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.

Yes, thank you. I was sick of it quite awhile back. With, of course, the usual number of exceptions, it just seems so... empty. A bunch of pretty (but, as you point out, increasingly similar) costumes and not much behind that. I too think it has potential, but so far that hasn't been borne out.

I have started to comment "steamjunk" when I see items that would be great accessories.

I had trouble with science fiction and fantasy (despite being raised on LOTR and William Gibson) when I was a kid, for many years. Then I finally figured out that it wasn't the genres that were my problem, it was the fact that because those genres had more publishing avenues available with lower standards than "literary" fiction, there was just a LOT more slop to get through to find the good stuff (I think this continues to be the problem for people who blow those genres off).

Steampunk right now is obviously suffering from the same thing. When all you HAD were The Difference Engine and Diamond Age, it was exciting, because those books had talent and promise. Now that steampunk is big, everyone wants to publish it, and people who shouldn't be getting anything at all published are getting lots published because it fits the publisher's current plan.

In other words: I AGREE. But I have hope that it will subside; I think what will happen is that the craze will pass, eventually, and steampunk will become a subgenre of science fiction or fantasy the way that cyberpunk did. And zombies and vampires, please dear god, will go back to being just one horror option out of many. Eventually.

*edited to change an "and" to a "with," which I think captures my intention a lot better.

(More publishing avenues WITH lower standards; I do not intend to imply that sci fi publishers in general have terrible standards.)

Edited at 2010-11-03 06:21 pm (UTC)

Also, when I have a problem with sci fi and fantasy stories, it's generally because the authors have gotten too wrapped up in the trappings of the world they're creating, and forgot about a) the characters, and why I should care about them, and b) the plot. I think steampunk suffers from that x1000 because everyone is so concerned with making a STEAMPUNK story instead of making a story.

THANK you, exactly, so much. I have explained this to a few people who have gone, "huh, yeah, I see what you mean..." but yes. The idea that a set of costumes makes a story is as ridiculous as if I said "here's a medieval ball! now isn't that a great story?!"

I just can't get into a "genre" that is little more than a set of imagery.

Although, to be fair, the occasions when I have ventured into the past of science-fiction and fantasy for those original "mind blowing" stories, they seemed more like "ZOMG there's MAGIC! This must be a good story!" without much thought to character development or even a feasible plot. (I think most notably of this classic: http://www.amazon.com/Magic-Goes-Away-Collection-Return/dp/0743416937 )

So some part of me hopes that in the future of steampunk, we'll weed out the crap and the brilliant stories may return, but in the meantime I'll give most of the airships and goggles a pass.

Surely by now you would have figured out that you're in the manufacturing business; it's all about mass production.

Thank you.

I am sick to death of 98.7% of all steampunk. Things I am not sick of in the genre include Girl Genius.

I want to read something steampunk that is more, and I don't know where to look. I have been wanting to read Boneshaker for a long time now, and haven't yet gotten around to it.

I enjoy a decent amount of the fashion because I think it looks nifty, not because it's "period" or "steampunk".

What value would you have come out of this movement so it isn't wasted?

Please pardon the meandering footsteps of my words, as I'm at work and multitasking.

I like how the Foglios say Girl Genius isn't Steampunk but Gas Lamp Fantasy.

I welcomed "It's Steampunk Fortnight at Tor.Com" because it meant that I spend a lot less time reading my RSS feeds, what with all the skimming.

Really, I blame you. ;)

I had thought I had broken up with Steampunk for good, really I had. Had everything boxed up super nice and neat. Maybe even did some smack talking like one does about one's ex.

And then, Steampunk wrote me a love letter through you in that story where it was everything I loved about it and everything I believed about it and . . .when I was asked by the chair to head up the Steampunk track, I couldn't say no.

Because . . .I still believe it could be a revolution. Maybe not in the literary sense (likely not in the literary sense) but . . .in terms of the fashion, in the attitude, about how we can treat each other and what we can accomplish for charity and even maybe challenging stereotypes. I'm serious about getting work class steampunk chic going because frankly I can't afford modest steampunk clothing prices anymore in my real life. I don't *want* to be an airship pilot, I want to run faster than Jack and beat him at his own game, I want to bake in a bakery.

So, I'm saying, while That Thing we talked about has not been officially sanctioned, it v. much has not *not* been sanctioned and if you wanted, we could kick off a real grass roots aspect of it in the con world - word of mouth, posters, pamplets, steampunk working class, flower selling for charity, etc., etc.

If nothing else, I like kicking up some dirt and challenging people's notion about What This is Supposed to Be.

Meh. I don't disagree that steampunk is a shallow "genre", if it can be called that. I read Piers Anthony, though, so clearly I am not solely interested in reading heart-pounding life-changing fiction.

It's neat, and it's shiny, and it's nearly meaningless, and so what? I read other things for my life-changingness.

It's popular right now, and that's what makes it so terrible. :\ Everyone's into it, so it's all about conformity.

Nonetheless, these things are true: The idea of steampunk has caused more people to work with their hands, has inspired more actually amazing hand-wrought devices, and has caused more people to wonder aloud what they would be, if they were in such a fantastic world, than any fantasy series beyond Tolkien. It's inspired the imagination, and I appreciate it for that, even if it is a little boring after seven or eight years.

Let the kids who aren't on the bleeding edge of culture play, too.

Ok, but so what is not a good question for someone who makes their life out of books and words. So everything.

I haven't really developed an opinion on Steampunk. Some of it is neat and I enjoy it (which includes the clothing, the gears, the metal). A lot of it is problematic because aesthetics cannot be surgically removed from context. If you're wearing a bustle, pearl-button blouse and a shiny corset, chances are you're not one of the people who would have been losing limbs in factory accidents. Or, you know, brown.

I suppose I've considered Steampunk, as a movement, to be derivative and at least partially re-invented, but I've noticed in the last year that it has become more "corporate" in feel, which (to my sensibilities and definition of fun) defeats the purpose.

I've never been part of the movement, really, or participated in it other than wearing the occasional fascinator or tiny top hat (they are cute; I regret nothing) so maybe not having a big personal stake in it means I have missed the debate entirely.

I'm ok with that.

I think it has been taken over by entities who wish to make money off a fairly organic, grassrooty trend--whether they actually will remains to be seen.

*quietly nods and claps*

Substance. Can I haz naow?

It puts me in mind of a story I was working on years ago that got published in a little roleplaying manual. Actually, it was more like a series of stories all feeding into one another, a novel waiting to be. I think I almost had something, but I'm not too sure anymore. It lacked the goggles and gears, but it was still distorted, AU Britannia with a wicker airship, fossil fuels, a faerie queen and strange, brass-and-wood-covered technological advances and plush leather seating.

But I never could interest anyone in letting me sit down and write it, because it was too weird and had too much pseudo-science, faded magic and vague but persistent horror in it. That was 2003. So not part of the 80s/90s almost-zeitgeist, but at least not terribly late for dinner.

Sadly, I'm inclined to agree with you. No sub-genre is worth working in if you have nothing interesting to say, and it certainly shouldn't be hailed as the second coming if it hasn't done anything substantial. Food for thought, though.

You know, I actually FORGOT that The Diamond Age is technically steampunk because, frankly, there isn't enough brown in it. But more importantly, in The Diamond Age, the aesthetic serves the message of the novel. The window dressing is the window dressing, and the plot/characters/message of the novel aren't made into window dressing for the aesthetic. It was satirical, which, now that I think about it, is pretty much true of all good steampunk. Isn't it supposed to be satirical? Isn't it supposed to be about how the good old days were just a lie?

In other news, yes, brava, I agree.

(Deleted comment)
This. For some reason I always felt that I should love steampunk, because I'm a sucker for both fake-Victorian settings and the whole "steam powered death rays" thing. At the same time, there seems to be very little material that goes beyond the aesthetics and delivers some actual content, which is both a shame and a damn waste of time.

My personal exception, by the way, is the fantastic Girl Genius - which, aptly enough, doesn't even define itself as steampunk but rather a gaslamp fantasy.