters who is running things in the USA — the outcome wouldn’t necessarily be that much different whether book #6 featured the fictionalized WARBUCKS or Barack Obama in the White House.
OK, now a nitty-gritty question for Charlie. The Clan makes (or made, until WARBUCKS spoiled the fun) its money by smuggling drugs. But in their alternate universe, they seem to operate only from around Virginia to Massachusetts. How does that get drugs in from Colombia? (It’s OK to tell me to buzz off)
Welcome Charlie and Paul!
It is an odd day given the news but perhaps in some ways a very appropriate day as so many of us look for some consolation today. Science Fiction and Fantasy keep me going – reminding me of models and possibilities for the future that are worth working towards.
I haven’t read you yet Charlie but will now – adding titles to my Kindle as we type today.
There are survivors at the end of book #6, yes. And they’ve reached a tenuous sanctuary, of sorts.
(If that qualifies as optimism, so be it :)
Yes, for Charlie, but we have a rule for visiting economists; they too have to answer the questions.
Uh, you stumbled on a chunk of the back story I didn’t explore in sufficient detail to talk about. (Hand-wave: they’re intermediaries. Typical losses in wholesale drug smuggling are around 25% of shipments intercepted. The Clan can basically tell the Cartels: “we will take a 15% commission; in return we will guarantee delivery, or 100% of your money back.” Reputations matter as much in organized crime as in any other business …)
Oh, GOODY!!! I’ve just sent Mr. Marion in Savannah off to Amazon…
The question is, how did they survive? And I don’t mean the plot/story details. I mean the underlying principles that guided them. Right now, we seem not to know these things, so we’re fumbling around and many are hopeless.
Please don’t give too much away about specific characters. There’s a lot of joy in a first unspoiled reading.
It takes pretty much the whole of books 1-6 to explain how they survive; it’s not a short story!
Alas, we don’t have the quasi-magical ability to visit alternate time streams where history turned out differently. (Except in our heads.)
OK, it seems that I’m on the spot too. Let me say that I’m pretty giddy right now — although it’s telling that passing a deeply flawed piece of legislation can make people like me so happy; it’s all because of the alternatives. But look: despite everything, Western societies are a lot better than they were a few generations ago, and not just because they’re richer. There’s even some of that optimism in Strossland: America > New Britain > Gruinmarkt, so there are ways to do better. Charlie, am I being too upbeat?
Widening the focus a bit, the apocalyptic novel has become a popular form these days. Not only among the religious radicals, where “end-times fiction” has long been a popular form, but among the general public. It is hard for me to escape the sense that this is a response to perceived reality. Do you see your writing as a warning? Are you perhaps playing in the band on the Titanic? Or…?
And I’d add, I don’t think offering spoilers, that it’s the ability of at least a few people to think about where they are and where they’re going that makes the difference.
I hope there are ways to do better. (Optimist: “we live in the best of all possible worlds!” Pessimist: “I was afraid of that.”)
Actually, there might well exist better roads-not-taken, but because we didn’t take them we don’t know where they lead.
for us 50 + ers (age) it is a deeply depressing day indeed!
I’d like to second that, and add further: there were a lot of apocalyptic visions in science fiction even 30 years ago, but they seemed more of the Blade Runner cyberpunk style. And I don’t get that feel from Charlie’s work. How would you define that difference?
I must say that this sounds more like recent history than escapism.
Interesting question Raven.
A deeply flawed improvement to status quo is still an improvement to the status quo. Not that that is the prevailing opinion here.
I don’t think an alternate history of 2009 health care reform would sell, but it could make for some decent fan fiction.
I’m not into writing apocalyptic novels. (Well, not aside from the Laundry series — and “shit, Cthulhu’s returning to eat our brains! What’s our plan B?” doesn’t qualify as a serious attempt at responding to perceived reality.)
Mind you, it is increasingly difficult to see the shape of the near-future, 5-20 years out; meanwhile, the pages of Scientific American and similar are filling up every week or month with stuff that looks, to a 1970s trained eye, science-fictional. The world we live in seems to be getting more complex, dense, and richly textured, which in turn makes it maddeningly hard to plot a course. And we tend to feel insecure when we can’t see where we’re going.
If you’re giddy, then you have no idea what it’s like to live from paycheck to paycheck in this country. The people who will be forced to buy insurance won’t be able to afford to use it. That’s the clear lesson of the Massachusetts plan. Making these people buy insurance, particularly when there isn’t a hope in hell that any of the limitations on insurance provider behavior will be enforced, is as absurd as making the homeless buy houses.
What has been done in this bill is exactly what you’ve been railing about regarding the banking crisis – rewarding failure at the expense of the rest of us.
Now, could we get onto the topic at hand?
Apocalyptic novels have a long history in science fiction. They were popular when I was a child (40 years ago). I read some then from the thirties and fourties.
Just wanted to say Mr. Stross book Accelerando is one of my all time favorite books.
One thing you have said, though, is that when you try to see the shape of the future it doesn’t seem to include that sci-fi staple, manned space exploration and colonization. Does that conclusion shape your writing at all?
Blade Runner was a deeply derivative work; cyberpunk was surfacing in written SF from the early 70s onwards, and a lot of its themes reflect the way the future then seemed to be running. Japan Inc as global hegemon, multinationals running everything, interior decor stuck in an 80s bachelor-pad loop of black leather and chrome, and these clunky computer things that people plugged themselves into … it looks dystopian, but in fact most SF writers are merely reflecting the neuroses and fears of the present on the mirror of the future; those were the things that were bugging people back in the 70s and early 80s (those, and the terror of nuclear annihilation).
John Brunner had some precursor to cyberpunk 40+ years ago – Stand on Zanzibar, Shockwave Rider, Sheep Look Up… actually Blade Runner dates back to the 60s in its written form: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep
Shockwave Rider in particular still as some relevance. Isn’t Intrade basically a Delphi Pool?
If you’re counting “post-apocalyptic” fiction “A Canticle for Leibowitz” was published 50 years ago, in 1960. (Probably as a commentary on the cold war?)
Cujo, let me just say that I think the solution to your problem is to nationalize the insurance companies and establish a national single-payer. Government funded, out of the tax base, but run at arm’s length like the Postal Service.
(Such a system has done a sterling job of keeping me alive, so I’m biased in its favour … and it costs about half what you’re collectively paying at present. But what do I know? I’m just an ignorant foreigner.)
Thanks for saying that!
Great book, by the way!
I think you’ll find broad agreement with this plan among people here. The problem is how do we get Congress to do it.
Does the optimistic view spring from how you define evil? For example, it would be one thing to view the illegal drug trade as something that happens in Afghanistan, or becomes open warfare in Mexico but only a “police” matter in the US. That’s seems a terrible problem but potentially manageable, because everyone but the drug dealers recognizes the evil.
But if you define the criminal drug trade as driven by PhRMA’s stranglehold on Congress (and its deals with the WH), it’s willingness to absorb criminal fines as merely a cost of running its cartels, then its much more of a threat to democratic values and a more difficult challenge for those fighting it.
If it took six books for your protagonists to figure out how to survive, where are we today in our universe. Book 2 or Book 6?
Actually that’s a great illustration of Charlie’s dismissive assessment of Blade Runner: Stand on Zanzibar was very much taking IBM and the corporate world of the 60s and extrapolating them forward; it all looks very dated now.
You may be thinking of my flame-bait essay, the High Frontier Redux — observing that the human body isn’t adapted for space travel and that in fact we’re handicapped by needing a very restrictive set of environmental conditions to thrive in?
Yeah, that’s shaped my writing lately. But I’m a bit of a contrarian; I wrote that “why we’re never going to get much further than the moon” essay while I was hammering out the ideas for my space opera “Saturn’s Children”. And it does leave some wiggle room. Space colonization may be feasible if we can overcome any of a whole bunch of hurdles.
What I don’t see it being is economically valuable in the same way that, for example, settling the Americas or Australasia was for the European powers that did it.
Hey, we all know that. But you go to reform with the Congress — and system of campaign finance — you have.
(An observation: in the side-chat about healthcare reform, one of the echoes I’m getting in here — very strongly — is the eternal argument between pragmatism and idealism. And I can’t help feeling that there are valid criticisms to be made of both viewpoints. The demand for perfection is the enemy of the good-enough, but on the other hand if you keep making compromises in the face of implacable opposition, eventually you’re left holding nothing.)
OK, an authorly question: when I read The Family Trade I was immediately bugged by Miriam’s chair, which is — I realize I have to be careful to avoid giving a lot away — a clue that some of the supposed limitations, aren’t. But we don’t learn this, I think, until book five or so. Did you really have all this figured out from the beginning? I guess more broadly that’s a question about how pre-imagined a novel series really is.
Do you ever debate some of the other folks who have created the sci-fi where we make it out to space? IIRC, Jerry Niven and Larry Pournelle have used merchant societies as a strong part of some of their stuff.
(Assimov, Heinlein, Herbert, and Dickinson all did as well in parts of their stuff but we can’t get to their current writings of course) :})
Hopefully not in book 6. (There is a reason the cover of book 6 has mushroom clouds on it …)
One of the interesting errors in Stand on Zanzibar is the extrapolation of AI. In that book, Brunner took it that AI would be a more successful project than it has in fact been.
Just a side remark — there may be a couple of brief gaps in my participation. I was supposed to have tomorrow’s column filed by now, but I have a couple of stupid, I mean Stupak changes that have to be made.
The argument we may not be suited for space is, I suspect, the end of a larger argument that we’ve yet to prove we’re suited for earth in the long run. Our history seems to be: we can’t change ourselves, so lets change the earth, and we’re quite good at doing that without knowing where that leads. The earth is, however, totally indifferent to whether these changes doom us or save us.
Does this dilemma enter into your books?
Now you’re pinning me down :-)
Some of this stuff is actually me having to tap-dance around plot holes I unwittingly left in the earlier books. For example, the chair, the stolen ingot of plutonium, and the question of the identity of the second spy (hinted at in books 1 and 2). Because the first two books were on their way into print while I was still writing book 3, I couldn’t easily go back and edit them! And readers will only put up with so much of “oh, but I mis-spoke/mis-saw/mis-understood X” where X is some feature of an earlier book.
I had a lot of the plot figured out from the beginning, but things did run away from me a little during the writing of books 4 and 5. (Again, I’d never written a story this long before — at 650,000 words it’s about 30,000 words longer than “War and Peace”.)
There’s a difference? /snark
Yeah, grabbing hold of a few plausibly-anchoring future peeks has to be one of the more difficult aspects of righting in the SF genre. Increasing intellectual volatility vs Players forcing selected social stabilities and all the rest.
But then, you may have nailed a bit of near future with the MMO bank heist in “Halting State”. I think that recently happened on Wall Street.
You must be doing a pretty good job on describing the business side of your imagined world, or you wouldn’t have held Prof. Krugman’s attention. Do you have a background in business or finance?
The cold war was the real heyday of post-apocalyptic fiction. Nuclear annihilation as a theme was followed by biological annihilation. Today we have post-singularity fiction (to which Mr. Stross has made some notable contributions), which is not annihilation by war, but rather transformation (which can look a lot like annihilation depending upon your point of view) by technological advancement–the ultimate of Future Shock. In Stross’s “Saturn’s Children,” human beings already are all gone, succeeded by their machines. At least they miss us. Sort of.
Ooh, good question.
It doesn’t enter into the Merchant Princes books. It is, however, the huge, howling void at the heart of “Saturn’s Children”.
That novel scared me — so much of it came true, really fast!
(I am now working on the sequel, “Rule 34″, and sweating bullets. But it’s not about gaming this time; it’s about the changing social construction of crime, and how policing responds to it.)
It’s actually pretty damn good on Charlie’s part, although we need to talk about New Britain’s inflationary liquidity trap …
Hello Everyone,
Charlie
You mentioned that you are finding it harder and harder to “predict” the near future. Is that because you think there are more and more possible futures with varying outcomes, or is it because you think there are only a few, but its harder to predict which “one” will come to pass ?
Thanks
No. I have, however, worked in a variety of organizations of various sizes and cultivated my natural cynicism. (Ever wondered how the techies get screwed when a dot-com goes public? Been there, got the worm’s eye view …)
NB: am about to disappear from the keyboard for a minute to get a cup of tea. Be right back.
I pretty much reading SciFi a while ago because I just didn’t need to be depressed any worse than I already was. It seems I’ve missed a lot… I’ve loaded up the Kindle with Mr. Stross for starters.
Which leads me to a question for Mr. Stross: As an author do you get a reasonable royalty from Kindle? I love the convenience of the thing, but if it’s stealing from authors…
There is human adaptation to space in some modern authors – Lois McMaster Bujold, CJ Cherryh both come to mind.
Ah — a man after my own heart!
I think that would be a good solution. Most countries that have done something like this seem to have better health outcomes for less expenditure.
Now, I’m simultaneously peeking into another discussion forum where most people are ducking out for something stronger than tea …
I think we should keep this discussion Strossian — even if he has disappeared for a cuppa.
Since Mr. Stross has ducked out for a cuppa, Prof. Krugman may feel free to answer you. However, this is supposed to be a thread primarily discussing the book at hand… Just sayin’…
Self Deleted to remain on topic.
Charlie — if you’re back, another authorly question: what’s your daily writing routine (I have one, and wonder how different fiction is from the allegedly nonfiction econ grind)
As an SF reader of 45 years or so (1st book – Battle in a Country Garden), what has often disappointed me about SF books is a lack of thought about the real economic underpinnings of a future (or alternate) society, as opposed to the techno-gadgets, weapons, power structures, and alien interactions. In any society, one must FOLLOW THE MONEY. Mr. Stross, I’m currently online with my local library and reserving your books.
Mr. Krugman, as much as you seem to appreciate the imaginativeness of SF and fantasy, particularly in regards to the creation of new societies, your fealty to the “system we have” speaks to me of some cognitive dissonance. Why can’t you imagine and work towards something different than the present clusterf*ck? In my own opinion, as a Canadian watching in horrified fascination the current healthcare legislation/legislated rape of the American citizenry, the health insurance profit protection bill is *way* more bad than it is good.
It appears the mods may have removed an off topic comment.
I hope space is none the worse for the experience.
There’s at least one more. S/he doesn’t give up…
[snort] Until we can learn to breathe vacuum I think space is safe from us!
(Back while the tea brews)
It’s hard to forecast the future because it’s so fluid, and there’s so much more of it than there used to be!
We aren’t a monoculture any more. Nor do we consume common mass entertainment media. We’re appallingly diverse. And there are nearly seven billion of us, with more than a billion in the developed world and another 2-3 billion in countries that will be developed within a couple of decades (unless things go horribly wrong).
Consider recreational media. In the 19th century you had theatre, opera, music (mostly home-played), newspapers, novels, and maybe cock-fighting or bear-baiting or something. And sports.
Today you’ve got all of the above, plus: cinema. TV (fifty-plus channels of it.) Radio (ditto). Computer games, be they casuals played on a phone or console or mind-numbingly complex MMOs played on a computer. We’ve got the internet which explodes into blogs like this, chat, news sites, video via YouTube, and so on. And sports nobody had heard of a century ago — synchronized swimming, anyone?
In general, the dynamic of progress is to add complexity, to stick new items on the buffet rather than deleting old ones.
So the future we’re trying to predict is constantly getting denser and more gnarly.
Can I say that this is one of the great things about the Merchant Princes novels? change is *hard* — just knowing how things should be doesn’t easily get you from here to there, not in any of the three worlds in which these novels take place.
And the thing about science fiction is that it makes it possible to explore that idea, along with the alternative visions of ways society might be, while having fun. I might also note that judging from the descriptions in the books, people in these alternate universes face the same dilemmas as all of us, but are a lot better-looking, which is fine by me.
Nope. I hate the kindle. Explanations splattered on my blog for the past two months. (I’m one of those authors whose novels were de-listed by Amazon in their spat with Macmillan. Humph.)
Paul, while we’re waiting — how often do you find Charlie’s science “fiction” ideas entering into your own writings? I’m thinking of the “great forgetting,” posts. Are there other examples?
Makes Alvin Toffler’s “Future Shock” seem sweet and naive, doesn’t it?
Thanks for your reply. I’ll check your blog for details.
I’ll weigh in here too. In a lot of ways, I think we have a pretty good handle on pre-industrial societies — and not just, I think, because of hindsight. The range of political and social possibilities in a world where 92 percent of the population has to grow food just isn’t as great as one where you have as many choices as we do, to say nothing of what the future will face.
Actually on further thought Peter Hamilton has some characters that are adapted to moderate vacuum exposure in the Night’s Dawn books.
Bujold’s characters are adapted to free fall. Cherryh’s adaptations are less to space per se as to space travel, more of a Brave New World re-imagining of humans for space travel… It’s been a while since I’ve read her so take my recollection should be taken with a large grain of salt.
Doesn’t that depend on the availability of leisure time, though? We’re into the “5700
flavorschannels and nothing on” domain. That may not be the future. Or maybe we return to levels of leisure not seen since hunter-gatherer days.Daily routine: varies!
I write full-time, but I travel a lot, and I’m lousy at writing when I’m on the road.
At home … I usually start by web surfing for a few hours (including time to curate the comments on my blog: I have moderators these days, but it can get a bit frantic at times). Also slurping up the tech news sources. If I’m on a death march, it’s then straight into working on the novel for three to eight hours straight. But more often, I just hold myself to a basic quota — edit yesterday’s work and add another thousand words — then either continue (if I feel like it) or stop (if I’m tired). In general, the quality suffers if I write too much in a day — over 4000 words I have to do extensive editing, over 6000 words I end up spending extra time fixing mistakes.
And I’ve slowed down with age.
The real difference from an academic job is probably the lack of peer interaction. I don’t see other folks in my office while I’m working (aside from my wife, and/or the cats) and I tend to get feedback in a sudden deluge, when the book is published. It’s rather isolating. (Hence all that travelling.)
& the cafe I’m in is closing around me. Thank you Charlie & Prof. Krugman!
Haven’t read the books you’re referring to, but I’m wondering if those characters were descended from Himalayan dwellers?
I forget who wrote it now, might have been Kim Stanley Robinson, but I’m really not sure, but someone wrote an SF novel awhile back imagining a future where people kinda divided themselves up by the identities they chose for themselves. Rather like how religion can do that now, but for various other political, hobbyist, or entertainment preferences. One of the reasons I can’t recall who wrote it was that it was well before things like Fox News and the Internet as we now know it.
At the moment, it seems to be very prophetic.
I think that part of the reason the future is getting more complicated to predict is that all those different groups will have less idea what each other is doing as time goes on.
Thank you for the response, Mr. Krugman. It is a truism that most of us are, to one degree or another, trapped in the mindset of our native culture, which is why I identified myself as Canadian — I wanted you to realize my criticism comes from the incredulity of an outsider to present American culture. To keep the discussion in the SF/Alternate reality vein — what do you think would be a salutary, difficult-but-POSSIBLE change to American cultural/political values which would have benefits in the longer term? (i.e. something other than the current bill) As an outsider, I don’t really know how I might effect change, but as an American insider with connections maybe you have some (SFnal?) ideas.
I’m convinced that we’re living in a global meta-culture badly damaged by future shock.
The Tea Partiers are a symptom of this. So are the Young-Earth Creationists and the Biblical literalists.
Complexity hurts, and many people can’t handle it, so they retreat into comfortingly comprehensible certainties.
A rational mass transit policy might be a starting place…
Nope.
Americans strike Brits as being hopelessly overworked. (Only two weeks’ statutory vacation a year!) And Brits strike the French as being workaholics. (Only four or five weeks statutory vacation a year! 40 hour working weeks!) In terms of productivity per hour worked, the French are actually ahead, but they also have more leisure time.
The entertainment options available to Americans, Brits, and the French are, however, pretty much equivalent (if you make allowances for the relative size of the common language pool).
You really ought to read John Varley. Virtually all of his SF is populated by humans who make severe and frequent changes to their physical appearance and attributes to survive in various off-Earth environments. It is challenging to imagine, and one reason he is one of my favourite SF authors.
If I may say, speaking professionally, holy shit! I’m very fast by professorial standards, and actually quite fast by journalistic standards, but I have never written 4000 words in a day. I just finished a 3800-word piece, about material I know very well, and even so it took most of a week.
Either fiction is easier or you’ve inherited the talent of Isaac Asimov.
I wonder if there isn’t a direct causal connection there. Tired, stressed people make mistakes.
Paul, my normal productive output averages 500-600 words per day over a year.
(On the other hand? The first draft of “The Fuller Memorandum” took 24 days. Then I lay on my back and panted for a month.)
I’m pretty sure there is. ISTR an anecdote about a British software company in the 80s who did some time-and-motion studies … then banned programmers from working more than 8 hours a day; because for every hour over 8 hours that they worked, it took 90 minutes to correct the accumulated mistakes.
I’ve written up to 8,000 words in a day — but then I had to rest. I find that writing goes more quickly when I know the ending. And another key to quick writing is not to stop, and to save editing for another day. Self-editing as one goes on is the perfect way to slow down, then stop.
LARP-ification is it’s own reward.
Getting back to the intersection of science fiction and economics, there is a passage in “The Trade of Queens” that reads
“Development. In the Americans’ world there are lots of other countries. Some of them are dirt-poor, full of peasants…The rich folks can import automobiles and mobile phones but the poor are just like they’ve always been. The Americans were that way, two hundred years ago–somewhere along the way they did something right. You’ve seen how they live today. Turns out–they’ve tried it a lot in their world–if you just throw money at a poor country and pay for things like roads and schools, it doesn’t automatically get better. The economists have a bunch of theories about why, and what you need to do to make an entire nation lift itself up by its own bootstraps…but most of them are wrong…
…It’s probably some combination of money, and institutions like the rule of law and suppression of corruption and education, and a work ethic, and fair markets, and ways of making people feel like they can better themselves–social inclusion. But nobody knows for sure.”
I thought that this was a nice capsule summary of one of the central problems of our time, and echoes the sort of things that I’ve heard from a friend who’s doing development work in Iraq. I wondered if Mr. Krugman had any comments on this.
Alas, he took a right-angle turn about a decade ago. (In fact, the persistent failure to launch “Steeltown Blues” got me so annoyed that I had to write my own John Varley novel to fill in. Only it turned into “Glasshouse”.)
Can I say this is one of the more pleasant book salons we’ve had in a while. I feel like I’m in my own Backyard with a few buddies, a BBQ and a cooler.
When can we expect the series to reach films? And how do you feel about that transformation? What gets lost?
Thoroughly agree. [clink]
FWIW, the current state-of-the-art in software engineering tends toward organizational practices (Agile, XP, etc) that respect innovative slack and keep the workday sane. Some companies actually use them.
That’s actually very unlikely at this stage. It’s rare for a book to be optioned many years after publication. And this series in particular would be hard to convert for the screen without losing a lot of detail/being transformed out of all recognition.
Usually complexity and character development are the first to go… (Thinking of the first execrable movie of “Dune” here…)
Charlie is exactly right. I’ve been to Third World countries a lot, and what you see — especially in countries with high income inequality — is that they have no problems with modern technology. They have wi-fi and cell phones and fancy hotels with climate control. They may even have some elite universities. What they have trouble with is sewage and roads and public order and basic literacy; smart people with impeccable English drive purring Mercedes limos with all the creature comforts along roads where there’s a guy with an AK-47 at every corner.
Charlie,
Related to this, and to your previous comment about cultural diversity, do you think we’re going to see phenomena like Vernor Vinge’s belief circles? That is, how are people going to manage all the painful complexity of a changing present? There are already software products for ultra-orthodox jews that allow the user to filter out images and disagreeable content from the web, for instance. And of course there’s the Great Firewall of China (although that’s imposed from the top down). Do you think it’s possible that this kind of media/reality filtering could go mainstream?
I can’t vouch for that story, but I found that after ten hours I was usually undoing more than I accomplished. The only way to avoid that was to have checklists and notes to guide me through those late hours. In other words, I could do simple things like collect data from test runs and the like. Any real thinking would have to wait until morning.
Now, I suspect I’d hit that wall a lot earlier in the day…
Back in dot-com 1.0 it was all “shoot at the monkey’s feet; watch the monkey dance!”
Ah, the days when I had a to-do list 8.4 programmer-years long and three months to get it done …
Yup. Augmented reality is full of promise … and some of it is for exactly this kind of filtering.
(I hate advertising. I’d love to be able to run Adblock Plus on my glasses!)
We’re also seeing filtered news channels already. Look at Fox News’s audience for one example; or your typical FDL, or Guardian, reader for another. Our world-views are shaped by the news we consume, and you can put a radically different spin on the basic facts depending on the ideological lens you view them through.
NB: for a more radical think-through of this idea, read Karl Schroeder’s excellent SF novel “Lady of Mazes”. (Strongly recommended. Karl’s one of the best futurists writing SF today.)
Based on past experience with such trends, many more companies pretend to use them, without bothering to figure out how they’re really supposed to work.
Occasionally I’ve had great insights after a 12 hour day. But it is rare. It helps when you can take a couple hours away from the work campus to decompress before going back, those hours eating and socializing, even with some shop talk let you get back into flow.
Important note: a two hour movie is, in fictional terms, the equivalent of a 30,000 word novella — not a 100,000 word novel (much less a 150,000 word doorstep like “Dune”).
This is down to pacing, dialogue, and what you can put into a script. (Thumbnail: one page of script per minute, 100 words of dialogue per page.)
One of the things that I appreciated about the series overall was the way the plot would be going in a particular way (e.g. Miriam’s early technology transfer efforts), and just when I thought I could see where the story would be going, that particular line would be overtaken by other events. Overall, the plot was very messy compared to most literary creations–It had more of the texture of real life. I was thinking the room for such twists and turns might be a particular virtue of this longer form, which is more of a single extended novel than a series of novels (in which the individual volumes tend to have a more defined resolution).
Oh, almost ouch! However, most of us do look elsewhere. I subscribe to what I not-at-all-laughingly refer to as the “Savannah Daily Disappointment,” our daily birdcage liner. They manage to keep me very well up to date on what the knuckle-walkers are up to…
Slight outage for copy-editing of version 1 of tomorrow’s column.
Actually it’s two extended novels. Books 1 and 2 were written as a 600-page book; then Tor chopped it in two for publication. The next book was going to be a 900-page whopper, but they told me to deliver in 300 page chunks; and in the process of adding continuity, it swelled to four volumes. But yes, the development arc is paced for a really long book rather than shorter novels.
(Lesson learned? If/when I go back and write books 7-9, they will be written as a unit and delivered as such, for publication as a trilogy. That way, I can go back and fix bloopers in the first while I’m working on the last!)
I think that John Varley’s last books have been written specifically for optioning to movies. Remember that he disappeared from book-writing for several years, during which he admits he was paid obscene amounts of money to write screenplays which were never produced. Ah, the seduction of money . . . too bad it hasn’t happened to me yet!
Looking forward to it. (I just wish you didn’t have to share the page with wee Ross…)
Actually, one of them was produced — the screenplay of his Hugo and Nebula winning story “Air Raid” surfaced in the not-terribly-good movie “Millennium” (which I haven’t seen, but the book-of-the-film recaptured some of the spark of the original story).
Knowing what screenwriters get paid, and what novelists usually don’t, I can perfectly understand his willingness to go there.
Work beckons: Thank you, thank you Mr. Stross and Prof. Krugman for this welcome interlude, I wish I’d read the immediate source materials! Now adding them to the queue…
What worries me about this “augmented reality” is that without some sort of common agreement of facts, it becomes harder for people to communicate and to accommodate one another. After all if people don’t agree on the reality, how can they negotiate on how to deal with this reality. The potential for civil strife is very real and we are seeing that today.
But we already disagree on the reality!
(Hands up if you’ve ever got the feeling that the Overton window has slid so far into the Twilight Zone that you’re staring at a brick wall?)
Just to let everyone know — in the background, I’m dealing with a problem that won’t happen when IT takes over completely. The Times is a physical paper (still), which means that there are hard deadlines for particular editions; one coming up fairly soon. And we have this big vote coming late, late tonight, on a subject that I have to write about given that it’s one of my big issues. Luckily for journalism, it’s pretty clear now how the vote will go, but I can’t write as if it has already happened, so we’re engaged in complicated circumlocutions to seem hip and current without lying about what we really know as of 6:28.
I’m sure there’s a Stross novel in there …
Actually, I think we’ve reached Toffler’s Future Shock; just look at the Tea Party’s teabaggers now as well as Ted Kaczynski in the recent past and you’ll see a growing swath of people who are unable to deal with both technological and societal change.
It’s also increasingly difficult to explain what any technology does if you haven’t cut your teeth on it. There’s also pointed resistance. I’ve butt heads politically with men in their 60′s and 70′s who proudly brag of not being able to find the power switch on their computer.
Exactly. Which is why it’s so infuriating (and increasingly dangerous) that the “news” media has all but completely stopped doing their job.
I don’t suppose they’d pay you to write two columns — one for either way the coin falls …
Interesting. I read the book Millennium a good five years before the movie came out. Did not know that was the story route.
Indeed. And of course the real danger could occur if you somehow got locked into a particular set of filters. What if you lived in a community, for instance, that only allowed a certain type of filter? (Imagine it was set up 10 years from now: what would the internet filters look like in Paulville? (paulville.org))
I think we’re there. Talk with your average Teabagger, Fox News listener, or Christian fundamentalist. I’ve even had this experience with libertarians. We don’t just disagree on the implications of reality, but on what is actually real. We all seem to have our own mythologies.
Worse: men in their 50s. (It’s widely reported that Tony Blair didn’t read his email on a computer — he had a secretary print it out, hand-wrote replies, and someone else typed them up and sent them.)
It’s a generational thing, but a very dangerous one.
I saw Millennium. It sucked. High. And hard.
William Gibson (Neuromancer) is another great novelist who took, like, five years off to write unproduced screenplays and make his fuck-you money. Would I take it? Of course!
maybe if you write that it didn’t pass, we’ll get a reprieve from this monstrosity passing. no, i didn’t forget that you’re gleeful about its passage. i’m just as glum as you are gleeful.
These days, on a bill like this one, when the vote comes you know how it’s going to turn out.
Charlie — do you think the concerns about “augmented reality” and complexity are generational. E.g., our children play these extremely fast, complex video games, while the parents can hardly follow what is happening. I wonder if the human mind is expanding/speeding up to deal with this, and if so, that theme finds a home in your SF work. Is the “optimism” related to expectations to what future generations can do that we can’t see ourselves doing?
I liked the novel, which I seem to remember came out before the movie, for some reason. Anyway, the book’s idea was an interesting one. Unfortunately, even that comparatively simple concept didn’t translate well to the screen.
You don’t need to imagine that — just read “The Star Fraction” by Ken MacLeod.
(NB: I’d highly recommend Ken’s “Fall Revolution” tetralogy to FDL readers. Currently being republished by Tor in the US in two trade paperback omnibus volumes, as “Fractions” and “Divisions”, it’s a near-future SF tetralogy that examines different types of left-anarchist thought in light of posthumanist ideology and technologies such as AI and mind uploading. The politics is nonlinear enough that the Libertarian Futurist Society gave the books two Prometheus awards for libertarian SF before anyone realized that Ken is a sometime communist …)
Do you now have more freedom to sit on a multivolume series until all volumes are written? Seems like financial pressures might make that hard for some authors.
You know, when men in their 50′s do that crap — and we’re talking about 7-10 years ago, given Blair’s age — the challenge wasn’t with technology.
It was with power.
As in, “You are my little bitch, just remember who’s calling the shots while you print this out right now.”
Men who can’t handle business at the speed of email today are not at the top of the power pyramid now.
Hey, I’m in my 50s! But actually it’s true. On the other hand, going back to the Merchant Princes, knowing how to use modern technology doesn’t make you a modern person — that’s sort of the whole point. I was at a Gulf State conference where they allowed audience members to text questions to the speaker, because it turns out that the Arab elite refuse to put down their cell phones; that did NOT turn them into the political or moral equivalent of a group of Londoners or New Yorkers.
Thanks to Prof. Krugman for hosting Mr. Stross. This discussion has been a true delight, but it’s time for me to go and start thinking about dinner. Thanks again to y’all.
I can actually second this recommendation. I read “The Cassini Division” and loved it. I just haven’t gotten around to reading the rest yet.
Oh dear. That will surely wind up on Glenn Beck.
Funny you should ask about generational concerns.
I’ve just been watching my way through an old (early 1970s) British SF TV series (Doomwatch), and while some of the episodes are chillingly topical even today, some of them reflect almost ludicrous attitudes towards what have become normal elements of our technoculture — for example, genetic engineering today is just biotech as usual, but in 1972 there was an almost religious dread associated with it.
I think there are limits to how much multi-tasking and complexity we can handle — limits dictated by our cognitive bandwidth and our neural architecture — but we’re also raising concerns about stuff due to its unfamiliarity rather than our own incompatibility with it.
(Why, one day trains might run at 60 miles per hour! But they’ll be unmanned! After all, if passengers travelled at that speed, all the air would be sucked out of their lungs …)
Hollow laughter.
(Sorry. I can probably do a series as a single unit … if I negotiate a three-book deal with a big enough advance, and can get them written in 12-18 months so that I can live off the advance. Five years in the wilderness? Not so much …)
Ahem: “The Cassini Division” is the third book in the trilogy (or rather, one of the two alternate endings). And? Unreliable narrator with genocidal leanings towards AIs. Ahem.
I’m in my 50′s, and I have no problem with the technology itself. The biggest disconnect that I perceive is social changes that have arisen out of technology. Today’s young people have grown up with cell phones and texting. The way in which they are in nearly continuous contact with their friends every waking hour seems very strange to me, even though we 50-somethings are slowly coming around to Facebook and the like.
The idea that technology dictates cultural behaviour seems to me to be one of the besetting, dangerous delusions of many westerners — from silicon valley techno-libertarian business types to the US state department (who seem to assume, for example, that Iran views — and will use — nuclear technology exactly the way that the US state department would, if you moved State several time zones east and stuck them in charge of the former Persian empire).
William Gibson said, “the street finds its own uses for technology”. For “the street” substitute “any culture you care to name”.
Can’t resist: historically, there was one biotechnology that was a huge disaster, causing mass death. It’s called “raising livestock”: read Plagues and Peoples, or Jared Diamond. Huge epidemics, recapitulated whenever new trade routes opened.
So disastrous consequences from new technology can happen …
Yeah, but what if we don’t really know the “limits dictated by our cognitive bandwidth and our neural architecture,” and in fact we’re not even close to those limits, and the technology — e.g., X-Box — is unlocking more bandwidth then we knew existed? Watching the kids play these extremely fast-moving games, to realize they’re not only following what’s happening but interacting with it, even though I can’t absorb any screen fast enough to now what to do — there must be something there other than my own limits.
A guy who worked on Avatar was explaining to me recently that a lot of what we watch today is so much more complicated than what audiences could tolerate a generation ago — audiences would have freaked out, because their brains weren’t yet conditioned to comprehend everything they were seeing on the screen.
A word on behalf of the State department — under current management, they’re smarter than that; my former dean now heads policy planning …
Could be. Another possible explanation is that, and even as someone who worked with computers for a long career, it’s hard to imagine Tweets and Facebook notes and the like ending up as museum exhibits the way Jefferson’s or Truman’s letters were. Paper has a certain quality of permanence, at least to guys my and Phony Tony’s age.
Of course, there’s a flip side to this; by raising livestock — notably oxen and horses — our ancestors massively enhanced their ability to cultivate and store crops (animal-drawn ploughs, plus transport).
Yes, zoonotic diseases killed a huge proportion of the human population — but without animal husbandry there’d have been fewer people to kill because agriculture and hunting would have hit the population density buffers earlier.
(Head hurts, now.)
As we come to the end of this great Book Salon.
Charlie, Thank you for stopping by the Lake and spending your evening with us discussing your new book.
Paul, Thank you very much for Hosting this great Book Salon.
Everyone, if you haven’t bought Charlie’s book yet, here is a link.
Thanks all.
On that note, I haven’t seen Avatar. And I won’t be seeing it in 3D — my eyeballs are ‘B’-graded stock — and I couldn’t even finish the first of the Lord of the Rings movies. The cinematography style of modern films (with lots of fast, continuous panning and zooming across visually dense fields) only works for people with working retinas!
OK, folks, I’m going to have to split a few minutes early — Charlie can take care of himself, I’m sure. Enjoy.
Thanks very much for having me here! It’s been a pleasure!
(I’ll be sticking around for a little longer, but it’s 11pm over here …)
Yeah, isn’t that amazing? I think a great example is the way half-hour prime time TV cop shows used to have a single plot line they followed all the way through the show. And then Hill Street Blues came along and the world wasn’t the same again. We can’t do just one storyline or the programming seems draggy.
Look at how multiple feeds affects sports news consumption — jillions of crawls and stats all over the place. Political reporting had to keep up.
I think it remains to be seen if your dean’s view will prevail. I sometimes wonder if Dawn Johnsen had been confirmed as OLC director in Feb. of 2009, if things would be any different now relative to Guantanamo or releasing torture documents. My guess is that they wouldn’t have. Being there isn’t enough – the guys in charge have to want to listen.
Am so glad and thankful both Charlie and Paul could be here today, like a respite from the crazy circus of legislation and March Madness.
Thank you so much.
Never underestimate the power of institutional inertia to put the boot in on substantive change.
Thanks much to Charlie Stross and Paul Krugman. Fun, smart discussion.
Thanks to both of you.
This behavior of hereditary elites with respect to technology and power in the Merchant Princes series which I have read and liked, also appeared in a different context earlier in “Singularity Sky”. Did the latter book get you thinking about the “Merchant Princes” series ?
I worked with the DoD for almost thirty years. Institutional inertia there could be the key to energy independence, if we could just figure out how to harness it. Still, things do change there, on occasion. They never change if the leadership doesn’t want them to, though.
I was thinking along those lines at the time — I wrote “Singularity Sky” in 1996-99, and began “A Family Trade” in 2001 — but they’re not directly related.
I think it’s more a case of having read enough history to have an idea about how hereditary elites operate. (And being British. I will never understand why so many Americans are fond of royalty and aristocracy … another term for “king” is “hereditary dictator”, after all.)
By the way, I liked “Singularity Sky” too and here is another vote for that
‘batshit insane alt-hist diesel punk novel” mentioned in your blog.
Thanks to both Prof. Krugman and Charlie Stross for an interesting discussion. These books sound like an interesting series.
You’ve got five minutes from now to ask any final (brief) questions. Then I’m out of here (it’s heading for bed-time).
The title of one of your books is The Merchants’ War, which also happens to be the title of a book by Frederick Pohl, which I found to be a delightful bit of social satire. Has his work had any influence on you?
While I’ve read a lot of Pohl’s work in my youth, I’d entirely forgotten about his book of that name when I chose mine. More inexplicably, my editor at Tor (David Hartwell) didn’t remind me!
Ah well.
Thanks for listening to me blather; I may be around again some time in the future.
Bye!
It’s not one of his more popular ones, if the listings at Amazon are any guide.
Thanks for chatting.
As we just saw today, sadly.
Wish I coulda hung around to chat!