Log in

No account? Create an account
c is for cat

Rules for Anchorites

Letters from Proxima Thule

Previous Entry Share Flag Next Entry
Here I Stand, With Steam Coming Out of My Ears
I am sick to death of steampunk.

I don't even like typing the word at this point. It feels like contributing to this increasingly horrible culture of constant steampunk programming/fiction/special issues that no other sub-genre is treated to, wherein everyone stands around chirping STEAMPUNK! STEAMPUNK! like those seagulls from Finding Nemo. But as Tor.com continues its millionth special steampunk-focused thing, I'm seeing all kinds of people discussing it and I just want to scream.

I'm not going to talk about what steampunk could be. I'm not going to talk about what a joke it is to call something so inherently nostalgic, conservative, and comfort-oriented "punk." I've talked myself blue in the face on that score, and to be frank, nobody gives a shit. Sure, they nod their head and agree and shake my hand for saying that being nostalgic for the 19th century is farcical, and the fact that geek culture wants so desperately to side with the British aristocracy a sad comment on how "indie" we're not, but in the end they go home and write their same goggle-infested nonsense, maybe with a Chinese character, but probably not, or they write nothing at all. I see a lot of people talking now about what steampunk could be--yet very few of them have any intention of writing it, so it's all just lecturing by stern schoolmasters.

And I'm no better. I've rattled on about what steampunk could be and I've written a damn short story in the genre. I haven't put my money where my mouth is on this. There is market pressure to define my other books as steampunk because there's this idea that there is money to be made if only we could make a book that every single one of those geeks would buy and evangelize--but beyond the success of Boneshaker, the Great Steampunk Novel hasn't really happened. Nor the Great Steampunk Movie, for all that the imagery flits in occasionally. At WFC, someone suggested that they'd like to see a steampunk Snow Crash. But we can't have that because there's been no steampunk Neuromancer yet. You can't have the backlashy sharp parody before the definitive work. So we all dick around talking about a subgenre that is not actually managing to put together fiction with the people who seem to be a natural audience for it with any consistency.

And more than that, it's mega-websites looking for content, and since those websites brought us the steampunk-gull phenomenon, it's particularly rich that they're now giving column space to those who dislike it. It's like when Fox News tries to be balanced by letting Colmes out of his cage for five minutes. (Seriously, much as I love my Tor masters, when a major publishing company is throwing endless parties for a genre, it's no longer indie or underground in the slightest.) They've created the 24 hour steampunk news cycle, and it's killing whatever grassroots awesomeness the movement ever had (parrot-repetition of the "it's when goths discover brown" line is actually making me ill. Look, be a joiner or be a nitpicker, but don't just repeat the internet until we all want to die inside) by shoving it down our throats constantly, until every book with "wind-up" in the title is somehow a steampunk book, every event is a steampunk event, and I'm fucking exhausted because the fact is steampunk just isn't very good.

And here's where I get nervous about this post. Because a lot of my friends write steampunk and I don't want to insult them, and one of my favorite books of all time is steampunk (The Diamond Age, which to be bold should make the crop of current trend-capitalizing steampunk sit in the corner and think about what its done). There are exceptions to what I am about to say. Let's just insert your favorite steampunk into the blank and call it the exception.

But I'm gonna say it: steampunk sucks. The emperor has no fucking clothes, bustled or otherwise.

The costuming and maker (ugh, I hate that word, too, but that's a rant for another time) movements that kicked steampunk into the limelight again after it had sparked and then fizzled in the late eighties and early nineties are fine. In fact, they are wonderful people who've been generally quite supportive of my work, though I don't write steampunk myself except for the one story. They make cool shit, and sometimes they wear it. I'm a little alarmed at the lemmingness of it, how every con I go to year by year has more steampunk costuming and less of anything else, and the sameness of the costumes creeps me right the fuck out, but whatever. It's the books I care about, and for the most part, with a few exceptions, they just aren't very good.

And it's not because of what Charlie Stross said. I could not give less of a shit about how hard or not the science of steampunk is. It's not science fact, it's science fiction.

It's becase steampunk isn't really alternate history and it isn't really science fiction. It's adventure stories wrapped up in a very slight veneer of common tropes. And adventure stories, historically, have never even tried to be very good. They want to be "romps" and "rollicking" and "madcap" and I will give it to SP, they are often that. But good? Astonishing novels that pluck the strings of the soul, that make you clasp it to your chest and love it because it says something real and authentic about your life? Books that you put in your sig file, that you quote endlessly because they said something you just couldn't say any other way? Not so much. Of course, it's not a genre that cares about authenticity or emotion particularly, since it's all about the shiny veneer. All about the rewriting of the 19th century to be Tolkien's best fantasy of happy workers, inspired artisans, and noble aristos. We can't even get the medieval era right in fantasy, guys. Did you ever think we'd get the 19th spot on?

SF itself is a bit low on adventure and high on rigorous science and srs bsns lately. I can see why the idea of steampunk as something fun is more appealing--if I have to watch one more dark-palette tv show about how the ship doesn't have enough of x for everyone to survive and the SF elements are pared down to like, an offscreen alien that looks exactly like a human, I will fucking riot. Steampunk is at least a little shinier, a little brighter, a little more camp than that. But the sameness of it disturbs me deeply. Most of the books are not just part of a genre, they are just a bag where airships, goggles, 19th century England, 19th century America, gears, corsets and zombies are shaken and pulled out at random. Nothing sticks them together, nothing makes them meaningful or gives them depth. It's like people keep throwing books at the cool kids in costumes shrieking: do you like this? How about this? This? It has all the things you like in it, aren't you happy? Are you not entertained?

Steampunk is starting to look a lot like the endless dragons and maidens covers of old extruded product fantasy. Sameness is never exciting, and steampunk has plowed through the cycle of interesting and cool to establishment-supported to suspect at record speed. Sometimes I think the worst thing ever to happen to the world is the need to supply content all the time, so that the second the smallest flash of interest pops, every website and cable news channel and blogger has to pounce on it until it vanishes under the weight of attention.

Because of course now it's all about the steampunk zombies. Because why stick with chasing the one trend when you can smush two together to make something even more unsightly? I went to a reading where literally every reader but me read from their "upcoming steampunk zombie novel" in excited tones as though they were the only one doing it. I felt like I was actually in hell, where everyone was writing the same book but no one was aware of it. I'm sick of zombies too, but putting them together with steampunk in ways that neither acknowledge the fear of industry and what it does to us that gave rise to the zombie trope in the first place nor do much at all with them beyond random monster encounters looks a lot like playing Mousetrap without the man in the barrel--you're missing a vital piece, and without it everything may look cool but the ball don't move.

When I look at steampunk books and how they're marketed to us, all I see is surface. Look! The megasites say. Airships! Goggles! Pirates! Zombies! All these cool things! And if it has enough of the Exclamation Point Items, then by god, it must be good. And geek culture grabs on and worries it until there's nothing left, and even after that, still pronouncing it awesome, that fateful, overwrought, overused, now meaningless word, like some kind of huge literary all your base joke. The whole mass of it is just a bunch of things that either sparkle or blow up strung together on the hope that some kind of magic will happen and a zeitgeist will be capitalized upon. It's not even about books. Most steampunkers I know aren't dressing up as characters from books. They're role playing the same airship pirate crew every other person with goggles and a spray-painted nerf gun is. They care about the look, not the books. And what a fortunate thing, since the books care about the look so bloody much themselves. Steampunk runs on potential right now--the obvious cash potential of a group of people with disposable income invested in a subgenre already, the potential of the genre itself to produce something real and beautiful, the potential to access that geekly longing for a world clotted with gorgeous mechanical toys, a world devoted to them and ruled by them, a world in which their particularly strengths would be of prime use.

Of course, that world sure as hell ain't the 19th century. But never you mind. We can remake the 19th century. We can make it better, faster, stronger. We have the technology. Just don't look behind the curtain. It's a fucking mess back there.

Right now, the phrases "it's steampunk week at x giant site/magazine/irl event!" or "I'm working on my steampunk novel" make me break out in brain hives. I can be almost certain nothing good will come of it. Nothing that will make my soul sing--because steampunk isn't in the business of souls or of singing. It's just in business. And yet I struggle, because I feel like I shouldn't just bitch about what it could be, if I care enough to write a massive post I should write it, make it what I want it to be. But then I feel tired and if people are happy reading the same book 100 times, far be it from me to bother them. So I say fuck your goggles forever and go sit in the corner like a class dunce who just doesn't get the material.

In the end, maybe steampunk is giving us the 19th century in some subtle way. A glut of cheap, mass-produced products that are identical and bland instead of cottage-made and rough-edged, forged by underpaid workers who must smile and pretend everything is perfect when the foreman comes to visit. A world where fashion covers up all sins, where you don't have to look at brown people if you have enough money to avoid them, and authenticity is defined as looking and acting just exactly like all your friends.

I hope we're all enjoying it.


(Deleted comment)
I don't think just because it's popular it's uncool. Dude, I retell fairy tales like A LOT. But since it's become popular without producing very much that is not simply an attempt to capitalize its own perceived popularity WE ARE IN A PARADOX STOP I WANT TO GET OFF.

(Deleted comment)
What I actually had in mind was Abigail Nussbaum's recent essay about it and a lot of TV shows. But also Peter Watts' work, Banks and even Stephenson these days, and the several recent essays by Stross and others encouraging total hewing to rigorous current understandings of science.

(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
@ Right now, the phrases "it's steampunk week at x giant site/magazine/irl event!" or "I'm working on my steampunk novel" make me break out in brain hives. I can be almost certain nothing good will come of it.

I disagree with this sentence. It's not the steampunkish gadgets that make a good or bad writing, it's the storytelling skills of the writer, the story itself, the interesting characters that contribute to a good book. You cannot say it's going to be bad just because it's steampunk (or fantasy, or magic realism etc.).

Sure I can. I can say that there is a 90% chance that it will be bad because in almost every instance I've seen people not applying the same level of good storytelling and expectations they do to other genres. It is a trend I have noticed.

Note I say almost. There are exceptions. But I am gunshy these days because I've read more bad steampunk than I care to.

Your Name Here (Anonymous) Expand
Your Name Here (Anonymous) Expand
(Deleted comment)
I think this is pretty durn insightful, and it definitely provides a vehicle for improvement. Maybe someone needs to write A Tough Guide To SteamPunkLand; or Airship Piloting for Dummies.

Good lord, thank you. I could talk about this on my own LJ, but nowhere close to as many people will see it... so now you have yawped into the great void and people will actually THINK about it now.

I like the *idea* of steampunk. I like the pretty and the costumes and the stuff just as much as the next person. But I barely read the "genre" because so much of it is "Let's stick a zeppelin and some goggles in here and call it a story." There is so much room to SAY SOMETHING with steampunk--about progress and industrialization, about social classes and imperialism, and on and on. But no one seems to do that. I've been working on a story that, I suppose, takes place in a steampunky world, but I'm trying hard to give it an egg, to make it more than bustles and velvet. That might end up being the death of it. I dunno.

Sorry, just repeating your rant, which I've ranted myself lately. So, really, thank you.

I like the *idea* of steampunk. I like the pretty and the costumes and the stuff just as much as the next person. But I barely read the "genre" because so much of it is "Let's stick a zeppelin and some goggles in here and call it a story."

Word. I own goggles and liked The Difference Engine (a candidate for the role of the steampunk Neuromancer), but I haven't really read any self-professed steampunk fiction since, well, since all my goth friends started wearing brown. Once upon a time, a novel about steampunk zombie pirates and ninja vampires fighting over the world's supply of bacon might have been just the thing, but now I see yet another one and sigh.

A separate rant, or at least eye-roll accompanied sigh, would involve the way in which "steampunk" now comprises everything between George III and art deco.

I am inclined to agree. Steampunk isn't a genre - it's an aesthetic. It is about the look and feel, far more than substance. Throw in some gears, some clockwork this or that, sky pirates, a corset here or there, and you're good to go. It's a fun fad. Now, I don't even know why, but the aesthetic appeals to me. The fiction, however, has not, in the slightest. It feels paper thin, and I'd love to read some things were these elements work together and make sense and contribute to the story and wonderful characters, but I'm not holding my breath.

This probably explains why I have not successfully made my own costume and have no desire to write a steampunk novel, though I do enjoy a bunch of what I've read. Boneshaker kicks serious ass.

There is definitely something to be said for the 24/7 Shouting Machine (aka the Internet) having made things a wee bit on the insane side. Frankly, I think we all need to back away from it more often and go have a nice lie down.

As for disliking it, DUDE. I can't stand the Walking Dead and everyone's raving about how awesome and good it is.

No, it's not. Stupid sherriff's deputy is stupid and does not do basic detective work or ask the right questions. I feel your pain. But I am happy for my friends for having found something they enjoy.

*shrug* It is what it is, I think. If not Steampunk, it would have been some other bandwagon. After all Harry Potter's all tapped out and so's Twilight.

(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
It's funny. I'm a history and archaeology student (or was), and I find most of the component parts of steampunk fascinating and right up my alley. The nineteenth century is endlessly interesting to me. Do 'steampunk' authors do anything interesting with this grab-bag of cool shit? Not a damned thing. I went through the sci-fi/fantasy section at Austin's Book People looking for ONE recent steampunk novel that would be even remotely interesting and left empty-handed.

Steampunk is currently to adult fantasy/sci-fi as BEAUTIFUL VAMPYRE/WARWULF/MUMMY* ROMANCE is to the YA section, I guess. I'm sure someone could do an amazing job of it, but I'm also not sure if they've been born yet.

*BRB, writing my mummy romance novel.

Write the mummy romance. It'd be a break from the vampires. >_> *thought Evie and Imhotep should have done some more snogging, kthx*

Do werewolves get to be romantic leads? Or have I just been reading all the wrong books?

The most recent vampire book I've enjoyed does involve older male vampire, younger female human... But he spends a fair amount of the book avoiding her, she has her own teenagerly problems, and at one point, he tells her off for being a selfish teenager. Then he shows her a bit around the local area to teach her some of the history. They do not get together. The Night Wanderer by Drew Hayden Taylor.

I have yet to read a vampire romance that pleases me enough to want to recommend it to other people. *shakes fist at the genre* Do better!

I really enjoyed this rant/analysis - it was funny and pointed, and the paragraph about steampunk zombies, in particular, made me laugh a lot. I look forward to someday reading what you have to say about "maker," because OMG I HATE THAT TERM (as it has become popularly used, anyway).

How has it become popularly used, out of curiosity? /ignorant

Thank you for this post. You are much more articulate than I am and now I have something to link to when I try to explain why I don't really think of steampunk as a genre because there is no content. It's like steampunk is an aesthetic or fashion and it looks cool...and that's about it. I feel the same way about the popularity of cupcakes. A cupcake shop opened up down the street from me. It is way cool and hip inside and the products are beautiful and cool and tempting...so very, very pretty, but, uh, the taste is not as good or as special looking as the actual treat...and isn't the point of dessert to be as delicious as it looks? I dunno, that is how I think about steampunk, like over-priced, super cool cupcakes with names like pink champaigne that actually are just super sugary without the benefit of at least being something like vanilla or chocolate (which could give the treat a base to go from) and don't taste like anything all that special, or even close, to what their name evokes.

GAH! This this this.

I worked around the corner from a Sprinkles, there was always a line, I finally got one of my own and...

DUDE. My sister makes cupcakes and cake that taste ten thousand times better. I want the content to be as awesome as the look. And yes. Right now, Steampunk (AND Zombies) just don't have the content.

Your Name Here (Anonymous) Expand
I'll have to politely disagree on the Maker thing; anyone learning to make things done even in such a shallow context makes the idealistic life-hacker in me who wishes she could make EVERYTHING she needs, a bit warmer in the world of Apple and the like, where so many people cheerfully pay to use a thing they're patently not allowed to tinker with beyond a point, freedom within walls and all that.

But this?: A world where fashion covers up all sins, where you don't have to look at brown people if you have enough money to avoid them, and authenticity is defined as looking and acting just exactly like all your friends.

Preach on, lady. Aesthetic /= genre. I tried writing a steampunk story for a contest; the prizes were shinies, and I haven't been able to afford something pretty in some time, but I've been trying to suss out why it made me feel dirty without just being catty about personal experiences with the 'scene'. And I think this post sums it up nicely.

Oh, makers themselves I love. It's the term I hate. And not even the term, the way it's used to create a weird kind of elitist geek aristocracy.

(Deleted comment)
I actually hate The Difference Engine, too. Sigh.

But I actually wonder how much money is really being made. Boneshaker is the only recent novel that has really hit--are there big bucks being made here? I'm not sure.

(Deleted comment)
Your Name Here (Anonymous) Expand
I love your title :)

Well, you're making me feel hopeful. Because..without giving too much away...I am working on a story that is vaguely steampunkish, but not only is it not Shiny Shiny Wasn't the Gilded Age Awesome, it's downright vicious. I was afraid everyone would go, "awww, that's not what we like that stuff for." Now I know at least one person won't. I hope it will amuse.