BAS-LAG: Das China Miéville-Forum

Seblon · Administrator Beiträge: 354

Gerade habe ich die Antworten auf unsere Interview-Fragen von China via Email bekommen.

Hier der Text der Email inkl. Interview-Antworten:

Dear Seblon,

Here at long last are the answers to those questions. I'm afraid I will likely not have the time to answer in anything like such detail again! It took me hours and hours. I'm happy to do it, but I'm afraid I think it'll have to be a one-off, followed maybe by an occasional partial followup.

Please pass on my thanks to everyone for truly amazing, fascinating and detailed questions. I'm enormously flattered by the careful attention. I hope the answers do justice to the questions.

All my best, China
.....

>>
>> Questions about KING RAT:
>> We talked inside the forum a lot about KING RAT and there are some questions about it:
>> The main characters in KING RAT remind us of classical comic superheros, like Spiderman or Batman. Did you try to create a novel about the genesis of a superhero?

Not consciously, though many people have pointed out the 'superheroic' elements. I was more interested in fairy-tales than superheroes, at least at a conscious level.

>> The novel was written in a time where Drum&Bass was on its zenith, which lets the story become a bit historical determinate today. If you would write the novel today would you use Drum&Bass as a central theme again?

That's an impossible question to answer because I wouldn't want to write the novel today - the novel was inextricably part of its time. This question presumes that the D&B elements were sort of an add-in to the book, whereas the book was a product of that time. I agree though that that means it has dated now, but I don't mind that, as it's so much to do with its time.

>> How is it possible that a rat gives a birth to human child? How could Sauls dad fathers a child with a rat? How is it possible that the main characters like King Rat, Anansi or Loplop are humans for the humans and animals for the animals? Why aren’t these issues broached within the novel?
>> Was the surrealism of novel conceived or developed during the process of writing?

These issues aren't dealt with in the novel because they're not relevant. I have no problem at all with saying that these are the animal spirits, but that for humans they will generally appear human. Why? Because that's how it is. I understand that some people might find that frustrating, but to me that's part of what puts the book in the lineage of a fairytale. I don't even particularly consider this 'surreal', it's just a question of differential perception. I don't want to get bogged down with explaining everything - sometimes not explaining is what gives a particular flavour to a story. So, in answer to the questions 'how does that happen?', my answer would be 'Like that.'

>> Questions about PSS:
>> At the beginning of the work on PSS did you know very precisely in which direction Lin and Yagharek would develop or did they and the storyline surprise you in some manner?

As far as I remember - and don't forget this is a long time ago now - I had it planned out in some detail how it would all turn out. Generally I plan my books in great detail.

>> Inside the forum was a discussion about the crisis energy and its background.
>> Was it a means to an end which would be some kind of techno bubble or was it a try of some deeper metaphorical issue? If you would approve a metaphorical layer is the Crisis energy more a state in which things are or a measurable energy? Is it the unification of seemingly opposed things within a dialectic process? Is it Ying and Yang as a source of energy?

Yes.

The point is that, like most things in fantastic literature, it is both a literalised piece of invented science, and is also metaphorical. Metaphorically, I was interested in literalising a kind of dialectical process (and this is why I don't see it as Yin and Yang, which to my understanding is about balance rather than crisis). So it's a way of thinking about dialectical energy, but that doesn't mean it's 'really' a metaphor - it's both metaphoric and, in the world of Bas-Lag, literally true.

>> Did you first develop maps of Bas-Lag or did you start to write the novels?

Maps first, then the stories.

>> Who would be your favourite director of a potential PSS movie?

I don't know. Maybe Cronenberg? Maybe Svankmajer? Maybe del Toro? Maybe someone new completely?

>> Would you prefer a pure CGI movie like FINAL FANTASY or SHRECK for creating the world of Bas-Lag?

No absolutely not. I don't like CGI, I think it is grossly overused, and often looks rubbish - plasticky, weightless, cheap. I don't mind CGI being used to tweak things and clean up edges, but I'm heartily sick of its overuse.

>> Questions about THE SCAR:
>> Why is Bellis so obsessed to come back to New Crobuzon, which she has just escaped from?
>> Could you please explain why Bellis is such a passive person within the story in the face of such huge crises all around her? Why does she seem so frigid and reserved? Why do we get to know so less about her inner life and her motivations?

She wants to come back to NC because she loves it. She had to escape it, but that doesn't mean she wanted to. She's a creature of the city.

And I'm afraid no, I can't explain why she is the way she is (though I would add that I don't see her as 'passive', but rather 'contained')! There are plenty of people in the real world whose characters are somewhat opaque - there's no reason it shouldn't be the same for characters in fiction. My job's to describe an invented character, rather than to psychologise her. Of course if she seems unbelievable to readers then I haven't done my job well, and I can only apologise, but the book attempts to depict her as a realistic, if perhaps rather mysterious person. You are of course right that we don't get to know so much about her motivations... but of course if I'd wanted to tell the reader about her motivations, I would have done so! So I'm not going to start now...

Sorry if that's annoying! Everything i wanted to tell the reader is there in the book.

>> Questions about IRON COUNCIL:
>> Especially as a gay man I am always thrilled about gay protagonists in a phantastic novel but in IRON COUNCIL I didn’t understand the relevance of cutters homosexuality because it had no meaning to the storyline itself. Could you please tell us what you motivation was to make a gay person to one of the main characters?

I think it a shame that the homosexuality of characters always has to be what a book is 'about'. I wanted Iron Council to be a love story, but the two characters were emerging in my head as both male, which meant that to have them in love, they were going to be gay. That's the order of the events, not starting by deciding I wanted a gay character. Of course having realised that they'd be gay, I wasnt' going to pretend that that wouldn't have ramifications in that world, but it was never supposed to be *about* homosexuality. Just to feature two gay characters. Or to be more exact, one gay character, and one sort of abstractly polysexual character.

>> In opposite to PSS the metaphorical layer of IC can’t be ignored. Did you try very conscious to write a political phantastic novel? We discussed within the forum if and how the psychological depth of the characters are receded of the metaphorical layer.

It was absolutely intended to be a deliberately political fantasy novel. I still wanted the characters to be psychologically believable, however, and the world to be literally believable. But yes, the politics were central.

>> IC seems to be written by a disillusioned Berthold Brecht on LSD.

This may be my favourite description ever!

>> The political and metaphorical layer seems to create some kind of distance to the characters which reminds on Brechts "Verfremdungseffekt" in which the spectator should get in distance to the characters on stage to see their mistakes and to get the chance to make it better.
>> How conscious did you develop and use this effect?

I didn't want to distance to the extent of making the world unbelievable. But I was interested in the Brechtian technique, which was why the Flexible Puppet Theatre use Brechtian techniques. So I guess I'd say it was less Brechtian than meta-Brechtian.

>> Do you see the capture of the iron council in the time golem as a metaphor for the state of the socialist ideas today? Did the socialist ideas become a historical monument? How can you deal with this as a socialist?

The idea wasn't to depict socialism as a monument, so much as to conceive as that kind of hope as 'always-already there'. permanently immanent in the everyday.

>> Other questions:
>> How do work? How many hours do you write per diem? Do you have to discipline yourself to sit down and write? Do you use a PC or a Laptop?

I use a Mac laptop. On the days when I'm writing - which isn't every single day, because it never works out that way - I write many hours. I often get up very early and write for 12 or more hours in a day. I might do that for a couple of weeks or so, then spend several days doing other stuff and not writing at all. So it's very intense, but very patchy.

>> In how many languages have your novels been translated yet?

I can't remember (I'm so stupid about stuff like that)! But quite a few.

>> Do you have favourite German writers and why do you like them?

I can't read German so am reliant on work in translation. I really like Walter Moers, because of his imagination and the way his illustrations interact with his text. I also like Gunter Grass, though its many years since I read him.

>> Have you ever been to Germany? What about the Frankfurter Buchmesse?

Unfortunately not, though I'd like to.

>> A lot of people get the impression our time become more and more insecure and dangerous today. We talk about the clash of cultures between the religious fundamental, traditionalist almost archaic societies and the enlightened, secularised and individualised western societies. Our western societies seems to have sense crisis and the only values with seem to be left are the money and the individualised hedonism which makes us much more insecure by facing societies which are willing to kill themselves for religious and archaic ideas. What do you think about this issue? Do you think religious beliefs should be more protected than other opinions. Can we expect any reflection of such issues in your next works?

I think the idea that the west is 'enlightened' is very unpersuasive at the moment, and 'secular' is pretty questionable. I think the mass-murder perpetrated by the west is still mass-murder, and deeply 'unenlightened', and justified by racism, and cultural supremacism, no matter how much it says it's about bringing 'civilisation'.

I don't think religious beliefs should be more protected than other opinions, but I also think that we need to be aware of the way racism sometimes defines religiousness as well as ethnicity as part of what it despises, and therefore attacks on 'religion' are, depending on the time and the religion attacked, sometimes part of a more specific racist attack. In the 1930s, antisemitism would have made all sorts of claims about the evils of Jewish belief - that wasn't just an abstract critique of religion, it was part of a campaign of vilification. I think that's what we're seeing against Islam now. Of course that doesn't mean *agreeing* with aspects of Islamic teaching (though like all religions most of the edicts are disputed within the faith community), but it means not standing by for the demonisation of muslims - or any other group.

I also think that the notion, perpetrated by people such as dawkins, that religiosity is a kind of *intellectual error*, is quite wrong-headed. I think religion is a social and political phenomenon as well as an intellectual and emotional one, and so arguing against it on the grounds that its 'intellectually wrong' will get you nowhere. That's why all the arguments about how foolish creationism is can't make sense of why non-stupid people (and not all fundamentalists are stupid) believe creationism. For that you need a political understanding of religion.

>> At the moment every Miéville fan is talking about the DETAILS movie. Do you have a voice in the script or the movie? Will the movie be very different from the story?Some months ago I heard the rumour that a KING RAT movie is under way. Could we expect any other movie based on a Miéville story in the next years?

I can express my opinion at the script, but I have no final say. King Rat is under discussion, and I keep my fingers crossed. As to everything else, there are discussions, but nothign very final. I don't like talking in any detail about this stuff as it's such a world of rumour, counterrumour, event and non-event! I'll keep my mouth mostly shut until it either definitively happens or definitively doesn't.

>> Questions of Molosovsky:
>>
>> I love it, when authors play with language and sound, as you do with
>> your ›culture shock‹-strategy to prevent readers feeling too
>> comfortable and being lullabyed. Regarding language you do this by
>> using neologisms and unexpected foreign expressions. German is my
>> native langguage, and it was always hugly funny for me how german words
>> like ›blitzbaum‹, ›luftgeists‹ oder ›inselberg‹ popped out of the text.
>> ›Ersatz‹ is the german expression you use the most in the Bas-Lag
>> novells.
>> Can you tell us something about your usage of exotic words
>> (maybe especially about the german expressions)?.

There's not much to tell, really! I just like neologisms, and put them together from various languages, until i find the ones that feel right. I wish I spoke German (I intend to try to learn it when I have the time) as I love the sound of it, and so the worlds like luftgeist that you point out where chosen because of their euphony. Ersatz, by the way, though a German word, is also used in English. As with a lot of our vocabulary, we cheerfully stole it.

I have dictionaries of English to Polish, greek, Latin, German, French, and I pilfer words as and when, precisely to try to create that culture shock you talk about.

>> There is always a big plot turn in the last chapters of your
>> Bas-Lag books. In a sense, you follow a good old subversive tradition
>> by misleading the reader over the majpor course of the narration. Then
>> in the finale, there comes a suprising shift of perspective, theme or
>> unexpectet turn of events. — Were these ›syncopic turns‹ among the
>> first conceptual things, when you draftet the ›anti-trilogy‹? Can you
>> tell us something about this aspect of your work, If it is not too
>> spoiler-endangerd?

To be honest those points weren't drafted in advance in that way, because what I start with is the setting, and a couple of key scenes, and then work out the innards of the plot at the end. I don't *set out* to have a sudden shift at the end per se, but I do come out of a pulp tradition so like those narrative twists and turns, of which that's an example.

>> LONDON: What is the most good/bad thing about living in London, about being a Londoner? For example: Does living in this ›global city‹ make you feel proud/lucky or ashamed/doomed (sometimes)?

Above all I like how London is a patchwork - of all things, architecture, culture, politics, etc. Unlike, for example, Paris, London isn't the triumph of a particular aesthetic, but a chaos, and I love that. I'm neither proud nor ashamed - I didn't do it! I am lucky, however.

>> NON FICTION: »Between Equal Rights« was a difficult but thrilling read for me. Do you intend to publish further non-fiction books?

Absolutely. I have several ideas - two in particular that I want to pursue. But it's a question of finding time. There will be more, however. I'm delighted you enjoyed the book, by the way - more people than I had imagined seem to have read it.

>> RECOMMENDATIONS / INSPIRING EXAMPLES: In the ›Crooked Timber‹ seminar and the interview with Lou Anders for ›The Believer‹ you muse about the ›Holy Grail of fiction‹. QUOTE: »So my aim would be precisely to write the ripping yarn that is also sociologically serious and stylistically avant-garde.« UNQUOTE
>> Huzzar to that. — Fans are always eager to get recommendations from their maestro. (Btw: Thanks for your list of »50 F & SF Books a Socialist Should Read«. Very inspiring! Cool stuff!)
>> Please, can you give us three recommendations (favorite artists/works) for each value?
>> a) ripping yarn;

Hmmmm. OK, Walter Moers, '13 1/2 Lives of Captain Bluebear'

>> b) sociologically serious;

'Heart of Darkness', Conrad.

>> c) stylistically avant-garde.

'Cyclonopedia', by Reza Negarestani (it's not out yet, it's forthcoming).

>> And since you are also a non-fiction author, can you
>> d) name us three non-fiction books that you hold dear?

'Against Postmodernism' - Alex Callinicos. 'From Apology to Utopia' - Martti Koskenniemi. 'Law and Marxism' - Evgeny Pashukanis.

>> THE GAY THING / SEX / LOVE:
>> We are having a discussion about Cutter and Judah, ›the lovers‹ in IRON COUNCIL. Rutger is wondering about your reasons for going with a homosexual couple, whereas it makes perfect sense for me, that you blend together the dyadic tensions of ›the master & the adept‹- with that of the ›the lover & the beloved‹-realtionship. I appreciated it as a clever and thoughtful riff on the topic about the differnces between ›physical love‹ and ›platonic love.‹ — Can you give a helpfull comment on that?

Oh lord. I don't know... I'm not a hundred percent sure I understand, but if I do, you're right to the extent that the tragedy is that Cutter loves Judah and Judah loves Cutter in very different ways. Cutter passionately, emotionally and sexually loves Judah. Judah is too abstracted, too messianic, to love Cutter *concretely*, in any way. It's not exactly platonic, but it is abstract.

>> GEEKING OUT / VEGGING OUT: Since you praise Neal Stephenson I hope you don't mind, when I use a quote from him to launch a question. In an essay about STAR WARS Stephenson referrs to the difference of ›geeking out‹ and ›vegging out‹.
>> (»Now we take the Jedi geeks offline« in Harald Tribune, June 18 2005; URL: http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/06/17/opinion/edneal.php)
>>
>> QUOTE: Modern English has given us two terms we need to explain this phenomenon: »geeking out« and »vegging out.«
>> To geek out on something means to immerse yourself in its details to an extent that is distinctly abnormal – and to have a good time doing it. To veg out, by contrast, means to enter a passive state and allow sounds and images to wash over you without troubling yourself too much about what it all means. UNQUOTE
>>
>> In Really Old School terms, this is somewhat a rephrasing of the antique distinction between ›homeopathic‹ and ›allotopic‹ catharsis. However these two ›flavours‹ are named: For us fans its obvious that your fiction provides both attitudes splendetly. — So, what is more fullfilling or satisfying for you (as a person / as an artist / as an activist, if there is a differnce): an audience that's geeking out or one that's vegging out?

Blimey. What an amazing question. I think overall i tend to prepare geeking out to vegging out. Though I'm certainly not averse to a bit of vegging occasionally, but I like being alienated, being a bit shocked, displaced, and I think that tends to be a bit uncomfortable, in a good way, and vegging is probably sort of pro-comfortable. Which is fine! But I prefer the former.

>>
>> Question of Theophagos
>>
>> The unavoidable New Weird: The discussion happened about three years ago. Would you say in retrospect, that the discussion brought light into darkness? What is your judgement about the current state? You are working at the moment on a 'pure' SF-Story. Will you return to the New Weird or is that moment passé?

I promised once in print that I would no longer talk about New Weird, because I felt like it was becoming a self-parody. If I answer this question you're going to make me a liar! I don't want to be a liar, so I hope you'll forgive me. All I'll say is that I never ever, nor would I, chose what to write on the basis of whether or not it was 'New Weird' or anything else. I write what I want, then think about how to think about and describe it later.

>> Your new novel: The title of your doctoral thesis is: "Between Equal Rights: A Marxist Theory Of International Law" and your article "What’s the point of international law?" was just published. It seems as if this subject is important to you. Now you write a story about humans meeting aliens. Will you reflect therein the basics of international law? Will you make the political/law system of the aliens a subject? If so, will these systems be oriented to historical ones or will they be differing from them?

Law is interesting to me primarily as it's viral, and reflects underlying social dynamics, which strike me as even more interesting. Lots of my fiction reflects on such underlying dynamics, of which law may or may not be a reflection. You can see how I'll duck the specifics of this question about the new novel, I'm afraid, because I don't like talking about work in progress.

>> Just because I'm curious: Who is the grandfather of Yagharek – Vishnu or Borges?

The Monster Manual in Dungeons and Dragons.

>> The unloved postmodernism: In the course of the discussion about the New Weird, you dissociated yourself from postmodern narrative methods. Do you think that these methods are generally inferior? Or only with the use of Fantasy or New Weird?

I have no intrinsic objection to any of these techniques per se, and have in fact used certain 'metafictional' techniques myself. I love Borges, I love Tristram Shandy, etc etc. So I'm not *against* these techniques. I just think that their radicalism has become overstated, and that the notion that 'sophistication' or 'avant-garde-ness' inheres in self-reflective fiction is very narrow. I think if you see for example the rather tired reiteration of such metafictional 'irony' and self-reflection in recent Paul Auster, for example, you see these techniques cannibalising themselves. My problem is that these techniques have become cliches, but still seem to think they are intrinsically radical. Chaucer was doing them! So no, not intrinsically inferior in any generic context, but not intrinsically superior either, and particularly uninteresting in their simplistic crudest iterations.

>> A very simple question: What are you reading at the moment? Why have you decided to read it?

'The Amphibian' by Alexandar Belyaev, because I'm interested in Russian SF.

>> Which question should have been asked, but wasn't (and what would be the answer)?

'What medium haven't you worked in that you'd particularly like to?' Answer: I'd love to create video-games. Not the coding, obviously, but scripting the architecture of the gameplay.

Da ich derzeit tierisch viel um die Ohren habe (neben meinen täglichen normalen 8 Stunden Dienst auf der Intensivstation jagt derzeit eine Klausur die nächste - ja, ja bedauert mich mal ruhig

) muss derzeit nicht nur die Übersetzung des Interviews warten, sondern auch die Umsetzung als Artikel für die Website.

Es grüßt ein gestresster

Actibus aut verbis noli tu adsuescere pravis.