OMG WHAT DID I DO!?
For mobile just hold the reblog button
You changed my life, i thank you.
bornonthebattleground asked: Ok, don't get me wrong because it's just curiosity, but I have to ask: how much of Supernatural is in Demon's Lexicon, if any? Please don't get this wrong, i love your books, it's a great story with great characters (and better storytelling, to be fair). It's just that I started to watch it recently and some similiarities struck me. And because it would be SO great if someone made a tv show out of DL :)
Oh, you poor sweetie. Please don’t feel at all self-conscious about asking this question, because it’s totally fine, and I so appreciate you saying you like the books (and I would love to have a TV show!) but this is actually something that comes up a lot. This ask about my books is really nice, which is why I chose it, because people have told me they find hostile asks upsetting. I do myself.
Since this question DOES come up a lot, sometimes in not-so-nice ways, I figured maybe I could use this nice question and write some kind of Ultimate Tumblr Answer to all such questions so I wouldn’t have to answer it again.
This is going to be kind of a BIG answer and it might feel overwhelming, so check out of it any time after the simple answer, which is:
None. Zero. Zip. Nada.
There is no Supernatural in my books. I promise you.
I have only seen a few episodes of the first season of Supernatural, back maybe six years ago, and I didn’t enjoy it. (Which doesn’t mean that people can’t enjoy it. Many people cooler than me enjoy it. I have a brilliant lady astrophysicist friend who owns all the box sets!) I’m not going to go into why I didn’t enjoy it, because then people will come and argue with me about my judgy ways, and criticise all the stuff like Vampire Diaries and Teen Wolf that I do like. Fair enough, people. Let us all like what we like, accept that we like different things, and everything will be lovely!
I always feel like I have to be careful talking about Supernatural: if any Supernatural fans read the Demon’s Lexicon series and think to themselves, ‘Hey, this contains some of the stuff what I like, i.e. demons and brothers (the only two things TDL and SPN have in common)’ - then fabulous. I want people to read my books, and whatever way they get to my books is wonderful.
But it’s also important to be clear and honest: I would not base a book series on a TV show I never saw much of, and which I didn’t enjoy. That would be a lot of time to devote to stuff I didn’t enjoy! I wouldn’t do it. (Why do people think I would? Well, we’ll get to that later.)
There are a lot of demon stories out there, and a lot of family stories out there, but here are some obvious dissimilarities between Supernatural and the Demon’s Lexicon series:
1. The brothers in Supernatural are actually blood related, while the brothers I wrote about are not blood related. They are not even the same species.
2. One of the brothers in Demon’s Lexicon is disabled.
3. Road-Trip-Through-Small-Town America is a very distinct aesthetic Supernatural seemed to be going for. Can’t be achieved when your setting is England. The magic system itself is rooted in American folklore—mine is totally different.
4. There are ladies in my series who are present in every book and important, whereas I do not believe the Supernatural series has a female lead present in every episode or indeed season.
5. There’s also a queer character present and important in every book, and I do not believe the Supernatural series has a queer character present in every episode. Or indeed season.
6. There are no angels in my world and I understand angels become pretty important in Supernatural. Obviously, they like angels and I like—other stuff.
This has come out seeming judgy of Supernatural after all. I understand that Supernatural now has a queer lady character played by Felicia Day, and that’s excellent. I don’t mean to bag on Supernatural. But it is a very different story to the story in my books, and its creators have very different priorities to me, and I think that’s pretty clear.
There’s something else to be discussed here, which is that people may say unto me: Why’d you write books about brothers and demons if you didn’t want people to think your books were fanfiction, you dumb jerk?
I have two answers to that.
1) I can write what I like and I think it’s gross to say that I can’t.
2) It wouldn’t have mattered what I wrote about. Every book I’ve ever written gets this. My books haven’t just been called Supernatural fanfiction. They get called Harry Potter fanfiction, too. Definitely! How would I have the ability to come up with my own characters?
No, the hero of Demon’s Lexicon is definitely Harry Potter. (Y’all remember that Harry Potter was an evil demon, right?) And Unspoken is definitely Harry Potter too. (Y’all remember that Harry Potter was a part-Japanese sassy girl detective? As well as being an evil demon. That Harry Potter. Such a multi-faceted individual.)
My books are also Twilight fanfiction. (What isn’t?) And Full Metal Alchemist fanfiction. Just ceaseless fanfiction. And that means of course that the books are very, very bad.
My books get called fanfiction all the time, I think, for two reasons:
a) I am a girl. Dudes get to write perceived-as-derivative/actually-derivative fiction all the time and it’s a HOMAGE, but girls can’t do either. People decide girls’ stuff is derivative and lousy all the time, whereas boys’ stuff is part of a literary tradition and an important conversation. This is sexist and terrible.
Neil Gaiman referenced Asimov in Neverwhere:
And G.K. Chesterton in Coraline:
And William Gibson in Neverwhere:
Yet I do not see Neil Gaiman getting chased around and called a plagiarist like I was this summer when I wrote three words which also appear in the Hunger Games! (And before that, as it turns out, in The Emperor’s New Groove. Llamas, sue the Hunger Games!)
I am very tired of seeing women insulted for things every dude in the world is allowed to do. It is not literary critique. It is violent misogyny.
b) I used to write fanfiction. (These two issues—sexism and fanfiction—are actually very closely intertwined, because writing fanfiction is something that mostly girls do, and thus like all things Associated With Ladies, such as sewing and pink, is treated as dumb and worthless. And fanfiction, as I’m going to discuss, provides people with a narrative that go ‘why this lady actually sucks’ and people love narratives which say that.)
For those who didn’t know I used to write fanfiction, it’s obviously irrelevant to your opinion of me, and honestly, you can cut out here. Definitely if the person who asked me about Supernatural this time around wants to cut out here… they should. I am about to get mad. It is not your fault. I have just got this too many times, and I have had it up to here.
When someone is traditionally published after writing fanfiction, they get treated like trash, both by people who think fanfiction is weird rubbish and by people who themselves like to write and read fanfiction.
Welp. This is pretty much amazing.
Sesame Street: Encouraging you to get active since 1969. Even if you’re a ladybug at a picnic.
"You want to photograph me eating chicken?"
"Well, if I let you, I need you to help me deliver a message."
"I work at this library. And before that, I was coming here for twenty years. It’s my favorite place in the world. As many people know, the main reading room of this library is supported by seven floors of books, which contain one of the greatest research collections in the world. Recently, the library administration has decided to rip out this collection, send the books to New Jersey, and use the space for a lending library. As part of the consolidation, they are going to close down the Mid-Manhattan Library Branch as well as the Science, Industry, and Business Library. When everything is finished, one of the greatest research libraries in the world will become a glorified internet cafe. Now read that back to me."
It’s pretty rare I get to link things that hit two of the purported topic areas of this blog (that is, I work in a library and mostly post about music, but you’d be surprised at how much the new St. Vincent doesn’t come up in an engineering library—I know, right?). Anyway, this was forwarded to me today, and it’s pretty wild.
In layperson’s terms, this establishes a list of approved words (a “controlled vocabulary” in library/information science terms) that library catalogers should use in describing the instruments used to perform works of music.
Why? Well, using consistent terminology ostensibly improves access and retrieval. Suppose one cataloger were to use the term “didgeridoo” in a record for one work and another cataloger were to use the term “digeridoo” in a record for another work (entirely possible based on how the instrument is spelled on the record sleeve, CD liner notes, MP3 metadata, piece of sheet music, etc.); when a patron tried to find works played on “dijiridu” using a keyword search, she wouldn’t necessarily retrieve either. What this list will ideally do is create a scenario in which the patron will type in “dijiridu,” and she’ll get redirected to a whole bunch of records that have been consistently cataloged using the authorized spelling “didjeridu.” She can then pick through all of the library’s didjeridu-related holdings and be relatively confident she hasn’t missed something due to a misunderstanding over terminology. Ideally, because there are a number of places this can break down external to cataloging practices, etc.
The real meat of this thing is over here—the proposed list. If you’re not a cataloger, the numbers won’t mean anything to you, but all you really need to know is that the first word listed in each chunk is the authorized term, and the words that follow are terms that should be replaced with the authorized term (UF for “use for”), broader terms (BT), or narrower terms (NT). Some also include a 680 note, which describes the term in more detail. For instance:
162 didjeridu [pp2013015209]
462 UF didgeridoo
462 UF didjeridoo
462 UF digeridoo
462 UF dijiridu
562 BT natural horn
680 An Australian Aboriginal brass instrument.
To my Western eyes, it looks remarkably inclusive, but I couldn’t tell a dömbra from a domra without those 680 fields (although it’s been pointed out that armpit noises are accounted for). Still, it’s fun to flip through. One that sticks out for me is that this guy:
162 vocal percussion [pp2013015836]
462 UF bouladjèl
462 UF mouth drum
562 BT voice
562 BT body percussion
680 A vocalist who creates sounds with the mouth that approximate, imitate, or otherwise serve the same purpose as a percussion instrument.
could seriously use a “562 UF human beatbox,” the term most likely to be used by pretty much anyone in the U.S. looking for the hip-hop-grounded incarnation of this mode of performance. And, certainly, any cataloger contending with the King Crimson oeuvre is going to need an entry for the Chapman Stick, Future Man calls out for a “drumitar” heading, and folks like Buke and Gase and the Presidents of the United States of America with their easily overlooked guitbass and basitar … well, who knows? Anyway, thought the music folks of Tumblr who don’t often stumble into libraryland might enjoy this (or enjoy picking it apart at the very least).
Currently: Me, relative to the Sherlock fandom.