Author: VD

They ALWAYS get it wrong

See, this is why you should never talk to the media. First, they always get it wrong. Second, if they really want to get a quote from you, they’ll just stalk social media.

The full character of the burgeoning politics of platforms remains to be seen. But right-wing movements have found early traction and see opportunity. Even as farce, Kjellberg’s performance has been illustrative, and a small number of eager observers say they hope that, as backlash mounts, it will be galvanizing. “If Pewdiepie wasn’t #AltRight before,” Vox Day, a former video-game designer and an alt-right leader posted on Gab.ai, a private, Twitterlike service popular with the movement, “he is now.”

I note, with some amusement, that I a) have been promoted to “alt-right leader” and b) just delivered a finished computer game that I designed and executive produced last week. This was the first DevGame course team to go pro, by the way, so congratulations, Team Elveteka.

While we’re on the subject, here is a character image from one of our several computer games currently in development, Divine Right, that the artist just sent me this morning. Yes, wargamers, THAT Divine Right.

In praise of moi

The estimable John C. Wright, Dragon Award-winner and grandmaster of science fiction and fantasy, explains what makes a good editor:

Someone asked me privately why I say that Vox Day is the best editor under whom it has been my privilege to work. I wrote a private answer, but I see no reason not to share it with the world. Mr. Day does not suffer from false modesty.

I do not mind elaborating.

The question is broader than just one author’s opinion about one editor. It is asking what editing is. That is a deeper question, too deep for this column, but I can plant a few signs pointing the direction where a fuller answer hides.

A good editor does not substitute his tastes, his politics, his pet peeves, or his sense of where your story should go for his own. A good editor is like a beauty parlor that brings out the best-looking version of the hair style you want framing your face, not someone else’s face.

That is, a good editor can tell the difference between the subjective and objective parts of the way one judges a story, and limit his comments to the more objective.

A good editor want you to tell your story your way, but he want you to tell it in your highest and best way, not your merely workmanlike way.

A good editor does make specific suggestions rather than vague ones, that is, he tells you which lines should be amended and how, rather than simply say “this needs to be tighter” or “this lacks punch”

Let me amend that. I should be more specific. A good editor knows when to be specific (to cure specific flaws) and when to be general (when he knows you know how to address a general flaw, and trusts you to find a specific solution). That requires good assessment both about the writing and about the writer’s professionalism.

A good editor reads the work and his comments show he understands what point each scene is trying to make, how characters develop, how description works or does not work.

A good editor keeps you informed of his decisions that might effect your book. Vox Day has contacted me more often in the last two weeks than Tor Books has in two years.

A good editor finds good covers.

There is, as you can probably imagine, considerably more there, as well as a few other Castalia authors weighing in on the basis of their own experiences working with me and other editors. For me, one of the biggest challenges in editing Mr. Wright is dealing with his massive vocabulary, which exceeds my English vocabulary, and frequently forces me, or an assistant editor, to resort to the OED in order to determine if the unfamiliar word is a typo, a misspelling, or simply a word with which we are unfamiliar.

8 times out of 10, Mr. Wright is correct and our vocabularies are expanded accordingly.

One mistake I think many editors make is to believe that they, and not the writer, should have the final say in how the book will proceed. While I will occasionally pull rank on a beginning writer whose grasp of what works and what doesn’t can be dubious, with more experienced writers I am inclined to view my edits as suggestions they can take or leave. Usually they listen, but sometimes they don’t, in which case I am content to let them take the chance that they’ll hear it from the readers as well.

It’s their name on the book, after all, not mine. Therefore, it has to be their call in the end. My primary objective as an editor is to make their book better and more successful, not make it my book. I don’t have to agree with them, or even like what they are writing, in order to do that, I merely have to understand what it is they are trying to accomplish.

Of course, it probably helps that, unlike many editors in SF/F, I am actually an established writer in my own right, so I have no need to seek vicarious input in someone else’s book. As Mr. Wright noted, I have even been known to suggest a turn of phrase or two on occasion. And, as some readers have observed, all this editing over the last three years appears to have improved my own writing, as having to articulate various issues to a wide variety of writers helps me better understand some of the weaknesses of my own writing.

In any event, I regard editing Mr. Wright as both a privilege and a serious responsibility. While it would be nice if my own books were read one hundred years from now as well, there are worse things to be remembered for than having been a grandmaster’s editor.

A tale of two techs

SJW-converged Twitter doubles down on its speech-policing:

Twitter has launched a new way to punish users for bad behavior, temporarily “limiting” their account.

Some users are receiving notices their accounts are limited for 12 hours, meaning only people who follow them can see their tweets or receive notifications. When they are retweeted, people outside their network can’t see those retweets.

Some speculate these limitations are automatic based on keywords, but there is no hard evidence.

This would be fine if this was used uniformly to clamp down on harassment, but it appears to be used on people simply for using politically incorrect language.

He claims he got his account limited directly after saying retarded twice. The first time he called a Nintendo policy adding paid extra content to their new Zelda game retarded. The next time he called someone a retard who called him a retard first.

That should help continue to drive down their user base and stock price. Meanwhile, I posted on Gab for the first time using their new Android app. It’s pretty slick for a beta, in fact, the only immediate suggestion I have is that they either expand all the Mentions to show the entire post by default, or, alternatively, provide an option to do so.

It’s fine to just have a list of all the Follows, Likes, and Reposts, but Mentions usually contains more information that requires viewing.

The Gab Android app beta is currently only available to donors.

What to do, what not to do

The Men of the West have suggestions for the Alt-Right, the Alt-Lite, and other defenders of Western civilization:

So, you have looked around and realized that the world is not how it should be. Things that were good in the past  have decayed. Our culture is crumbling around us. We see things that are good and proper being ignored or even intentionally dismantled, replaced with obscenities and evil. Whether we are talking about governmental policies or business practices, or even educational opportunities, we can no longer rely on things as they are. They do not produce an end result that indicates a healthy, godly culture. So what do we do? As I see it, we have three choices.

First, the thing we cannot do, though it is an option, is to just stick our heads back in the sand and ignore it. Look, it is time to make a stand, not just let things progress down this path to destruction.

Secondly, we can point out problems. We can gripe about them. We can write articles, blog posts, and generally complain. Now, I do think we need to do this. It is important. Without calling out the problems, nothing will be done. However, we cannot stop there.

igThird, we have to address these problems, whatever they may be, and begin to do something about them. We point them out, and then enact change. The time for “go along to get along” is past. In fact, it was never a good choice, but so many of us just figured things will work themselves out. Unfortunately, that is not the case. We have to take real action.

  • Use resources that are consistent with our world view. We recently ran a post with such resources. Make it your habit to support them, whether with finances or just by using them. The more we spread these healthy alternatives, the more people will be exposed to them and the more impact they will have.
  • Use your own skills and talents to produce more alternatives. Already, good folks have created alternatives to Wikipedia, Twitter, and more. Other alternatives are in the works. We need folks to step up and create even more of these. If your skill set allows you to help produce those, then go for it. Many, maybe most, of these won’t catch on, but so what? Some will. The more that do, the more that can follow. We just need traction to get these things to succeed.
  • Stop complaining about those who are stepping up. Rather than trying to be a “moderate,” be an extremist. This is no time for moderation. As Barry Goldwater stated: “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” We have no patience for moderates. We want wholesale change and will work to make it happen.
  • Network with likeminded folks. Recently, a commenter on this site pointed out that too many people spend time complaining and writing articles, but not enough time actually doing anything. While the majority of his post was incorrect, on this one point, he was spot on. 

These are key points. Unless you are a beta tester or a proofreader, don’t kid yourself into thinking that complaints and criticism are “helping” anyone or doing anything. They’re not. In almost all cases, the criticism is superficial and redundant, while the complaints are both irritating and demoralizing. And perhaps more importantly, if you had ever done anything yourself, you would know that.

So get involved. Do something. Act. Build. Cheer. Support. Subscribe. Sustain. That’s how you can make a difference. That’s how we will stave off collapse.

Genetic politics

It is futile to deny the impact of identity politics, given that both science and history are pointing towards the observable influence that genetics and demographics have at the macrosocietal level:

Here we identify very recent fine-scale population structure in North America from a network of over 500 million genetic (identity-by-descent, IBD) connections among 770,000 genotyped individuals of US origin. We detect densely connected clusters within the network and annotate these clusters using a database of over 20 million genealogical records. Recent population patterns captured by IBD clustering include immigrants such as Scandinavians and French Canadians; groups with continental admixture such as Puerto Ricans; settlers such as the Amish and Appalachians who experienced geographic or cultural isolation; and broad historical trends, including reduced north-south gene flow. Our results yield a detailed historical portrait of North America after European settlement and support substantial genetic heterogeneity in the United States beyond that uncovered by previous studies.

In short, their giant sample and rich genealogical data allowed them to detect large patterns of shared ancestry in living Americans. And, as expected the American nations clearly emerge from the genetic data.

How did this pattern emerge? In short, this is ultimately the result of the four British folkways of Albion’s Seed. Here the genetic data show that they remain alive and well. Previously, in my post Genes, Climate, and Even More Maps of the American Nations, we saw that the founding British colonists came from distinct parts of the British Isles and settled in different parts of North America. The founding British stock are themselves visible in the genetic data, as we saw from fine-scale analysis of Britain

So what then do the clusters of Han et al mean? While the original colonial ancestry of the country has been overrun by subsequent migrants, the founding stock remain as a genetic undercurrent – a common genetic thread – within each American nation. This is especially true in the nations of the American South, where the colonial settlers received less subsequent migration and the original stock remains strong.

Neither conservatism nor progressivism can account for the patterns and trends being observed. This is why it is vital for the Alt-Right to resolutely resist the temptation to lock itself into an ideology that will ultimately doom it to the same sort of ludicrous denial that we so often see from communists, socialists, feminists, free traders, multiculturalists, Churchians, conservatives, neo-Nazis, and others whose political identity requires them to rely upon anti-scientific, anti-historical denial.

Hitler didn’t pick me!

The opposition media is ludicrously un-self-aware:

Members of the mainstream media were left fuming this afternoon after President Trump refused to call on any of their organizations for the third straight press conference.

Yet many of these same news organizations have likened Trump to the Taliban and Adolf Hitler, floated false rumors about his use of a Russian prostitute, and accused his administration of being pro-slavery.

After Trump avoided calling on MSNBC during today’s presser with Benjamin Netanyahu, MSNBC’s Peter Alexander complained that the conservative journalists he did call on didn’t ask “real questions” like he would have.  “What was striking,” Alexander said, was that “President Trump, again, called on a series of more conservative leaning news organizations which didn’t allow for any real questions, trying to zero in on this issue of Mike Flynn, the now former national security advisor.”

We can’t speak for Trump, but one reason he may not be in a rush to give MSNBC more airtime is that they seem intent on using it to liken him to Adolf Hitler.

As SJWs like to say, speech has consequences.

Mailvox: how to mentor an SJW

A successful software entrepeneur teaches SJWs that beliefs have consequences:

After years of hearing the SJW and “allies” bash straight white men, I’m fighting back. When they ask for my advice, mentorship, a reference, a referral, leads or whatever, I now tell them that white people (and especially men!) have it too easy and their business is going to be successful no matter what. And further, it would be racist and sexist for me to help them.

The sputtering responses are so worth it.

SJW delenda est. Give them neither assistance nor mercy. Let them rely upon their privilege of which they speak so highly.

Tolkien and the rewrite of the Ring Cycle

I’m always a bit cautious taking David Goldman’s assertions at face value, because his Jewish hyperautomonomania occasionally leads his otherwise astute commentary astray into absurdities. That is why, despite not having any information at all on the subject, I tend to suspect his claim that Tolkien “despised” Wagner is at least part projection on his part.

But it is certainly interesting to observe the amazing number of structural, plot, and character similarities between The Ring of the Nibelung and The Lord of the Rings, in an old Spengler article linked at Castalia House today.

Tolkien well may have written his epic as an “anti-Ring” to repair the damage that Wagner had inflicted upon Western culture…. Tolkien himself despised Wagner (whom he knew thoroughly) and rejected comparisons between his Ring and Wagner’s cycle (“Both rings are round,” is the extent of his published comment). But the parallels between the two works are so extensive as to raise the question as to Tolkien’s intent. The Ring of Power itself is Wagner’s invention (probably derived from the German Romantic de la Motte Fouque). Also to be found in both works are an immortal woman who renounces immortality for the love of a human, a broken sword reforged, a life-and-death game of riddles, and other elements which one doesn’t encounter every day. 

Now, I don’t know how anyone with even a modicum of musical talent or appreciation could fail to revere Wagner. His is my favorite writing music, and if his Nibelungenlied fell short of his vision of a Gesamtkunstwerk, it is still one of the great artistic accomplishments of Man. Which is not to say that his Teutonic interpretation of the Norse sagas is necessarily the optimal one; Middle Earth is considerably far more relatable to the more optimistic, less doom-obsessed Anglo-Saxons and their descendants.

And, we have to recall that Tolkien was scarred by England’s two wars against Germany, and was writing in the shadow of the latter. But no one delves so deep into the work of an artist he despises, or knows it so well. I do despise Scalzi as an author, which is why I stopped reading his work after the second straight debacle. I don’t despise George R. R. Marin – as an author, you understand – because even though ASOIAF has lost the plot and devolved into a near-parody of the earlier books, there are still enough echoes of very good epic fantasy that I will finish reading whatever portion of the series he manages to finish.

At the risk of engaging in some projection myself, I think Tolkien was doing very much what I am doing with Arts of Dark and Light, which is appreciating something, seeing its flaws, and imagining how it could have been done better. And it should be no surprise that The Lord of the Rings exceeds Arts of Dark and Light; Wagner certainly makes for a higher and more challenging bar to clear than Martin.