Gun Runner wins Dragon Award

ByJohn Brown

I was very happy to receive news that GUN RUNNER, the novel Larry Correia and I wrote together, just won the 2021 Dragon Award for Best Military Science Fiction or Fantasy Novel.

The Dragon Awards are a set of literary and media awards presented annually by Dragon Con in Atlanta, Georgia for excellence in various categories of science fiction, fantasy, and horror novels, movies, television, and games.

And the cool thing is that these awards are voted on by fandom, meaning thousands and thousands of folks voted.

Past winners have included authors such as Terry Pratchett, Brandon Sanderson, Rick Riordan, and Stephen King.

As stated in earlier posts, the seed came from Larry’s eleven-year-old son, Joe.

When Larry and I sat down to develop an idea for a workshop we were holding for Life, the Universe and Everything, a large annual writer’s conference in Provo, a number of years ago, Joe was listening in on the stairs.

We settled on a genre, and then Correia asked, “Hey Joe, what’s cool?”

Joe immediately popped up and said, “Giant robots, bandits, and murderers.”

“We looked at each other and said, ‘Dang, that IS cool.’”

Forty minutes later we had the key elements we needed for the story we’d use in the workshop. A number of years after that workshop, Baen Books wanted a collaboration from Larry, and that story was one of the first he thought of.

Larry and I are both frequently asked to present at writers conferences. And one of the tips each of us shares to new authors is to loosen up and have fun. One of the keys to writing an entertaining story is to simply ask, “What’s cool?” And go from there.

I’m thrilled and honored that those who voted selected Gun Runner for this award.

Share

Similar Posts

  • I spent 7 days in a car with Larry Correia, International Lord of Hate, and lived to tell about it

    ByJohn Brown

    Larry-Correia
    I think this was taken when someone stole  the ILOH’s Cheetoes

    Seven days.

    San Diego, Phoenix, and a wild trip through Wyoming, around Denver, and back to Utah.

    Seven days.

    Five nights.

    In Arizona, I was told by a wild-eyed denizen of the Barnes & Noble we were signing at that my epic fantasy book was true–we are ruled by lizard people!

    Imagine how shocking it was to learn that. I mean it doesn’t have anything to do with my book, but lizard people? A hollow earth? Is the CIA in on it? I don’t think I’ve recovered yet.

    In San Diego, we rode around with Dave Farland in his old four-door sedan. A Lincoln? All I remember is that it was big and floated like a dream. After some narrow misses, Dave asked me to drive. Two big guys up front. One older, rough-looking guy being chauffeured in the back. At one point we walked to a restaurant during the day like some made man and his two goons. The restaurant was empty except for three rough characters sitting around a table on the far side. They looked at us, sized us up, then looked away. We sat at a table on our side.

    In Wyoming we drove in high winds that sent streams of snow across the highway like multitudes of slithering snakes. At one point we passed one semi that was on fire, winds howling about. About an hour later, we passed a truck driver out in the median, thigh-deep in snow, a huge knife in his hand. He was trying to saw off the frozen antlers of an elk that had been hit. I looked up at his rig as we passed and did not see anyone behind the wheel. I swear the thing was rolling slowly down the highway, unmanned.

    On the way back from Denver, we rode along a wintery, icy highway with trucks and cars littering the sides. Larry white-knuckled the steering wheel, but we made it. Two big guys, one 6’4″ the other 6’2″, in a tiny Ford Focus.

    Did the very road fear the Lord of Hate? I cannot tell.

    On this trip, Larry, that man of hate, brought a bag of Walmart beef jerky that smelled like, well, a particular kind of flatulence. What kind of person does that to beef? But we ate it. Because you do such things on epic journeys.

    Now, here’s the thing. If you spend any amount of time with me, you will eventually tell me your life story.

    You will.

    Not because I’m a prier. But because I’m simply and sincerely interested. In people. If you work for the sanitation department, I’m going to want to know about garbage trucks. If you bowl, I’m going to want to know about bowling. If you’re some kind of wackadoo, I’m going to want to hear your wackadooness. Sooner or later, you’re going to talk. And, yes, there will be things along the way that I just might put in my zing file. That’s not why I’m talking to you. But sometimes the slices of life are too good not to capture.

    So you put Larry Correia, International Lord of Hate, into a car with me, and he’s going to spill his guts.

    Let me tell you what I found. Oh yeah, wait until you hear this.

    Larry loves Bridget, his wife. No, do not turn away in horror. You must hear the rest of the tale.

    He doesn’t like taxes, which is outrageous. Simply beyond the pale.

    He’s a strong advocate of the right to bear arms. He figures people are safer with guns than without. And he was loaded. I remember getting to the hotel in Denver and seeing he draw his guns and put them on the table. A Kimber/Bul Poly .45 from his waist and a little Kahr MK9 on the ankle. Frightening. Of course, I never worried about going anywhere with him, but the guns had nothing to do with that.

    He doesn’t like the idea of a small group of people in Washington telling folks what they need to do. He’s not anti-government. He just likes a minimal amount of government. This too is outrageous. Government is the source of all good in the world.

    He doesn’t like a lot of what Franklin Delano Roosevelt did. One of those things he doesn’t like is the rounding up of Japanese Americans and putting them in war camps. Another was Roosevelt’s attempt to pack the Supreme Court with justices who would rule his way, essentially eliminating that branch’s check on the presidency. Nor does he like Roosevelt for being the first president to explicitly embrace deficit spending. The list with Roosevelt could go on. Of course, we all know that wise people everywhere thought Roosevelt made the right choice on these things.

    Larry honors the folks who serve in our military and law enforcement. Big time. Guys and gals who put their lives on the line or support those who do. I roll my eyes.

    Larry’s a big believer in pulling yourself up by your boot straps and getting to work. He worked on his father’s dairy farm milking cows early in life. Busted his chops in school. Busted his chops at work. Busted his chops writing novel after novel. And now he lives on Yard Moose Mountain. A supposed example of can-do economic mobility, which all smart people know is a farce.

    I mean, work? Come on. Do you see how unreasonable the man is?

    He’s an accountant and pretty good with numbers. Ergo he doesn’t like a lot of bureaucratic waste. It stinks to his accountant soul. And he saw a lot of that as a military contractor. I’m really for a lot of waste of taxpayer dollars, but I let him have his say.

    Larry was once a bouncer.

    He’s a big guy, but got his trash kicked in some early amateur MMA. But he still loved it.

    LarryCorreiacismale
    The International Lord of Hate in multiple colors

    In a friendly wrestling match, he broke his roommate’s toe, and said roommate responded by breaking the International Lord of Hate’s nose. Yes, the nose, Ladies and Gentlemen.

    Larry is funny.

    Larry has a lot of friends because, shocker, he’s a friendly guy.

    He’s also kind of a sheepdog.

    Larry is a capitalist. And it appears he’s the dirty greedy kind who uses his capitalistic ties for helping folks down on their luck.

    There’s more. But let me tell you what I never heard. I never heard him make a racist remark. Not even when he told me about growing up in California’s Central Valley, or when some idiot kids who had been tasked with beating someone up to to join a Hispanic gang targeted him. Never heard him make a misogynistic remark.

    I did hear how he loved to argue with folks on the internets. And then saw that later when I started reading his blog. It’s clear Larry likes a good fight. He’s a barbarian with big boots. But, in truth, he’s a friendly barbarian.

    That’s the expose. I know. Shocking, isn’t it.

    Now he’s gone and done this Hugo thing and calls people names and uses four-letter words on his blog posts.

    I’ve found that Larry in person is not quite the same as Larry online when you disagree with him. In person he’s usually very conversational when you disagree.

    Some might say he needs to be more polite online. Use more class.

    They might have a point. Sometimes I think he steps over the line. Then again, they might not. He does get people to listen. And some of the things he has to say are insightful and worthwhile. Others are just plain funny.

    Whatever your opinion, all I know is that if you’re wanting Abraham Lincoln, you’re going to have to look elsewhere. If you come out swinging, he’s not going to regale you with Kumbaya.

    larrycorreia
    The International Lord of Hate radiating fearsome hate

    And because he fights the way he does as Internet Larry, his posts seem to push some folks buttons to the point that they actually miss his intent.

    For example, when Larry responded to Alex MacFarlane’s call for “an end to the default of binary gender in science fiction stories,” he never once suggested that we should discriminate against the folks MacFarlane wants to read stories about. He never suggested there shouldn’t be any such stories. Nor did he ever suggest folks who are discriminated against never have a case. His point was that the best way to write an entertaining story was to put the entertainment first, not some political agenda. His point was also that he’s sick of folks trying to foist their interests on him and everyone else. If you want to write about certain types of characters, do it. But don’t tell everyone else they must.

    That was lost on some people. All they saw was someone who disagreed “rudely,” and they saw red.  I’d be seeing red too if I felt ruded upon. At the same time, they still missed his point. A lot have missed his point about the Hugos as well.

    But whatever happens with this latest kerfluffle, I had to tell my tale. Because I spent seven days with Larry Correia, International Lord of Hate. It was nip and tuck the whole time, but I survived his horrible onslaught. And then we enjoyed some ice creams and tropical trail mix, which I can happily report smelled a lot better than the beef jerky.

    Share

  • YA Books Ratings and Publisher Arrogance (shh, it’s about the $$)

    ByJohn Brown

    I’m a bit irked.

    I wish I could talk to a publisher about this. I should talk to a Barnes & Noble corporate book buyer. But since I don’t have one handy, I’ll discuss it with you folks. Maybe I’m up in the night? You tell me.

    Here’s the deal. My wife is 7th and 8th grade language arts teacher. My wife is also a mom who loves books and wants her girls to read until their eyes bong out of their heads.

    So we go to find books for her students and for our girls and, jeez, wouldn’t you know it, but this YA book features masturbation and that one features lots of fine words like F*** and S*** and this one is about giving the guys a blow job (tee, hee, hee).

    Yeah, I know about YA saves. This isn’t about banning this or that content.

    It’s about the fact that I’m a parent. And, geez, I have a certain way I want to raise my kids. My wife is a teacher who needs to provide books to her students that aren’t going to piss some parent off. Why? Because she’s providing a service to that parent. Because she wants to keep her job. And because it’s her job to help parents improve their kid’s reading ability not tell them how to raise a family.

    So why in the Sam Hill can’t publishers rate their books?

    There are millions of their customers who would find this useful.

    Well, here’s one answer I was given by a writer friend I respect.

    Everyone in the industry is really pushing back against the idea of a rating system. Let me see if I can explain why.

    A friend of mine, ZZ [name removed], is the nicest person in the world. Volunteered for years at a prison to help people learn to express themselves by writing. Her older brother was a closeted homosexual for years, contracted AIDS, died too young. She wrote a book recently called [title removed], about a family in the restaurant business (as hers was) who have a “late” baby and the problems it causes for the older teens, one of whom is coming out as gay. It’s a soft, quite, sad, moving book. And it would be part of the “rating” system and banned from a bunch of schools. ZZ also wrote a book a few years ago about teenage pregnancy. Also beautifully written, kind, compassionate. But it would get tagged by schools as “inappropriate.” ZZ feels strongly that there are kids out there who need books, kids in your wife’s school system who need to be told they are not alone.

    I don’t see any way to have a system that distinguishes between books that I see as anchors to kids who need help and those books which I see as genuinely offensive and encouraging bad teen behavior by glorifying it. The only system I know is me recommending the best books I see. And I’d much rather see librarians and school teachers go through books on a case by case basis, deciding whether they personally think it fits the values in their community than to have someone else not attached to the community do the same thing.

    Uh huh.

    If this is accurate, it shows the industry’s stunning lack of creativity AND arrogance. Because if publishers really were listening to parents, they could come up with a solution.

    No, really. They could.

    Why, there’s already one out there. They don’t even have to expend even one creative molecule to find it.  

    Look at the Kids-in-Mind rating system: http://www.kidsinmind.com/. It rates movies 1-10 on sex, violence, and profanity (SVP).

    There’s no age stipulation in their ratings.

    Unlike other rating systems, there’s no “children under 13 not admitted.” No “appropriate for teens.” No recommended range for this or that group or this book is good and that one’s bad.

    It just rates the content and gives it a number. You, as the user, determine what level you’re comfortable with and then find the movies that fit.

    I’m a 4-10-4 on sex, violence, and profanity. You might be a 5-2-9. That’s not good or bad. It’s just what it is. More importantly, the rating allows me as a consumer to EASILY FIND AND PURCHASE THE PRODUCT I WANT.

    I know some folks have never heard of it, but consumer choice is a really cool thing.

    And if I hear about a movie that’s amazingly good, but I see it doesn’t match my normal levels, then I can make an informed choice to watch or not watch. The King’s Speech, for example, is a bit above my normal profanity setting. But this didn’t prevent me from watching the film (it was a fabulous movie, btw). SVP just gave me a couple of pieces of simple data I find useful as I make my choices. Data I’m already looking for.

    If publishers were to use a similar rating system, every librarian could peg the levels they wanted in their school and be done with it. As well as consider special cases. Teachers could peg the level for their classroom. Parents could search and find and buy. And they could guide their kids in their purchases as well.  

    Make it easy for them to go case-by-case. And don’t imagine librarians and teachers and parents are going to read every YA book published to find those that fit with their values. They don’t, can’t, do that now. They won’t in some utopian future. If you give them SVP ratings, it will help them spend their time, case-by-case, on books that they’re likely to buy. Which probably means they’ll buy more.

    Write about homosexuality, rape, whatever. But make it easy on the consumer to see if it’s the kind of product they want to buy.

    Some might say, but themes of homosexuality and rape and child abuse etc. etc. are important and would be automatically excluded!

    No, they won’t.

    You can write a story about those themes that scores low on SVP. You can write about those themes and score high. Themes are outside the SVP scale.

    Some parents, librarians, and teachers may want to avoid some themes. Others would seek them out.

    So, good golly, here’s an idea only a rocket scientist could come up with. OR someone who took the issue a tiny bit seriously and wanted to serve their customer. How about a little box under the SVP rating that contained “sensitive” themes.

    They don’t have to do what Scholastic does with its school catalogs and label them “mature” themes, which might suggest “mature audiences only.” They’re not “mature” themes. They’re not “bad” themes. They’re not “good” themes. They’re just sensitive themes.

    SVP and Sensitive Themes: four little pieces of data consumers would find oh so incredibly helpful.

    But no. The industry can’t be bothered with that. And, consequently, reveals its arrogance and total lack of respect for a HUGE portion of their customers.

    I guess they think librarians are mindless idiots. Never in a million years, if a librarian is tuned into the needs of her community and thinks a book on homosexuality would be important, would she search on that sensitive theme and her SVP ratings. And parents would never do that for sure (do you know how many gun-clinging troglodyte parents there are out there!?)

    I guess the industry thinks because it sits in an office in NY City that it knows everything about raising kids. It knows so much it must dictate to parents how to do it right.

    Yeah.

    Or maybe what this really shows is that the publishers have got a book they want to sell. They want to make a buck. And, dang it, this might hurt sales. Because then people wouldn’t buy things they didn’t want.

    They really don’t seem to care about what many of their customers want. Because if they did, and they realio trulio cared about these sensitive topics and saving the world, then they’d publish books high on the SVP because they’re just sooooo goooood, but they’d also publish books on those topics that are equally as goooood with SVP ratings that the majority of parents and school districts would be comfortable with.

    And they’d let the customer choose what they wanted to purchase.

    Customer choice. Customer service.

    Wow, what revolutionary concepts.

    They even might find that if you delight the customer, they’ll come back for more.

    I know, I know. I’m living in fantasy land; delighted customers coming back for more . . . as if.

    Question is: will the publishers listen?

    We’ll see. I truly hope I’m wrong about their arrogance and disregard towards huge swaths of their customer base. In the meantime, you might want to think about talking to the manager of your favorite book store about this. Strangely enough, books stores have a lot of pull with publishers.

    You also might want to look at Kids-in-Mind. It seems to make a lot in advertising. Looks like there’s money to be made in a review site like that for YA books. I know a lot of people who have said they wished they could just read books for a living. Anyone feeling entrepreneurial? Anyone?

    EDIT

    Two more points.

    First, what’s sensitive for one person may not be for another. But that’s the beauty of this. This only identifies subjects that would be sensitive for reasonable sections of the market. For someone with your reading tastes, you’d say, eh, homosexuality, big deal. That’s not a sensitive subject. For others, they’d say, hum, have to think about it.

    It’s just giving data. A respect and recognition of different tastes. Not a prescription of what someone’s taste should be. Or what people should or shouldn’t feel is sensitive subject matter.

    For this reason, I don’t think publishers would want to use the word “controversial” because that implies controversy. Just sensitive (or some other similar label). Or even “Potentially Sensitive Themes.” This is just giving data about content areas SOME parents might want to know about.

    Second, the SVP is not going to be 100% perfect. But something is much better than nothing. And having some clear standard for rating, whatever it is, pegs things so you can figure out where you are. As long as the raters are fairly consistent, then you can tell if something is close to the type of product you’re interested in. There will be goofs. No doubt about it. Huge goofs would be probably very infrequent because a ten-point scale allows you to make gradual distinctions. But I’ll take some goofs now and again over nothing at all.

    Furthermore, because it’s NOT age-based like the MPAA and prescriptive in the target audience, it’s not telling parents what to do. There is no “good for your kids” and “bad for your kids” rating. Just the level you’re comfortable with.

    Finally, some people object to ratings because “how can you boil a book down to a few numbers?” I don’t think this boils a book down. It’s only a couple of pieces of data about a book. Data parents are already looking for. The cover, recommendations, word-of-mouth, flap, description, buzz–these are all pieces of data as well.

    In fact, you and I exclude many books based on genre labels alone. And yet we don’t worry about a genre labels much. They’re useful pieces of information. Are they always perfect? No. But they’re by-and-large very useful. I don’t see that this is much different. Just another piece of data to help consumers find what they want.

    Share

  • Good Stuff! The political book for our times

    ByJohn Brown

    I just finished the most important book on politics I’ve read in years.

    Years.

    In fact, I’ll go so far as to say it is the book for our current political times.

    I say this because America isn’t facing the threat of Communism, Nazism, poverty, illiteracy, or disease. ISIS and the terrorists are on the run. We’re beginning to figure out a better way of treating our LGBT brother and sisters. And we’re not poisoning ourselves with the broad-based racism or sexism of the past. Yes, there are lots of areas where we can improve. But these are not the main problems of our current time.

    In my opinion, the main problem of our current time is a burgeoning contempt between left and right.

    Political scientists find our nation is more polarized than at any time since the Civil War. People in positions of power and influence on both sides of the spectrum, and everywhere in between, are setting us against each other. They tell us our neighbors who are on the other side are evil, corrupt, or stupid. And must be utterly vanquished. And many of us perpetuate the message, very frequently on social media.

    By some measures the divide between right and left in America is beginning to approach the size and feeling of the one between the Israelis and Palestinians.

    Is that really where we want to go?

    I think most people will agree with me that it is not. So what do we do about it?

    May I suggest we start by reading this terrific book by Arthur C. Brooks called Love Your Enemies: How Decent People Can Save America from the Culture of Contempt.

    With that title you might think Brooks is suggesting that the solution to the divisions in our country is to start a national program for the singing of “Kum Ba Yah.” If so, you would be wrong.

    Brooks doesn’t claim we need less disagreement. He thinks we need more disagreement. Yes, you read that right. More. He’s calling for more, strong disagreement. It’s just that we need to disagree in a better way. A different way.

    At this point you might be wondering how it’s possible to disagree, and in greater amounts, and not run the nation off the cliff in flames.

    I was wondering that too. And Brooks provides the research, the thinking, and a number of practical methods in his book. Brooks will make you think about how we interact in a totally different way. And he does it with his trademark good humor. You’ll laugh, you’ll think, and you’ll come away seeing a better path.

    If a good portion of us disagree the way Brooks is suggesting, it will change our country. All we need is a core of us willing to try.

    If you’re interested in politics, if you are getting tired of the insults on social media and the news, if you’re tired of the way the parties are not working with each other in Washington, I think you’ll love this book.

    If you want a taste of what Brooks is talking about, watch his eleven-minute commencement speech at BYU this last April. Find it here. If you want another taste, watch his TED talk.

    Share

  • Good Stuff! TruContain, Johnny Walker, Great British Baking Show

    ByJohn Brown

    I love the sunny winters we get up at Bear Lake. I hate the snow that my car brings into the garage. Because the snow melts, and the water runs to the bottom corners of the garage and pools there, creating a huge mess until I get out there with my cement squeegee.

    Who wants to continually be moving crap in and out of the garage so you can squeegee it? And in the winter when it’s freezing?

    Not me.  

    For years I’ve wanted to do something about it, but what can you do after the concrete of your garage is poured?

    Well, this year, after the first big storm, I got sick and tired of traipsing through the water and mud and cleaning all that crap up. So I put my massive Google-fu skills to work. And, lo and behold, I discovered a product called TruContain.

    It’s a car mat for your garage. It’s made of thick vinyl and has raised edges.

    I bought one.

    The UPS man delivered it not many days later.

    The installation instructions were simple. Two steps. The perfect number for me to manage. Step one was to let it warm up in the house for twenty-four hours so it was easier to unroll. I did that. Step two was to unroll and position it in the garage where we park our car. That took about a minute. So far so good.

    No soon after the mat was deployed, we had another snow storm. The van went out for daily driving and came back with an undercarriage covered in ice and snow. We parked the van on the mat. The ice and snow melted. And the mat caught it and contained it.

    I was delighted.

    The next day the van went out for another day’s use and came back all covered in snow and ice again. The snow and ice melted, along with a bunch of dirt. And the mat caught it again!

    I was whooping for joy.

    I’m still whooping for joy because my garage is dry!

    If we get a lot of water on the mat, I’ll use the shop vac to suck it up. I took out five gallon of dirty, cold water the first time. Five gallons that would have flooded my garage! If there’s not too much water on the mat, I’ll drag the mat out with a helper and dump the water on the lawn.  

    I love my TruContain garage mat.

    If you have winter water mess in your garage, you’ll want to consider it. I got mine from the manufacturer garageflooringllc.com.  

    One word of advice. If you get one, don’t get one bigger than you need. If it’s too big, then the mat will stick out from the sides of the car, and when you go to step out, you’ll be stepping out into your mini garage lake.

    #

    I enjoy books about Army Rangers, Navy SEALS, Special Forces soldiers, etc.  Almost all of them are written from the point of view of the operators. But I just found and enjoyed one, not about the operators, but about a guy who helped them in Iraq.

    The book is called Code Name: Johnny Walker and was written by the guy the SEALs called Johnny Walker with the help of Jim DeFelice.

    Who is Johnny Walker?

    He was a resident of Mosul and was what they called a “terp”, an interpreter who went with the SEALs on their missions. He went on hundreds and hundreds of missions with them. And he offers a fascinating glimpse into what life was like in Iraq during the Iraq War for those Iraqis who helped the coalition forces.

    The SEALs appreciated his service. I know this because a host of them have blurbed his book. Furthermore, they helped him eventually immigrate to America. That’s how grateful they were for his service.

    If you like these types of books and would enjoy new insights, I think you’ll really enjoy the book. Johnny Walker does swear a bit. But I tend to take people as they are. And it was well worth time I spent listening to him.

    #

    For Christmas my daughter received a number of seasons of The Great British Baking Show. It’s a competition baking show. I’d heard about it before, but I’d seen episodes of American competition cooking shows and didn’t enjoy them at all.

    However, my daughter said this was nothing like the American shows, that it was awesome, and it was so awesome she wanted to the DVDs for Christmas so she could watch the episodes again. I needed to give it a try, she said. So I gave it a try.

    I’m happy to report that I and my family have are enjoying the heck out of her DVDs.

    The British folks that are competing in the challenges are down-to-earth and interesting. Some of them are funny. The tips about baking are interesting. And, best of all, the British show makers know how to create suspense.

    They start each season with a group of twelve amateur bakers. Two professional bakers give them a baking challenge with a time limit and then judge the bakes. After a series of three challenges, the pros name a star baker for that series and then also announce who was at the bottom of the pack and will be leaving the show. If you like cooking or have ever found yourself watching a cooking program all the way through, I think you’ll really enjoy these fun, British bakers.

    Share

  • Gun Runner submitted!

    ByJohn Brown

    Gun Runner, the action-packed, science fiction novel Larry Correia and I have been working on, has been delivered to Toni Weisskopf at Baen Books.

    It was a blast to write.

    This song was played, as was appropriate, in celebration.

    The seed came from Larry’s eleven-year-old son. When we sat down to develop an idea for a sci-fi con presentation a number of years ago, Larry asked: “Joe, what’s cool?”

    The answer: “Giant robots, bandits, and murderers.”

    We looked at each other and said, “That IS cool.”

    And thus was a story born.

    The current description Baen has goes like this.

    “Once, Jackson Rook was a war hero. Raised from boyhood to pilot an exosuit mech, he’d fought gallantly for the rebellion against the Collectivists. But that was a long time ago, on a world very far away.

    Now, Jackson Rook is a criminal, a smuggler on board the Multipurpose Supply Vehicle Tar Heel. His latest mission: steal a top-of-the-line mech called the Citadel and deliver it to the far-flung planet Swindle, a world so hostile even the air will kill you. The client: a man known only as the Warlord. Rook has been in the smuggling business long enough to know that it’s best to take the money and not ask questions. But Rook cannot stand by and watch as the Warlord runs roughshod over the citizens of Swindle, the way the Collectivists did on his homeworld. For all his mercenary ways, Rook is not a pirate. And deep within the smuggler, the heart of a warrior still beats.”

    The book should be available February, 2021.

    Share
  • |

    Writers of the Future, the Church of Scientology, and Killing Puppies

    ByJohn Brown

    Author Jim C. Hines recently posted a thoughtful blog about connections between Writers of the Future and Scientology. There are a number of folks who have issues with Hubbard’s metaphysical claims and the church he started. Some folks claim that supporting Writers of the Future (WOTF) in any way supports the Church of Scientology (CoS) and the abuse of the young, the innocent, those who are vulnerable, and the stupid.

    I won a first prize in the Writers of the Future. I received $2,000 cash for the prize and subsequent publication. I also recieved a paid trip to Cocoa Beach, Florida to workshop with the other winners and pro writers. I tell new writers to submit to the contest all the time. I do not feel I’m supporting any wickedness. Let me walk you through this. You tell me if I’m killing any puppies.

    A. What underlies the continued operation of WOTF?

    1. Hubbard wanted it (I don’t know why, although he states it was to help new sff authors and illustrators).
    2. The folks who run it have a very HIGH esteem of Hubbard and so have huge motivation to make it successful.
    3. A trust was set aside, although without looking at the books we can’t know exactly if it’s an independent thing or if money is being funneled from other CoS holdings.  You do not pay many to enter the contest, so all of the money to run the contest and pay prizes etc. comes from this trust, sales of the WOTF anthologies, and perhaps other CoS holdings.
    4. It’s used for positsive PR for Hubbard’s brand name.
    5. The judges, who don’t give a fig about CoS, want to help new writers.

    B. What are the effects of the contest?

    1. No documented writer conversions to CoS.
    2. No documented WOTF anthology conversions of young skulls full of mush to CoS. Someone please show me some evidence of the WOTF antho being a gateway to anything, despite the rumored statements of some Scientologists someone’s uncle overheard.
    3. No documented donations to CoS that I know of.
    4. New writers get paid a whole bunch of money, get to network, and receive instruction from pros for a week.
    5. The winners, on average, think better of Hubbard, as do their friends and family.
    6. Most winners report it was a great experience and encourage other new writers to submit.
    7. WOTF sells some anthologies and makes a little bit of cash to offset expenses. I can’t imagine they’re ever in the black, are they?
    8. WOTF tracks winners and uses those who have done well as PR shiny for . . . WOTF and the Hubbard brand name.

    I was a first place winner. I had a marvelous time. This was the one held in Cocoa Beach, Florida. One night I needed to go to a convenience store to get something (tooth paste?). One of the WOTF folks drove me there. A nice woman. It was raining. It was just the two of us in the SUV.

    I’m a VERY CURIOUS guy. I’ve read most of DIANETICS. I stopped by a Scientology place in Seattle to chat. I like hearing people talk about their faiths, about their lives, about whatever. If you spend any amount of time with me, you will tell me your life story. You will. It just happens.

    I tried my dangest to get something out of that woman, but she was as tight as a clam sealed in four feet of concrete.

    Nobody talked Scientology. Everyone involved went out of their way to avoid it. End of story. I’ve talked to many other winners. They report the same.

    On the other hand, they did have a PR guy there.

    Mr. PR intereviewed us about the contest and Hubbard’s works and took footage. Our one-on-one interviews were on camera. We took still photos. He asked us in our acceptance speeches to thank Hubbard by name.

    He was a PR guy.

    It was very clear his job was to generate PR content for WOTF and Hubbard. How do I KNOW this? Because his questions all centered around WOTF and/or Hubbard. But never CoS.

    Some of the winners did not like his solicitation for a mention of Hubbard’s name. There was some reality show behind the scenes grumbling and scheming, and they did not mention Hubbard in their thanks at the awards event.

    That’s fine, although it didn’t make much sense to me. Maybe they felt gratitude needs to be spontaneous, not asked for. And I can agree with them on that. At the same time, why would I take $2,000 cash for the prize and publication, and the paid hotel, and workshop, and airfare and then slap the folks who gave it to me? I was indeed grateful. So I mentioned Hubbard in my thanks (oh, look at how noble I am; somebody should saint me).

    What did the contest do for me?

    1. Gave me some cash.
    2. Validated that maybe I had some chops. No, I wasn’t competing against pros. But I was competing against all those wanting to break in. I talked to Wolverton, who was a coordinating judge for many years and was the first reader, about the numbers of submissions they received. Hundreds upon hundreds each quarter. Huge boxes full. Were some drek? Of course. Who cares? Others weren’t. I won.
    3. Planted an idea in me that maybe I could do this.
    4. Gave me great connections with some pros and other authors.
    5. Allowed me to tell people I won a big international award for my writing. A little PR for my own brand. Who doesn’t want to engage in a bit of puffery now and then (and so you see, Fred, I am a little fabulous, aren’t I . . . )?

    So the contest, as far as I’m concerned, is a GREAT contest for new writers.

    But am I supporting CoS? And is that a bad thing?

    Every time I purchase a Kraft Foods or Nabisco product, I directly fund Phillip Morris tobacco company and their efforts to hook children on smoking abroad. Some of the tomatoes I purchase in Walmart and other grocery stores are tainted by slavery that occurs today in Florida and California’s central valley with migrant workers. Some of those tomatoes end up in various restaurants like Pizza Hut or Papa Murphy’s. Every bite of chocolate you eat funds slavery in the Ivory Coast, where the vast majority of cocoa beans come from. Not a few slavers here and there, but widespread slavery and abuse. There are many situations like this.

    What do you do when you like a product or service, but don’t necessarily want to lend aid to an affiliated cause?

    In many situations, I don’t do much.

    Alas, there goes my sainthood.

    I admit that I should and should probably think more about this.  At the same time, with regards to CoS, I don’t know that it is a wicked and exploitative organization.

    I’ve seen nothing that suggests they’re into crime. Or systemic abuse. Or fraud. Or that they have a vendetta against dumb people. I don’t share one iota of their faith in Hubbard or his metaphysical teachings. But I do share other values and beliefs with them. Just as I do with Catholics, Muslims, Pagans, Athiests, Communists, and Realtors.

    Besides, I never did PR for them. I’ve always said I DISAGREED with their theology, which is negative PR, if you think about it. Furthermore, I’m fairly confident the contest DOES NOT funnel large amounts of money to CoS.

    What can they be making after taking out the expenses of the award week for all those authors, illustrators, judges, “luminaries,” etc. that they fly in and house, all in addition to the prize and publication monies? I’m confident they make nothing at all, but actually lose money each year.

    So the net net is that they get some PR for WOTF in the SFF community and some for Hubbard’s name. That’s it. That’s what I’m giving them.

    But I don’t see any documented stories of that leading to any donations or conversions to CoS. Or positive PR for CoS. Which, again, I’m still not convinced is a systemically exploitative and wicked organization.

    But even if it were, am I really supporting CoS when I promote WOTF?

    I don’t think so. I’m not giving them cash. I’m not giving them any positive PR. It seems to me purchasing one bag of Oreos or a Lindt chocolate bar does more harm than this ever could.

    I feel so much better now. I am saving the puppies.

    Of course, if you disagree, please post a comment. If you have reliable documentation, not hearsay and tabloid clamor, that can add to the discussion, feel free to share it. I’m all for good data. And if you see issues with my logic, share that as well. But no wild-eyed, Chicken Little, my mother was eaten by CoS aliens rants please.

    As for that Twix I just ate. . .

    (sigh)

    EDIT 1: I just learned the Phillip Morris spun Nabisco and Kraft off in 2007.  So that frees up my Oreo conscience, but the principle remains.

    EDIT 2: Okay, so I just learned that the CoS planned and authorized crimes in Operation Snow White. What to make of that? Comments? Talk about your corporate espionage. I know there are governments and organizations around the world and in the US that engage in that all the time. But this is the first I’ve seen from a “church.”

    EDIT 3: Read through the links on this post by Deirdre Saoirse Moen where she explains why she no longer supports the WOTF contest. Primarily, she just can’t stand some of the CoS practices.

    Of note is the link to the court report by the Village Voice at the Debbie Cook hearing. One question I have is why all those leaders were in the Hole to begin with? Was it some routine church program? Yeah, it sounds awful, but the military puts the SEALs and Special Forces through awful things. So I’m not clear on all of that.  And why haven’t more come out to complain? The unlawful detainment aspect of these allegations is disturbing. But are they really doing this? Are these isolated experiences, or SOP? I don’t know.

    There’s another one farther down that lists alleged harassment of folks posting some CoS theology documents on the internet.  I sampled the documents linked to there. Most of those are just copyright violation letters. SOP for anyone trying to protect copyright.

    Looking at Operation Snow White, the Debbie Cook hearing, and the copyright violation stuff, it’s becoming fairly clear that the CoS has taken an extremely aggressive approach against some of those who speak out against them (maybe it’s over the top) and a similar approach with protecting their materials. Although I think they’ve lost the battle about their materials on the internet. 

    Instead of trying to win public opinion with the truth, it seems in some cases they’ve instead attempted through various methods to try to silence detractors.

    Anyone have any more links to substantive material?

    EDIT 4: Here’s a letter from Joni Labaqui, a Scientologist and the person who runs the whole WOTF shooting match, to Frank Wu, who was an illustrator winner, and had posted some stuff about WOTF and CoS here: http://www.frankwu.com/illo.html (I found the letter at the bottom).

    Dear Frank,

    Hi! It’s Joni Labaqui here. Haven’t seen you since you blew me off at LA Con a few years ago and now I know why. I didn’t understand why you didn’t want to talk to me for very long. I loved your write-up on your site about the contest until you got into talking about Scientology. I know what you mean about feeling hurt when people put down your church. I happen to think you are NOT stupid because you are a Christian. I have many Christian friends and I respect their beliefs and even fight for them. But then you get into my religion on your site and putting out falsehoods, then I realized you didn’t have all of the info. We don’t sue people for bad mouthing our religion. The Church sues when there is slander and liable of considerable magnitude involved. Lets use an analogy here – lets say someone accused you of raping the girl next door, but you didn’t do it. Would you be upset? Lets say the parents then sued you or had you put in jail or both. Would you be upset? Would you hire an attorney? Gee, you’d be involved in a legal suit wouldn’t you? What if the father of the girl made sure you were lied about in the newspapers and on TV and he tried or succeeded in ruining your reputation? How would you feel? On top of that, lets say what really happened is you simply talked to the girl and were trying to help her and she turned around and accused you. How would you feel? And how about all those people who love to gossip? (I personally hate people who gossip as all they are doing is hurting others and they are basically low-life losers – lots of people fit into this category, I’m afraid). How would you feel?

    You were actually wrong in that Scientology pays for the writers and illustrators awards. The Hubbard estate (which is not the church) makes so much money on royalties from his hundreds of published fiction it would make your head spin. You were right about the fact that every one of us who works at Author Services is a Scientologist, but the judges of the contest are not. They share the same goal that Mr. Hubbard did in starting and paying for this contest – to help the new guy, just like yourself back then when you won. So I don’t understand, a nice person like you has to even bring up the subject in your write-up. You think we are interested in “converting” any of you winners just because we have you tour the Life Exhibition? The answer from the horses mouth is NO. We are simply showing you more about his life and works so that you have the facts about the other part of his life, not the bullshit and lies that has been put out by vested interests of multi-billion dollar drug companies and the psychs that can’t stand us. Have you received tons of unwanted, unsolicited mail? The answer is no. Trust me, if we wanted to convert you, you would sure know it. Believe it or not, Mr. Hubbard in founding this contest just wanted you guys to be seen and heard because he knew how hard it is to get started. Period. Its not about Scientology. That is the simplicity of this contest. Anyone reading anything else into it has their own issues and I feel sorry for them. I guess maybe you ran into someone bad mouthing us and you listened to them. If someone badmouthed you – to this day – I wouldn’t buy it. I’d tell them to take a hike. Do you know why? Because I know you are a good person. I met you, I shared some of that joy you experienced when you won, and I was truely happy for you because I like people being happy, winning in life and doing well and winning this contest. I still like you, but I’m a bit disappointed that you felt compeled to write what you did. I don’t get it. I personally put in hundreds of hours of work to help give you the event that you won your award at, so how do you think I feel?

    I hope to hear from you. Best, Joni

    Share

7 Comments

  1. congratulations!!!!John, you deserve this and there will be more recognition and plaudits in the future

Comments are closed.