Sunday morning

[ksmith]

First day of Autumn, so I've switched my LJ theme to "Woodcut Autumn." I like it better than the Summer version. The dark ochre background has a little more definition.

Steel-cut oats for breakfast. Cooked in 50/50 water/milk, with brown sugar and sliced banana as toppers.

Busy morning yesterday. Along with the usual errands--food shopping, bank, etc--picture framing was committed. I finally gathered together the CI cover painting, the Craft "Turandot" print, and the Endgame cover print and went over to Hobby Lobby to see what they offered. Took along a couple of copies of my books, in case the framer wondered why the rear view of the spandex-clad lady with the sidearm and the lady with the knives. Turned out that I needn't have bothered--the older lady working the frame department turned out to be a science fiction fan, who loved all the images**. Thought it was so cool that I wrote science fiction. Said I made her day.

The painting was tricky to frame. I picked a silver frame with a satin finish, and dual matting in light grey and deep red. Not sure about the light grey, but that would be easy to change at some point if I decided it really didn't work. The frame for the Endgame print is gorgeous, an old gold with a branch-like pattern that matches the ancient sense of the buildings and the scene. I choose a pale yellow-brown mat that matches the paler shades of the sand and structures. The frame for the Turandot is also gold, with a raised pattern and black trim that along with the deep red matting works very well with the subject. Overall, I'm happy with how things turned out.

It's cool this morning, 50F or so. Sunny. Normally I'd want to work outside on a day like this, but I want to finish Gideon's never-ending Chapter 2. Need to fit laundry in there somewhere. I should mow the backyard, but I don't want to.

King has taken it into his head that I need to be out of bed by 6am. Isn't that sweet of him?

**but when she talked about the SF she loved, the only writer she mentioned was Isaac Asimov. I didn't have the presence of mind to suggest newer writers, although she did ask for the titles of my books. It's just something I've noticed--many more mundane folk who say they love SF read Asimov, maybe Clarke, and that's about it. Something wrong with that picture.

Comments

[phantomminuet.livejournal.com]

I like the new background. It reminds me of a piece of toile. :-)

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

Spring and Summer actually had the same backgrounds. But at light green and light yellow respectively, they didn't show up very well.

I wonder what color Winter will be. I haven't been checking ahead. I want it to be a surprise.

[chris-gerrib.livejournal.com]

Re: Asimov - I don't think SF has done a good job of marketing SF to provide a transition from Asimov. I mean, you don't see books advertised as "the new Asimov" or "the new Clarke." You do see books advertised (or at least reviewed) as "the new Heinlein" but if you're not a Heinlein fan (and I'm sure they're are a few), where do you go?

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

What qualities would you pick out as representative of Asimov and Clarke? Heinlein seemed a little more definite in that regard. Certain sorts of poli sci fi space opera would be indicative. Asimov and Clarke don't seem as easy to type.

[chris-gerrib.livejournal.com]

I don't know. Perhaps that's why we're not marketing stuff as "the next Asimov."

[anisosynchronic.livejournal.com]

what's wrong with this picture?

Given that most people don't do pleasure reading, the fact the the person is reading and reading SF at all, is something of a victory.

Asimov and Clarke and Heinlein to a lesser degree, all had technical backgrounds, were writing for an audience which was or had the conceit of wanting to be technically sophisticated, and were using "plain English." For that matter, they were also all pushing space travel and Progress technologically.

All these days later, the space program has mostly been moribund for decades: it took ten years to get to Luna, and 30 since to fail to get people further up ever again than near earth orbit.... The verve and sense of wonder and idealism and going out in the unknown in the work of Clarke and Asimov and Heinlein, is mostly missing from the contemporary world. Compare e.g. Star Trek the Original Series, with the later incarnations.

There's a lost simplicity and elegance and lost innocence, that just aren't around anymore.

There are works by writers contemporary to Asimov and Heinlein and Clarke, republished by NESFA and other publishers, which convey some of the same atmosphere. But contemporary writing is mostly differently--Clarke and Asimove and Heinlein are "classic" and have withstood the tests of time as regards readability--one can't tell in the present, usually, what will hold up and not become dated/inaccessible/irrelevant from shifts in point of view and changes in experience....

Years ago Cordwainer Smith [two volumes from NESFA Press of his complete works of SF] wrote a story entitled, "The Lady Who Sailed the Soul." At the time, abortion was illegal in the USA, and the protagonist went to a remote location to obtain one... during the 1980s the situation was quite different in much of the USA, but then the restrictions started returning.

But mostly, Asimov etc. were writing out of reference frames that aren't available today, in styles that aren't contemporary ones. Baxter and MacLeod and various other British science-background writers have prose that read to me like the sort of technical writing I read either because I have to read it for work, or for information--not for pleasure of reading. It's loaded with passive voice, as is this sentenced loaded with passive voice. Most of what's getting written today is fantasy, not SF, in the genre and its close relatives. And there's space opera that lacks the feel of having technical underpinning furnishing worldbuilding infrastructure with apparent structure integrity and credibility.

There might be some authors out there anyway, though... G. David Nordley, for example.

[cabri729.livejournal.com]

I always have a hard time picking out matting. They say if you match one of the colors in the artwork, it de-emphasizes that color instead of emphasizing it. I end up chickening out and using white or black.

Whenever anyone says they like Asimov but haven't read SF in years, I try to steer them to some of the lighter space opera out these days. Not too heavily military, not so much intense world-building. YA novels work really well as long as you don't tell them their YA. ;-)

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

I hadn't heard that. I didn't really find that the case with my stuff, but I haven't seen the finished works, either. In any case, black or white would've been too stark.

[anisosynchronic.livejournal.com]

Rules about artwork and artwork collecting: [related point to be gotten to eventually]]

1. There's really little intrinsic value to a piece of art--its worth, boiled down to the basic, is what someone is willing to pay for it. The valuation of the same piece of property can vary tremendously over time--the prized sculpture heavily contested at auction for the privilege of owning in one generation, smashed by someone of a later generation or different culture who considers it worthless, distasteful or offensive, or better used for gypsum for making something else with (the fate of the ancient bronze ships' rams mounted by Octavian after his defeat of Cleopatra and Marcus Antonius, was being melted down to reuse as other objects. Taliban blew up giant carved rock Buddhas. And there was the Bonfire of the Vanities in Florence, and outlawing and burning of books deemed objectionable over the millennia). Some work goes in an out of favor over time, as styles change, tastes change, cultural values change... there was a book of Andrew Wyeth paintings published decades ago in a one shot edition, the book supervised by Wyeth. The publication price was something between $10 and $100. Soon after publication the resale price zoomed up to $1000. Over time, however, the price dropped dramatically down from its high. For that matter, the price of out of print paperbacks for a book in much greater demand than reading availability, can soar past $100--and when/if the book gets reprinted, the price of that same edition generall drops precipitously. There's supply, demand, and a non-linear intangible set of dimensions involving cultural attitude, personal history ("Rosebud"), community values, etc.

2. Taste is a combination of arbitrary, social/community value and compliance (whatever book Oprah praises on her show, immediately hits bestseller status), training, experience (virtuosity may not necessarily be obvious, but tends to carry value with it... the latest insanity in high end houses for expen$ive according to a friend when I talked to him some months ago, is concrete kitchen counters--they have to have custom on-site wooden molds made for pouring the concrete into, meaning that there is greater expense and effort involved that e.g. cutting and polishing marble or granite slabs offsite and installed the finished natural rock counters... My own feeling towards concrete is that aesthetically it looks and feels rather nasty, wears in a an ugly fashion, and the idea of it as a material to make kitchen counters out of, does not appeal to me), practicality sometimes, whimsy sometimes, functionality, worldview (consider the Arts & Crafts movememnt and the values it put on display), etc.

3. There is the issue of personal aesthetic versus cultural value--long ago science fiction in the greater US society was considered a debased literary form, excised from consideration as "literature" and dismissed as mass market lowbrow lacking in merit entertainment for those lacking in true literary taste. There was the art of Andy Warhol, and controversy regarding, "is it art?" That gets back to #1 above, and "what is a piece of art worth, it's worth what someone is willing to pay for it."

4. Compare the typical museum exhibit conditions for paintings and drawings on stark sterile white or neutral gray featureless except for the artwork walls, with art in people's homes and at work and play. Look at e.g. the exhibit area of the Worcester Art Museum showing the home with furnishings and artwork of a family at the time the Dutch Masters were in their heyday... the artwork goes on walls which are anything but featureless: there's furniture with shelving, furniture with other types of storage, devices for hanging stuff, fireplaces, etc. The rooms the artworks hang in has functionality to it for living in--kitchen areas, dining areas, play areas, meeting and conversation areas... the most extreme cases are the clutter-ridden Victorian era living spaces, chock full of/crammed with bric-a-brac, keyboard musical instruments, candleholders, chairs, tables, and clutter of all variety.

[continued on next rock]

[anisosynchronic.livejournal.com]

5. Mounting and framing of artwork is not an exercise in vacuum stand-alone aesthetics. When art goes into a museum exhibition that is not antiques with the frames being part of the artwork ensemble, generally it gets mounted and framed for consistency in the exhibition. The lines in Ellen Kushner's novel Swordspoint regarding leatherbound books as decorative items, with the books all bound in the same color leather and with the same decoration on the binding, to form a matched set as, again, decor elements, rather than with the books intended to be functional objects for reading, applies.

6. That is, mounting and framing as aesthetic considerations, with the components including any or all of functional issues--acid-free mount board, and e.g. UV-blocking for artwork that needs protection of glass and against UV; frames which fit into the decor of the room the owner intends to hang the artwork in, or which match other frames of other artwork; mounting style which pleases the owner aesthetically.... there are styles which use several layers of mount board, and mount board with contrasting layers of colors, the framer with the latter runs a knife creating a rectangle of contrasting color...

7. So really, the bottom line is, does it look good to you, not "what is the prevailing social value taste in what mounting should be?" You're the one whose personal space the artwork is going to be in, the mounting and framing should be something that you enjoy looking at--as should the artwork, it's a corollary of,

8. Buy what you like, not what other people tell you you should like. Art as investment is a less sure consideration--a piece of art may or may not appreciate in value, if it doesn't appreciate in value. If you bought the artwork as something you liked, you get enjoyment out of it, and aren't going to get stuck with something you don't enjoy/like. And if it does appreciate, you have the choice of continuing to keep it, or selling it for a profit, and having it go to someone else who hopefully will also find it pleasing.

[equesgal.livejournal.com]

Where do you buy your steel cut oats?

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

The local chain grocery. They're from Quaker, which surprised me. I was on the lookout for McCann or another boutique brand.

They were pretty good, but a little soupy. I followed the directions regarding liquid amount, so maybe they needed to cook a little longer.