Changes Coming to the Elfyverse
Folks, changes are coming to the Elfyverse. The first is a very positive one: I now have a publisher for my novel, Elfy. However, as the publisher has not yet made this information public, I am going to hold off on announcing exactly where Elfy is going, for now . . . I promise that as soon as I am able to discuss where Elfy has been placed, I will do so.
Second, as long-time readers of this blog will undoubtedly note, I’ve taken down my links to e-Quill Publishing. There’s a reason for that; as of yesterday, I asked that my stories — and my late husband Michael’s stories, also — be removed from e-Quill Publishing’s offerings. I did this not from any feelings of ill will toward e-Quill Publishing or its publisher, Lawrence T., but because I now have a publisher for Elfy. The new publisher is willing to look at my late husband’s writing, and if this publisher indeed is interested in the two “Maverick” novellas (set in Michael’s Atlantean Union universe) or the three “Columba” stories (romantic fantasies, which I hope to show the new publisher down the line, too), it would be a big step up for me to place them with the new publisher.
That’s why, for the moment, I don’t have a Gravatar listing here at my blog, and it’s also why I no longer have stories offered at e-Quill Publishing.
Lawrence T. and I remain on good terms, which I think is a very good thing; he’s the first person in a long time who enjoyed my writing, and Michael’s writing, and wanted to showcase it at his small publishing company in Australia. Lawrence T., being a classy gentleman of the old school, wished me well in my new publishing endeavors, too — and told me that if the new publisher wasn’t interested in Michael’s work, or in anything else of mine save Elfy, he’d be glad to publish my work (and Michael’s work, too) any time, any place, anywhere.
At any rate, the projected publication date for Elfy is late in 2013 — that much I can share with you, thus far — and aside from that, I continue to work on An Elfy Abroad (the sequel to Elfy) and Keisha’s Vow (the prequel to Elfy, set in 1954) along with my non-Elfyverse urban fantasy/spiritual transgendered romance, Changing Faces.
Everything else remains on course, which just goes to show you that regardless of how it may seem sometimes, persistence does pay off. (And maybe the good woman wins in the end, too. Here’s hoping.)
Neil Armstrong Dies at 82
Tonight, raise your glass to commemorate the life of Neil Armstrong, a remarkable man who made history, yet remained humble afterward. He died today at 82.
Now, most of us know that Armstrong was one of the United States of America’s first astronauts and the first man on the moon. But did you know that Armstrong was also an engineer, a businessman, a farmer, and the role Armstrong seems to have relished the most, that of a “quiet old retired guy?” (I hadn’t, and didn’t, before I read so much today about Armstrong’s life after the moon landing.)
Please see this link for more information about Armstrong’s remarkable life and career; a brief excerpt follows:
Armstrong commanded the Apollo 11 spacecraft that landed on the moon July 20, 1969, capping the most daring of the 20th century’s scientific expeditions. His first words after setting foot on the surface are etched in history books and the memories of those who heard them in a live broadcast.
“That’s one small step for (a) man, one giant leap for mankind,” Armstrong said.
In those first few moments on the moon, during the climax of heated space race with the then-Soviet Union, Armstrong stopped in what he called “a tender moment” and left a patch commemorate NASA astronauts and Soviet cosmonauts who had died in action.
“It was special and memorable but it was only instantaneous because there was work to do,” Armstrong told an Australian television interviewer this year.
Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin spent nearly three hours walking on the lunar surface, collecting samples, conducting experiments and taking photographs.
“The sights were simply magnificent, beyond any visual experience that I had ever been exposed to,” Armstrong once said.
The rest of the Yahoo article points out the historical significance of Armstrong’s moonwalk, puts Armstrong’s life in context, and discusses Armstrong’s private life (which was very, very private indeed).
Armstrong leaves behind his wife of thirteen years, Carol, and two grown sons from a previous marriage — and, of course, the many people around the world who remember his remarkable achievements, and will forever more.
Lance Armstrong: Victim of Anti-doping Turf War?
Folks, I’m unhappy that seven-time Tour de France winner and noted cyclist Lance Armstrong has been stripped of his titles by the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA for short). There are many stories about this right now; here’s one about a federal judge tossing Lance Armstrong’s suit against the USADA, and here’s another regarding what the USADA did after the lawsuit was tossed.
In addition, the USADA has banned Armstrong, who is a retired American cyclist, for life from all cycling events under its jurisdiction.
However, there’s a bit of a turf war going on. The International Cycling Union says that it’s the organization that has jurisdiction, not the USADA. And the ICU wants to know why, exactly, Armstrong should give up his seven Tour de France titles; apparently the USADA has not made its case to them.
My take on this is simple: Armstrong may well have used blood transfusions, but he was and is a cancer survivor. This may have been a part of his treatment; if so, the USADA should’ve left this alone. As for the whole notion of Armstrong using EPO, a banned substance, I think it’s been sixteen years since Armstrong first won a title. He’s a retired competitor. The USADA should’ve left this alone, too.
See, right now, sports seems to want to tear down its heroes. Whether it’s Ryan Braun in baseball or Lance Armstrong in cycling, the various anti-doping agencies seem to be on a crusade. This isn’t necessary. Worse yet, it causes immense damage that is incredibly hard to fight, even if you’ve made millions upon millions of dollars like Armstrong, had an exceptionally good and lengthy career like Armstrong, and even if you’re able to hire the best lawyers possible.
This is why Armstrong ended up ending his fight against the USADA — it’s incredibly difficult to prove that you are innocent, especially sixteen years after the fact. Then when you add in the fact that the ICU doesn’t believe the USADA has the proper jurisdiction anyway, it’s obvious why Armstrong decided to end his fight.
To me, the fact that Armstrong has stopped arguing with the USADA does not prove that he used banned substances. All it proves is that the USADA is on a witch hunt. And by besmirching Armstrong and his legacy, it apparently feels like it’s doing the right thing — even though 99 out of 100 people would’ve told the USADA to back off years ago, especially considering the fact that Armstrong is a symbol to millions and that Armstrong has retired from competitive cycling.
This is what should be at the bottom of every serious story about Armstrong — the fact that there’s an anti-doping turf war going on — yet because this fact hasn’t been brought up nearly as much as it should, we’re getting all sorts of stories on the Internet about how Armstrong’s legacy has been completely ruined.
Hah!
Once again — the only ruination that’s occurred here is to those fanatics at the USADA, who really should’ve butted out of this one. Even if they’re right about what Armstrong did (something I find very hard to believe), they’re wrong about how they did it. And that wrongness is something that needs to end, here and now, before it ends up hurting another competitor who has far less money, energy, or time to fight than Armstrong did — ’cause as bad as these things are for Armstrong, at least he did fight and that shows that he believes himself to be innocent.
All the hand-wringing from well-known sports columnists aside, the fact of the matter is that the ICU thus far has refused to strip Armstrong of his titles just because the USADA threw what amounts to a huge hissy fit. People need to know this and realize that the way the media has slanted this story has got to end. (In other words, the narrative framing here is biased against Armstrong and is prejudiced instead in favor of the USADA.)
And I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m far more concerned with what a sports star does on the field — or on the track, as in the case of Armstrong — than whatever little turf war the USADA wants to win at the moment. (Aren’t you?)
Just Reviewed Books 6 and 7 of “The Mageworlds” Series at SBR
Folks, if you haven’t read Debra Doyle and James D. MacDonald’s writing yet, you really should. These two writers have written interesting, relevant novels for the past twenty-five to thirty years; their signature series, “the Mageworlds,” ran to seven books, is intricate, rousing, and extremely moving. (Not bad for a series initially dismissed by some as a Star Wars knockoff.)
Anyway, here’s a link to my review of books 6 and 7 — these books are THE STARS ASUNDER and A WORKING OF STARS, respectively:
Go read my review, then go read these books!
August 2012 Quick Hits, Part Three
Folks, once again I have very little time and way too many subjects to write about, so here’s some more “quick hits:”
First, I was saddened to see that the Milwaukee Brewers released lefthanded pitcher Randy Wolf today; worse yet, today was Wolf’s thirty-sixth birthday, which seems a bit cold even for the Brewers front office staff. The Brewers made this move because Wolf has a 3-10 record and an ERA over 5.00; that the Brewers are out of playoff contention also undoubtedly had something to do with Wolf’s early dismissal.
Second, the Brewers beat the Chicago Cubs today, 3-2, to sweep the Cubs. Today’s game was notable as it’s the second game in a row Brewers manager Ron Roenicke actually pulled relievers when they were doing poorly; by getting those relievers out quickly, rather than letting them stay in for a whole inning and give up several runs, the Brewers actually won yesterday and today’s games. (Maybe Roenicke is finally learning, eh? Either that, or pitching coach Rick Kranitz is shouting louder into Roenicke’s ear.)
Third, I spent a lot of time today — for me, anyway — signing various petitions to overturn Citizens United in the only way we can: by the United States Congress passing an amendment to the Constitution that would disallow exorbitant amounts of corporate money that are now flowing into every election in the country. We saw huge sums of money in Wisconsin during our past recall elections in 2011 and 2012, but those sums will be dwarfed by the various Congressional and Senatorial races, not to mention the 2012 Presidential race.
So much money in politics is very bad news for the average, run-of-the-mill citizen. This should go without saying, but as it isn’t, it’s time for a Constitutional amendment.
If you, too, want to sign the various petitions out there, I suggest you go to Sherrod Brown’s Web site first, then Google “overturn Citizens United petition” and go from there. (Change.org has a good one that I signed, too; it’s sponsored by CREDO Action. Even the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee — the DSCC for short — has gotten into the act, and yes, I signed that one also.)
Finally, Missouri Senate Candidate Todd Akin (R) has not withdrawn his name from consideration. Akin seems to believe that he will be able to beat embattled Senator Claire McCaskill (D) despite his awful statement about “legitimate rape” and how if someone has been “legitimately raped” that she will supposedly not get pregnant. (I wrote about this a few days ago; follow the back arrow to see that post.)
Even though I’m not a Republican, I believe we need good candidates for every office in the land regardless of party affiliation. That’s why Akin should’ve stepped down; whether he wins or not (though my money is on him losing, and losing big, partly due to his new insistence that he only used one “bad” or “wrong” word — that word being “legitimate” — and that “(his) heart” shouldn’t be judged), he’s shown himself incompetent to hold the high and important office of United States Senator.
And if I were a voter in Missouri — I’m not, thankfully — I’d be hopping mad that this man refused to step down when a better candidate could’ve still been appointed. Because really, if Akin doesn’t think rape victims can get pregnant if a rape is “legitimate,” why should his appalling display of ignorance win him any votes at all? (Doesn’t he realize that women of all shapes, sizes, ages, and yes, even party affiliations, have been raped in the past? And that some of them have indeed gotten pregnant from “legitimate” rapes?)
US Senate Candidate Todd Akin of MO Believes “Legitimate Rape Victims” Won’t Get Pregnant
Folks, I’ve seen some bad politicians in my lifetime. And I’ve seen some stupid ones, too. But rarely have I seen such utter stupidity — not to mention total ignorance of biology — on display by a bad politician as with the comments of United States Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO), currently running for the US Senate against incumbent Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO). Akin believes that victims of “legitimate rape” are not likely to get pregnant because apparently the female body “will shut (stuff like that) right down.” Here’s his full comment, in context, from a recent post at Talking Points Memo:
Rep. Todd Akin, the Republican nominee for Senate in Missouri who is running against Sen. Claire McCaskill, justified his opposition to abortion rights even in case of rape with a claim that victims of “legitimate rape” have unnamed biological defenses that prevent pregnancy.
“First of all, from what I understand from doctors [pregnancy from rape] is really rare,” Akin told KTVI-TV in an interview posted Sunday. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
Akin said that even in the worst-case scenario — when the supposed natural protections against unwanted pregnancy fail — abortion should still not be a legal option for the rape victim.
Obviously, Akin is plain, flat wrong. (Not to mention unlettered, ignorant, and in need of a basic health refresher course.) Pregnancy can occur with any unprotected sex between two people, and while rape is much different than “unprotected sex,” rapists don’t usually wear condoms, nor do they worry about birth control.
You’d think all of this goes without saying, but apparently to someone like Akin, it doesn’t.
Look. As President Obama said today, “rape is rape.” Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, too, has condemned Akin’s statement, calling it “insulting” and “inexcusable.” Good for them.
Indeed, many in the GOP has condemned Akin, yet the main problem the GOP has right now is that Akin, along with GOP VP candidate Paul Ryan, himself a US Rep. from Janesville, WI, tried to get a law through the House of Reps. that used a similar term — “forcible rape” — to limit government aid for abortions.
Here’s a link to one of the best articles I’ve managed to find yet regarding why Akin’s shocking remark may torpedo the GOP’s chances in Missouri and elsewhere; the upshot is that Akin knows Ryan well, and because of what amounts to secondhand contamination — and well-known, long-held similar views with regards to rape — this may hurt the GOP Presidential ticket in the fall.
Conservative commentator John Podhoretz, writing in Commentary Magazine (here’s the link), describes Akin’s remarks thusly:
The moral, intellectual, and spiritual ignoramus who spoke those words is Todd Akin. He won the Missouri primary two weeks ago in a three-way race against two other conservatives, taking 36 percent of the vote—his two major rivals together won about 60 percent.
The PJ Tatler bluntly says this about Akin’s remarks:
This isn’t a gaffe. It’s a nuclear bomb.
Exactly so.
My advice to Akin is this: withdraw from the US Senate race while the getting’s good. (As I understand it, Akin has about a day to withdraw, then the Missouri GOP can field another candidate. Anyone would have to be better than this guy.) Then figure out a new line of work, hope your Congressional pension will be good enough for you to while away your golden years, and do your best to stay away from microphones for the good of all concerned.
I’d also suggest taking that refresher course on basic human biology, too, as that might keep you from making any more small-minded and uninformed comments. But that’s only something you should do if you wish to rejoin the rest of the human race as an informed, thinking, and feeling human being . . . no pressure.
Plagiarism, Pt. 2 — Zakaria Cleared, Reinstated by Time and CNN
Well, folks, I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised — yet I am.
It appears that Fareed Zakaria, who blatantly plagiarised from a column by the New Yorker’s Jill Lepore for his most recent column at Time magazine, then got suspended last week from both CNN and Time (my earlier blog post about this is here), will resume his jobs in September.
Here’s tonight’s article from the Huffington Post, which states:
Fareed Zakaria is off the hook at both Time magazine and CNN after he admitted plagiarizing a New Yorker column last Friday.
The upshot of the article is, Time and CNN both have agreed to let Zakaria keep his jobs even though Zakaria most definitely plagiarised from Lepore. Zakaria’s employers view this as an “isolated” incident, even though Jeffrey Goldberg from The Atlantic pointed out back in 2009 that Zakaria had also plagiarised him without attribution.
Basically, Zakaria is getting away with doing something unconscionable, merely because he is a celebrity. This should not be tolerated, but apparently in today’s hyper-conscious celebrity culture, the bigwigs at Time and CNN just don’t care.
And by refusing to can Zakaria due to his plagiarism, it’s obvious that journalistic ethics — writerly ethics — have gone out the window at both CNN and Time. Despite the fact that they’re supposedly devoted to the news. Despite the fact that they should wish those who report the news for them will be honest, fair-minded, and at least have the common courtesy to properly attribute their sources.
I’m shocked that Time and CNN have chosen this course. They’re both news-oriented organizations. The people who work for them should be above reproach.
Yet Zakaria no longer can be considered above reproach, if indeed he ever was — which is why he should’ve been fired without delay no matter how high-profile he is and no matter how much of a celebrity, either.
By retaining Zakaria despite his blatant plagiarism, both of Zakaria’s employers have proven that the almighty dollar matters far more to them than the truth. Or ethics. Or even common sense.
Even in this day and age, wrong is wrong — and we all know that what Zakaria did is plain, flat wrong.
Usually, committing blatant acts of plagiarism is the one thing that can get a reporter, host, or “basic writer” fired without an appeal. It’s utterly wrong that Zakaria didn’t even have to sweat a little bit before he found out that he would, indeed, keep his jobs.
Instead, it appears he got what amounts to a “get out of jail free” card from his employers.
That’s wrong.
That’s shameful.
And it should not be allowed to stand. Period.
Quick Hits, August ’12, pt. 2
Folks, it’s been a few days between blogs, mostly because I’ve had much to do and little time to do it in. But I do have a few things to discuss, so let’s get to it.
Congratulations go out to Seattle Mariners’ pitcher Felix Hernandez, who pitched a perfect game on Wednesday, August 15, 2012, against the Tampa Bay Rays. (One of the many excellent stories about Hernandez’s perfecto can be found here.) This was the third perfect game thrown this season by major league pitchers, and it’s already one more than was thrown in the entire 2011 season.
On a milder note, but staying with baseball, congratulations should also be given to Milwaukee Brewers first baseman/right fielder Corey Hart. Hart, you see, hit a grand slam home run in the eighth inning last night against the Philadelphia Phillies; that grand slam home run was the difference in a 7-4 win for the Brewers. (And to think that Hart had been 0-for-3 with three strikeouts before that, though that’s a bit deceptive as Hart’s previous three at-bats had come against Phillies ace Cliff Lee.)
And in more baseball news, former Brewers ace Ben Sheets, now with the Atlanta Braves, currently has a 4-2 record with a 2.13 ERA in 38 innings pitched; Sheets has also given up 8 walks and has marked 28 strikeouts during that time. (An excellent article from Bleacher Report about Sheets’s comeback is available here, if you’re interested.) Sheets’s comeback has proven to be “the real deal” and I couldn’t be happier for him (in my view, once a Brewer, always a Brewer; best of all in Sheets’s case, he’s on a contending team).
Finally, the Racine Concert Band will play its final summer concert this Sunday at the Racine Zoo. (Showtime is 7 p.m.) So if you’re in the mood for a free concert, please be sure to stop on by and listen to the band.
Writer Fareed Zakaria Suspended from Time and CNN for Plagiarism
On August 10, 2012 — two days ago, to be exact — Fareed Zakaria, a writer for Time magazine and a host at CNN, was suspended for plagiarism. Something like this happens only rarely to top-level, nationally-known pundits, which is why I wanted to see what the fallout would be before I wrote about it.
Here’s what happened. Zakaria wrote a column on gun control for Time that used a number of passages from a similar article by Jill Lepore that appeared in the April edition of the New Yorker. Here’s a copy of what Lepore wrote back then:
“As Adam Winkler, a constitutional-law scholar at U.C.L.A., demonstrates in a remarkably nuanced new book, ‘Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America,’ firearms have been regulated in the United States from the start. Laws banning the carrying of concealed weapons were passed in Kentucky and Louisiana in 1813, and other states soon followed: Indiana (1820), Tennessee and Virginia (1838), Alabama (1839), and Ohio (1859). Similar laws were passed in Texas, Florida, and Oklahoma. As the governor of Texas explained in 1893, the ‘mission of the concealed deadly weapon is murder. To check it is the duty of every self-respecting, law-abiding man.’”
Now, see Zakaria’s version of the same thing from his recent column in Time magazine:
“Adam Winkler, a professor of constitutional law at UCLA, documents the actual history in Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. “Guns were regulated in the U.S. from the earliest years of the Republic. Laws that banned the carrying of concealed weapons were passed in Kentucky and Louisiana in 1813. Other states soon followed: Indiana in 1820, Tennessee and Virginia in 1838, Alabama in 1839 and Ohio in 1859. Similar laws were passed in Texas, Florida and Oklahoma. As the governor of Texas (Texas!) explained in 1893, the ‘mission of the concealed deadly weapon is murder. To check it is the duty of every self-respecting, law-abiding man.’”
As you see, there’s little difference.
What’s worse, there’s no excuse for this — none whatsoever — because Zakaria did have other options than to simply lift a passage from Lepore’s piece without proper attribution.
The first and easiest thing Zakaria could’ve done is this — give Lepore her due. Say, “Recently, in the New Yorker, Jill Lepore wrote an excellent article on gun control. As I cannot improve upon her words, here’s what she said back in April:” and go on from there.
But Zakaria had a second option available as well if Time wouldn’t go for that. He could have either used a different source, or if he really liked Adam Winkler’s book, he could’ve interviewed Winkler directly, thus getting different words but getting at the same thing. This would not have been plagiarism because Winkler, as an author, is allowed to cite his own words whenever he feels like it. And if Winkler wanted to point out that Lepore had written an article back in April that was really good, Zakaria could’ve mentioned that without using any of Lepore’s words, too.
And do you know what else shocked me? This isn’t even the first time Zakaria has been accused of plagiarism. Because as an article by Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic back in 2009 points out, Zakaria lifted some of his words, too!
So it appears that Zakaria has been lifting quotes from other people and not giving proper attribution for years. However, this time, he lifted a whole paragraph, which is why he got caught.
So what did Zakaria do after he got caught? He apologized, which is here:
Media reporters have pointed out that paragraphs in my Time column this week bear close similarities to paragraphs in Jill Lepore’s essay in the April 23 issue of The New Yorker. They are right. I made a terrible mistake. It is a serious lapse and one that is entirely my fault. I apologize unreservedly to her, to my editors at Time, and to my readers.
The problem with the apology is, it’s too little, too late. Zakaria knows better than this. Writers, reporters, journalists, and even hosts — like he has been on CNN for years — know that the only thing we have going for us, ultimately, is our bare word that we’ll tell the truth as we know it. Any writer worth his or her salt knows that. And we know that if we plagiarise, our credibility is completely and utterly blown. Forever!
And as I said before, Zakaria had other options. He did not have to do this. He should not have done this. And he deservedly got suspended for doing it anyway.
What’s truly sad and shocking about all of this is that Zakaria still has the potential to go back to work, when so many other writers who would never have done what Zakaria just did either aren’t working at all, or are working far below their capacities. No other writer I know would catch a break like this, yet it appears Zakaria just might due to his celebrity status.
And that’s wrong — so wrong that I do not have the words to explain just how wrong it is.
Look. Writers write. But we don’t crib from other writers intentionally, then refuse to give proper attribution. Because it’s ethically utterly wrong, and we know this, so we just don’t do it. Which is why Zakaria should not have done this, period.
So what comes next for Fareed Zakaria? My guess is that he’s going to have far fewer speaking engagements, he’ll be closely monitored at CNN, and if Time allows him to write any more articles, they will be extensively fact-checked so that no repeat performance is possible.
That’s better than what he deserves. Because after doing something like this, he really should be fired, celebrity or no. Because he’s proved he has no honor.
Just Reviewed Dave Freer’s “Cuttlefish” at SBR
Folks, if you’re looking for an excellent naval adventure that just happens to be set in an alternate timeline where the British Empire never fell and a major change in climate (global warming) has happened due to the overuse of coal-powered technology, look no further than Dave Freer’s new novel, CUTTLEFISH, which I just reviewed over at Shiny Book Review (SBR). This novel has it all — a winning hero and heroine, a sweet, G-rated romance, rousing action-adventure, and great naval battles — and did I mention the writing is outstanding yet?
Seriously. Go grab a copy of CUTTLEFISH. Then get to reading already! (You’ll be glad you did.)
Barb Caffrey's Blog 