Stoneslayer Draft 2, Beta Reads, and The University Vignettes

By way of update, a little over a week ago I finished the second draft of Stoneslayer. I had hoped to reduce the word count under 120k, but I ended up making it about 450 words longer, ending at 123.5k. I've sent it to a ton of beta readers (~20). We'll see whether they get to the end :) So far their suggestions have been to add more...

The University Vignettes:
I suppose I should make a mention of a longstanding project I've had called The University Vignettes (working title). I wrote a random kernel of a short story back in March 2015, which I rediscovered in August 2016 and finished. That project became "The Future's Price", a commentary on the cost of higher education through a very grim fantasy story. You can listen to a reading I did here.

But it doesn't end there. I got the idea to make a series of commentaries in this fashion, which I've tentatively titled The University Vignettes. There will be five short stories all told. They're all separate stories (well, #'s 1 and 4 are from the same POV), but they reference each other and focus around a particular event at the university, the breaking of the Jewel of Tusco (a giant stained-glass window).

Just the other day I finished the second of these stories, named "To What Degree?" The alpha reader reactions have been overwhelmingly positive, which is encouraging. This is a slow burning project though, so there's no telling when exactly I'll make it to the next vignettes. I do already have the epilogue written. I'd like to say I'll finish before the end of summer, but with the helter-skelter angle I've taken with this I'm much more comfortable saying the end of the year. Once they're all done, I'm going to publish them in a little anthology.

Evoking the Fantastical Milieu: Naming

This post will focus specifically on names and words.

Names are powerful. Glance over the two following lists of names:

• Daniel, Samuel, Adam, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Joshua, David, Zach, Aaron, Benjamin, Jonathan
• Abdon, Dishon, Jerah, Maher-shalal-hash-baz, Phallu, Urijah, Vophsi, Zeror

If you were raised in a biblically influenced country, the first list will likely seem mundane to you. However, the second list will immediately transport one to a land far away and so unlike our own. In case you didn't guess, all of the above names are from the Bible. If you know your audience, you can evoke impressions and emotions by choosing the right names.

In The Dinosaur Lords, Victor Milan lifts names straight from Spanish (Spañol), French (Francés), German (Alemán), English (Anglysh), and Russian (Slavo). He references countries and principalities in approximately the same locations as Spain, France, Germany, England, and Russia. The primary difference from our world is that they use dinosaurs for warfare. I personally would have preferred an alternate world rather than just an alternate history, but Milan did what he did so that he could immediately put impressions of these countries in our heads without having to devote much time for cultural backgrounds. A shortcut, if you're not looking to build a whole world.

Your names need a sense of uniformity in their foreignness. One option is to pick a language and lift all your names from that language. For Stoneslayer I used Hebrew. I made some rules, like all B's became V's. I often changed A's into E's. The particle 'om' means god (instead of 'el'), so lots of names end with that. Some other things like that. By my count, there are 96 separate names (some are used more than once though). Evrom, Matek, Shaleyu, Verutz, Lahilokh, Hayam. They have a sense of coherency, yet none are familiar to the reader.

For Orluvoq I used Greenlandic. It's a base I've essentially never seen in the books I've read. Orluvoq, Naalagaa, Ikingut, Nunapisu, Arsarneq, Arpap, Paarsisoq, Sinik. Once again, all very foreign, but all similar.

If you have multiple cultures, you need to make sure your naming bases are separate. Choose phonemes (basic units of sound) and some rules, then apply them to your names. In Augmentals I have one language that has a sound where they kiss the M. To represent it I use 'mm'. They also have the voiceless lateral fricative, which I represent with 'tl'. These are things that the reader will likely never consciously know, but their subconscious will pick up on the uniformity and whisper to them, "This is a solid book."

Magic Systems

In the earlier days of fantasy, magic was often a given nebulous force that accompanied the story. As the years have progressed, people have conjured up increasingly diverse scenarios and put new sets of constraints on their magic. From this there has arisen some sort of rift in the fantasy community between those who prefer a softer or a harder magic system.

Definition of Magic
I think it’s important that we first define magic. To me, magic is anything that is not possible within the bounds of the reader’s physics. Some people who prefer a soft approach to magic will say that anything that takes a more systematic, scientific approach disqualifies it from being magic. I say that whether or not it’s considered magic by the characters in the book is irrelevant to whether or not it’s magical to the reader. Because all of us live in the same world with the same physics, I think it’s safe to talk about the things outside of our laws under the umbrella term “magic”.

A Call for Mystique
Another argument I see a lot is that magic must have an air of mystique, a sense of wonder, a shroud of mystery. These people are conflating their preference with definitional limitation. That would be the same as saying magic must involve mental exertion, runes, ingredients, demons, handheld conduits, flashing lights, dead gods, temperature changes, incantations, exhaustion, sacrifices, or any other number of requirements. Certainly someone can have favorites, but personal penchants do not nullify all other options.

The Basis of Fantasy
The basis of fantasy and all good speculative fiction is that it poses a question and then explores the answers. The question is almost always in the form of, “How would humans react if they were put into a situation where [blank]?” (Possibilities for the blank: the gods interacted with men, dragons roamed the earth, there were other sapient species, certain people could control the weather?)

We live in a world that has figured out electricity and magnetism, wireless data transmission, nuclear power, space travel, DNA modification, vaccines, and endless other marvels. In a world where magic was relatively widespread, it would require great suspension of disbelief to pretend that that world’s humans hadn’t made any investigations into the nature, limits, and uses of that magic.

Now, there are possibilities of regressions, dark ages, and that their discoveries haven’t advanced very far yet. Maybe a god is keeping them from learning too much. Maybe they’re religious and kill anyone who uses magic outside the prescribed methods. Maybe they live in an extremely harsh environment and don’t have any extra time to devote to study. Maybe magic is only available to very few people. There are many good reasons why the world wouldn’t know very much about the limits of their magic. But human ingenuity, curiosity, and persistence are powerful forces, and I believe that wherever possible, they will have made at least some investigations into the strange powers at play in their world.

The Limitations of Constraints
I believe that constraints inspire more creativity than sheer freedom does. You see it in music when a composer decides, for example, to create something in a whole tone scale, never use the key’s base chord in the progression, write in 5/4, or use at least one augmented chord per measure. Working within limitations allows you to push the boundaries; when working with pure freedom there are no boundaries to push.

I hope the above explains why I lean more toward the hard magic end of the spectrum. Let’s take Sanderson’s Mistborn, specifically the steel push and the iron pull. At its core, these two powers are nothing more than telekinesis. However, the constraints that Sanderson places on them turns them into so much more. These include

• Must be a misting (born with the ability to burn a metal in your stomach)
• Must have your metal in your stomach; once out, so are your powers
• Can only push/pull on metals
• Can only push/pull in a straight, radial line from your center of mass
• Every push/pull reacts with a proportionate pull/push on you

So Sanderson took a very common power, telekinesis, put constraints on it, and turned it into something that’s far more interesting. Battles and puzzles require more creativity. I find that often when the magic is less defined I wonder why a particular magical solution wasn’t applied earlier than it was, or why it wasn’t applied again at a later point.

That being said, some people prefer a less systematic approach, just as some people prefer not to listen to music in 5/4 or music that has an augmented chord in every measure. Both opinions are right for those that hold them.

Conclusion
Both hard and soft magic systems are valid, even if you prefer one over the other. I have read, enjoyed, and written both kinds. However, I typically get more enjoyment out of hard systems, so I tend to use those in my bigger series so I can flex my creativity against the constraints.

Consumers, the Casual Killers

I originally wrote this because I gave a presentation on nuclear power in one of my friend's high school classes, and the students wanted to know how many people died from their energy use—your so-called deathprint. Skip ahead if you don't care about the calculations.

Hey, I ran some calculations for your students. I couldn't find exactly the per capita energy usage for an American, so taking some averages and estimations I went with 90,000 kWh/yr. The deathprint numbers come in deaths per PWh, so I use the equation $$k = \frac{a\ell d}{10^{15}\, Wh}$$ where k is the amount of people you kill over your whole life, a is your annual energy consumption, $\ell$ is your life expectancy, d is the death rate multiplier (variable by energy source). I could have included the 1E15 Watt-hours in d, but it's easier to plug in this way.

Plugging in everything but d gives us $$k = \frac{d(9E10\, Wh/yr)(80\, yr)}{10^{15}\, Wh} = 0.0072d$$ Now it's time to calculate d.

From the eia.gov site, it says that in 2015 the US energy production mix was 32% natural gas, 28% petroleum, 21% coal (see footnote 1), 11% renewables, and nuclear electric 9%. You may notice that's only 91%. The remaining 9% was primarily petroleum imports, so we'll bump our petroleum up to 37%.

So we have $$d = (0.37\times 36000) + (0.32\times 4000) + (0.21\times 15000) + (0.11\times r) + (0.09\times 40) = 17753.6 + (0.11\times r)\, deaths$$
Now we have to figure out r (renewables factor). Using the EIA site again we get 49% is biomass, 25% is hydro (see footnote 2), 19% is wind, 6% is solar, and 2% is geothermal. So (this is just an estimate) $$r = (0.49\times 24000) + (0.25\times 100) + (0.19\times 150) + (0.06\times 440) + (0.02\times 0) = 11839.9$$ I put 0 in on the death rate multiplier for geothermal because I couldn't find any info on it. We plug that in and get $$d = 17753.6 + (0.11\times11839.9) = 19056 \, deaths$$

---

Skip to here if you're just looking for a number

---

Plugging that into our original equation we find that $$k = 0.0072\times 19056 = {\boxed{\color{#9fc5e8}\text{137 people killed per lifetime}}}$$ If it was 100% nuclear, d would be 40 and k would equal 0.3 people killed per lifetime. That, of course, is factoring in all the major accidents (using outdated technology) and the linear no threshold model, which has been proven to be false. Using updated science, the number would be much lower than 0.3 (see Footnote 3).

Once again, this is using the energy mix from 2015. We all know that the energy mix of 2035 will look pretty different from 2015. But with these numbers we can approximate that the average 16-year-old American has indirectly killed 27 people (or approx. one every 7 months). The actual number is higher than that because a) coal usage peaked in 2008, and b) a lot of energy-intensive processes that we benefit from have been moved to other countries, so those aren't counted in the consumption profile.

If all that energy was 100% nuclear derived, your students would have collaterally killed about 6% of a person each. In other words, it would take 17 students to have killed one person. At this energy consumption rate, you would have to live for 278 years to kill one person. This only accounts for energy production though, nothing about food, technology, or conveniences.

These are just some quick calculations using numbers I found. You (or your students) could do a much more in-depth research project by finding a lot more data points (see Footnote 4). Hope you enjoyed it! Also, you should tell your students to read my books :) I believe they're available at the school library. If not, they're available here.

---

Footnote 1 The world average is 100,000 deaths/PWh and the Chinese rate is 170,000 deaths/PWh. I used the US number of 15,000.
Footnote 2 This is the European number which doesn't include the Banqiao dam break that killed 171,000.
Footnote 3 This is infeasible, but a fun thought experiment. Switching over to entirely nuclear would result in a 99.93% reduction of the deathprint. The reduction would be greater if you factored in the performance history of the nuclear navy, which has logged "over 6200 reactor-years of accident-free experience involving 526 nuclear reactor cores over the course of 240 million kilometres, without a single radiological incident, over a period of more than 50 years." (Source)
Footnote 4 Here's the full equation if you want to tweak parameters:$$k = \frac{a\ell}{10^{15}\, Wh}[p_{pt}d_{pt} + p_{ng}d_{ng} + p_{co}d_{co} + p_{nu}d_{nu} + p_{re}(p_{bi}d_{bi} + p_{hy}d_{hy} + p_{wi}d_{wi} + p_{so}d_{so} + p_{gt}d_{gt})]$$ It's kind of a crappy formula because the p values (ha) are the percentages of the energy mix, except the ones in the square brackets are the percentage of the renewable energy mix.

New Novella: Orluvoq

I know I never update this and no one ever reads this, but just in case here we go.

Yesterday I finished writing my novella Orluvoq. It's 30,600 words long (which correlates to about 120 printed pages) and inspired by Inuit (specifically Greenlandic) culture. Here's the blurb:

In the highest north, the world has an end. Black oblivion gapes out forever beyond the plains of rotting snow, the two separated by the infinite drop of an ice cliff holding all the world’s dead.

In the highest north, hunters ride kites into the aurora to fell narwhal from out of the sky. Chandlers set the beast’s tusk in columns of tallow. Shamans exact powers from the burning candles—powers to walk with shadow or the wind, to turn away frostbite and fever, to stay warm on the darkest night in deepest winter.

But the narwhal’s tusk has other powers. Darker powers. When consumed, it floods the devourer with an inimitable high. Once consumed, the devourer will never be satisfied with anything less. Every shaman is taught not to eat the tusk. If forced to choose between healing and warmth or the high, the shaman can’t always be trusted to be stronger than the addiction. 

But not every shaman does as they’re taught.

And so, we follow Orluvoq, a drug-addicted, eight-year-old shaman, as she climbs down the ice cliff at the end of the world to find her dead parents. Will she find answers, or will she only find that her hope is all gone?

 I don't have any information on a publishing date, but I'm sure I'll post here once I do. In the meantime, you can read the beginning here.

I found this picture and thought, "That's Or lu freaking voq."

Anglish

So, good news. I've officially resumed work on Stoneslayer. It's beautiful. I just did a read through with a bit of editing and am sitting at 85,000 words. I expect the finished product to require around 35,000-40,000 more words, so hopefully I'll hit at least 120k with this book. Time and hard work will tell. If I can get my butt in gear I should have the first draft done before the end of August. If not, then hopefully before September's over.

But the other interesting thing is a major series of edits that I made during this read through. See, in this book there's a tribe called the Hanoshites that broke off from the main character's tribe 400 years ago. Because of this, I wanted them to be able to understand each other, but to have distinct dialects. Originally I just had them speaking in sort of an old-timey drawl. But I recently got the idea to have them speak Anglish. Now some of you are thinking, Benny, I think you mean English. But no, Anglish is a purist version of English that only has Germanic roots. Sort of a, "what if Modern English had developed from Old English without any Latin/Greek influence?" Here's an example from the text:

“We of Hanosh like our crowded gladness—though not to the mark of drunken daze; this the Bodings fastly forbid. In eight of the months, each Tent takes their stint throwing a simbleday. Songwrights, craftsmen, cooks, and so forth make show of their knacks. The other four months, the coming of the yeartides, as they’re hight, are the times of highest gladness. The whole of Hanosh gathers and shares in the best of mirthmaking and feed—though I warn thee, thou mightest never need feed again.” He smiled at his quip. “As luck would have it, the Tamez Simbleday lined up flawlessly with thine incoming.”

And that's about what it sounds like. It has a certain elegance to it. But here's the crazy thing. Doing these edits I had to check literally every. Single. Word. To see what its etymology is. The other frustrating thing is that sometimes, there literally aren't any fitting Germanic words for it. One example is tent. Try though I might, I couldn't come up with a suitable substitution. In other instances I had to come up with my own word. Like for encampment I used haltstead.

In the end, I think that the Anglish decision has added a great deal of depth to the work and I'm glad I did it, though it took many days. In those remaining 40k words the Hanoshites will appear yet again, so I'll have to delve into the Anglish Wordbook once more.

A New Plague Cover Reveal

So I sat down today knowing only that I wanted to make a cover for my novelette A New Plague, which, as you can see in the sidebar, is complete. This is what I came up with. It will be out soon after some edits. You can read the intro section, Germ, here. As a brief summary, it's about a man whose job is to make new plagues, and, well, he makes a new plague. Even though it deals with some heavy topics, it has a general jovial air about it. I like to refer to it as a work of grindark.