Communion Of Dreams


But wouldn’t (The World Series) be confusing?

A couple weeks ago, when I was setting up the price change and promotional stuff for the one-year anniversary of Communion of Dreams, I was again confronted with something I had pondered and then ignored previously: was this book part of a “series”?

See, when you’re going through the interface to publish a book with Amazon, that’s one of the questions you need to answer. The helpful little dialog box explains the idea this way:

A series is a connected set of books. If this book is part of a series, identify where the book exists in the sequence with a volume number. We only accept volume numbers in numerical format (“1”, “2”, or “3”). Magazines and journals are also often grouped as a series. Identifying the series helps customers find other books in the series.
Having such a series is a long and well-established literary tradition, particularly in genre fiction. Sometimes an author sets out to construct a series, sometimes a series is identified after the fact. Some authors are only known for a given series, others have several. I think Isaac Asimov is credited with like 47 separate but inter-related series, an all-time record.
These days most authors seem to consider naming a series as a marketing tool, as is indicated in the above blurb from Amazon. Just looking at the “Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought” recommendations on the Amazon page for Communion of Dreams, there are these named series:

It makes me jealous.

Well, OK, it doesn’t really.  But it does make me wonder. What would I call the series for the slightly-altered-universe in which Communion of Dreams exists?

When I first published Communion of Dreams, I thought that I would eventually like to write several other related books, but I didn’t know for sure whether I would ever get around to doing so. I mean, we make plans, and have hopes & dreams and all that, but it seemed both a little presumptuous as well as potentially risky (in the “tempting fate” sort of way) to claim that I was going to write a series of books before seeing what the response to the first one was.

And then there’s the complicating fact that at least for the time being I consider Communion of Dreams to be the end of any such series. St. Cybi’s Well is a prequel — the start of the so-called series, in fact. And I have some rough ideas for other books which would be related to the overall story arc, about one per decade of the time between now and the setting of Communion (2052). But those are just approximations. How can I number the books in the series when I have little confidence in how many there will be? And wouldn’t it be confusing to number the books in the order they are written, since they jump around in chronological sequence?

Anyway, this is all by way of saying that I could use some help and suggestions with this. If you’ve read Communion of Dreams, you have some sense of the overall arc of the series, at least as the history is outlined in that book. And I’ve chatted a fair amount about St. Cybi’s Well. Knowing those things, what do *you* think would be a good ‘series name’ for these books?

I’m serious — I’d like suggestions. Post it here in a comment, drop me an email, say something over on the FB page. If I use your suggestion, I’ll credit you with it and send you a hand-bound copy of either Communion of Dreams or St. Cybi’s Well depending on your preference (and if you’ve already got those coming as part of the Kickstarter rewards or something, we’ll work out an equitable substitute).

Thanks!

 

Jim Downey

 



“You remember the spider that lived in a bush outside your window? Orange body, green legs.”

Of late, as I have been slowly getting over the rather nasty bout of parainfluenza I mentioned previously, shedding the more annoying and disgusting symptoms, I’ve also come to realize that just now I am pulling out of the depressive trough of one of my long-term bipolar cycles.  It wasn’t a particularly bad trough, and was somewhat mitigated by the success of the Kickstarter back in the fall. Nonetheless, it was there, as I can see in hindsight.

I am frequently struck just how much of our life doesn’t make sense until seen from a distance. Just recently I was surprised at the revelation of *why* the failure of Her Final Year to be more successful bothered me as much as it did: it was because I had seen the book as being a way to create something positive (for the world) out of the experience of being a long-term care provider. To have the book only reach a limited audience was, in my mind, saying that our roles as care-givers didn’t matter.

Which isn’t true, of course, but that was the emotional reality which I had been dealing with. The “narrative truth”, if you will. A term I borrow from a very interesting meditation by Oliver Sacks at the New York Review of Books website titled Speak, Memory. From the article:

There is, it seems, no mechanism in the mind or the brain for ensuring the truth, or at least the veridical character, of our recollections. We have no direct access to historical truth, and what we feel or assert to be true (as Helen Keller was in a very good position to note) depends as much on our imagination as our senses. There is no way by which the events of the world can be directly transmitted or recorded in our brains; they are experienced and constructed in a highly subjective way, which is different in every individual to begin with, and differently reinterpreted or reexperienced whenever they are recollected. (The neuroscientist Gerald M. Edelman often speaks of perceiving as “creating,” and remembering as “recreating” or “recategorizing.”) Frequently, our only truth is narrative truth, the stories we tell each other, and ourselves—the stories we continually recategorize and refine. Such subjectivity is built into the very nature of memory, and follows from its basis and mechanisms in the human brain. The wonder is that aberrations of a gross sort are relatively rare, and that, for the most part, our memories are relatively solid and reliable.

Let me repeat one bit of that: “Frequently, our only truth is narrative truth, the stories we tell each other, and ourselves.”

I think this is at the very heart of why fiction has such power, and appeal. I also think that it explains the well-documented phenomenon of people believing things which are clearly and demonstratively false, if their facts come from a trusted source.

Little surprise that writers of fiction are aware of this very human trait, and have explored it in all manner of ways. I have a note here on my desk, a scrawl written on a scrap of paper some months ago as I was thinking through character motivations in St. Cybi’s Well, which says simply: “We take our truths from the people we trust.”

And here’s another example, from one of my favorite movies, exploring a favorite theme of Philip K. Dick’s:

 

That theme? The nature of reality.  And this is how the Sacks essay closes:

Indifference to source allows us to assimilate what we read, what we are told, what others say and think and write and paint, as intensely and richly as if they were primary experiences. It allows us to see and hear with other eyes and ears, to enter into other minds, to assimilate the art and science and religion of the whole culture, to enter into and contribute to the common mind, the general commonwealth of knowledge. This sort of sharing and participation, this communion, would not be possible if all our knowledge, our memories, were tagged and identified, seen as private, exclusively ours. Memory is dialogic and arises not only from direct experience but from the intercourse of many minds.

In other words, that reality is a shared construct. A Communion of Dreams, if you will.

Time for me to get back to work.

 

Jim Downey



Daisy, Daisy …

One of the things I’ve been a little bit surprised by has been just how many people have volunteered to me (or in reviews) just how much they like the ‘Experts’ in Communion of Dreams, and in particular how much of a favorite character Seth becomes to them in the course of the novel.

I don’t mean I’m surprised by how much people like the Experts, and particularly Seth. Hell, I intended the Experts to be likeable. I mean that this is something which people find remarkable enough to, well, remark on it.

That’s because humans tend to anthropomorphize just about everything. Our pets. Our cars. Our tools. Even nature. It’s one of the basic ways that we make sense of the world, as can be seen in religious and spiritual beliefs.  Long before Siri there was HAL, and inasmuch as Communion of Dreams is an homage to 2001: A Space Odyssey I knew that Seth would resonate as a ‘real person’.*

So this morning I was amused to hear a story on NPR about how giving computers/robots more human characteristics tends to cause humans to develop a greater sense of empathy and socialization with them. Amused, but not surprised. From the article:

Many people have studied machine-human relations, and at this point it’s clear that without realizing it, we often treat the machines around us like social beings.

Consider the work of Stanford professor Clifford Nass. In 1996, he arranged a series of experiments testing whether people observe the rule of reciprocity with machines.

* * *

What the study demonstrated was that people do in fact obey the rule of reciprocity when it comes to computers. When the first computer was helpful to people, they helped it way more on the boring task than the other computer in the room. They reciprocated.

* * *

“The relationship is profoundly social,” he says. “The human brain is built so that when given the slightest hint that something is even vaguely social, or vaguely human — in this case, it was just answering questions; it didn’t have a face on the screen, it didn’t have a voice — but given the slightest hint of humanness, people will respond with an enormous array of social responses including, in this case, reciprocating and retaliating.”

 

On the NPR website version of the story there’s also this delightful video showing what happens when a robot with cat/human characteristics begs a research subject to not switch it off:

 

Interesting. But again, unsurprising. Consider the whole sequence in 2001: A Space Odyssey when HAL is shut down — a powerful and poignant part of the movie. And referenced at the end of the video above.

Lastly, I laughed out loud once the story was over on NPR, and the transitional bit of music started up. Why? Because it was an instrumental work by the artist Vangelis, composed as the Love Theme from the movie Blade Runner.

Hilarious.

 

Jim Downey

*And for those who have read the book, consider what the role of Chu Ling’s devas are relative to Seth … 😉  We’ll see more of this reference in St. Cybi’s Well.



The “koob” early reviews are in!

So, earlier this week I mailed off the first ‘backwards’ books, and have now heard from four of the recipients.  Here are a couple of excerpts in their responses:

“The koob arrived safely – thanks! Looking forward (er, backward?) to re-reading it ;)”

“words. fail. me. the exceptional feeling of awe at this exquisite, hand-made work of art, serendipitously brought about can hardly be conveyed. it’s beautiful.”

Damn, I wish *I* had thought to call the thing the “koob”! See? My readers are clearly more intelligent & witty than I am. Pat yourself on the back — you deserve it.

Anyway, so that’s that.

Speaking of reviews, there’s another new one up on Amazon, this time breaking the 1-star streak I was afraid we were falling into. Here’s a bit of it:

I read this and thoroughly enjoyed it. It definitely has an ‘early sci-fi’ feel to it. People have compared the writing style to Clarke. I’m more into the military sci-fi but this was a refreshing and enjoyable change.

Today’s the last day of the big promotion. So far this week things have been really slow, and we haven’t made hardly any progress since Wednesday. Meaning that there’s still something like 1,400 to go to break the 25,000 mark.  Obviously, it’s not a big deal if we don’t make it. But if you haven’t yet picked up a copy of the Kindle edition, or know someone who might like it, you might as well get it for free today. And if you prefer paper over electronic format, then use the $2.00 discount code in my CreateSpace store: 99K4TNJZ

Have a great Friday!

 

Jim Downey

 

 



That’s kinda a kick in the head.

So, just shipped off the first batch of ‘backwards’ books.

Including one to a major Science Fiction author & internet personality. Who shall remain nameless, since I promised said person that I would not use their wanting the book for any kind of promotional benefit. But obviously, this is someone of considerable taste and good aesthetic sensibility. 🙂  If they say anything about the book publicly later, I’ll let you know.

But still, it’s kinda a kick in the head to know that *my* book will be on their bookshelf.

Yeah, very cool.

Remember, today’s the first day of the promotional push to break 25,000 copies of Communion of Dreams disseminated in the first year.  Help me out if you can and share the word.

 

Jim Downey



Hang in there, Friday’s coming.

On December 26th I wrote this:

As it happens, yesterday was also the 11 month ‘anniversary’ for the paperback edition of Communion of Dreams — the Kindle edition came out a few days earlier, but January 25th is what I consider to be the ‘launch date’ for the book.

And in 11 months, there have been a grand total of 23,216 downloads of the Kindle edition of the book, sales of 25 paperback copies through Amazon, and something about twice that of paperback sales through me directly (including the Kickstarter copies).

Including paperback and hardcover copies sold, we’re currently somewhere a bit over 23,300 total copies of all varieties disseminated.  That’s close enough to 25,000 that I think it would be fun to see if we could push over that number by the end of this coming Friday, which will be the actual one-year anniversary.

So, here’s a way to help that happen: have a big sale/promotional push.

To that end, the Kindle edition of Communion of Dreams will be free for anyone to download starting tomorrow and going through Friday. Yeah, completely FREE for four days. If you’re recently bought the Kindle edition of Communion of Dreams, I won’t even mind if you return it for credit and then download it for free starting tomorrow. Please, be my guest! And remember, you don’t even need to own a Kindle — there is a free emulator/app for just about every computer/tablet/mobile device out there. I recently added one to my smartphone, and it works like a charm.

If you prefer a paperback book over an electronic one, then here’s a discount code for $2.00 off the list price, good in my CreateSpace store: 99K4TNJZ

Lastly, if you’ve been wanting one of the hand-bound hardcover version books, but haven’t been able to swing the $100 minimum payment this close to the holidays, then here’s your chance to reserve a copy for just $25 down, balance due when the book is ready to ship (or in arranged installments if you would prefer).

All special offers/pricing is good tomorrow through the end of the day this coming Friday. Actually, the discount code on paperbacks and the minimum deposit on hardcover books is good today, as well.

So, help me out — we just need 1,700 copies sold/downloaded to break 25k. That’s doable. Very, very doable.

Thanks!

 

Jim Downey

 



Malaria.
January 21, 2013, 10:24 am
Filed under: Art, Comics, movies, Violence | Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

This is exceptionally well done.

 

More later.

Jim Downey



Done with ‘backwards’.

I just printed out the following text:

Following the completion of my successful Kickstarter for St. Cybi’s Well in the Fall of 2012, I proceeded to make arrangements for a limited edition print run of Communion of Dreams to be bound by hand. See the Colophon on the dedication page of this book for details.

However, there was an error at the printer’s with the first printing. In spite of having had a correct proof copy, the initial printing was done entirely backwards – laid out as though the book was intended to be read back-to-front, with the spine on the right side, and in which you turn the pages from left to right.

At first I thought the entire print run would need to be recycled. Indeed, once the printer realized their error, that’s what they asked me to do with the printed sheets in order to save them the cost of shipping.

Errors are part of the handmade process. In this case, the error wasn’t mine, but came from the printer. Whoever set up the print run managed to load the pages backwards, and in the process opened an unexpected door. When things like this happen, I’ve learned to roll with it. It’s like a little surprise, something special the universe gives you – serendipitous art.

So I decided to hand-bind a few of these ‘backwards’ books, as curiosities. How many? Just 15 copies – thirteen ‘lettered’ copies (A – M), and two artist’s/author’s proofs. This copy is letter _____.

 

Add a designated letter, and my signature, and then those sheets will be the ‘paste-down’ sheets for the back cover — er, I mean front cover — of the backwards books.  Yup, I’m all done with that little binding project. There are still 7 copies unclaimed, but now that they’re actually made I expect that they’ll find homes fairly soon.

 

Jim Downey

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The little photo essay of making these books isn’t fundamentally different than the first set shown, but it’s kind of fun to see the larger volume of the whole process.

Sheets for collating.

Sheets for collating.

 

Sheets gathered & folded into sections.

Sheets gathered & folded into sections.

 

Text blocks sewn, lined, stacked to dry.

Text blocks sewn, lined, stacked to dry.

 

Making the covers. Note the stack of cut boards, the stack of cut pieces of book cloth.

Making the covers. Note the stack of cut boards, the stack of cut pieces of book cloth.

 

Boards mounted, turning in the edges & corners to finish the covers.

Boards mounted, turning in the edges & corners to finish the covers.

 

"Pasting in" - the process of mounting the text blocks to the covers.

“Pasting in” – the process of mounting the text blocks to the covers.

 

Finished books, stacked and drying.

Finished books, stacked and drying.

 

And all done.

 

 

 

 



With LASERS!

I don’t want to reveal any spoilers, but here’s a passage from Chapter 15 of Communion of Dreams:

The moment the projector was set down and turned on, Jon could see what had them all so excited. There were flashes of light coming from the image of the ship, clearly directed back at the ASA.

“It’s brilliant. They’re using the point-defense lasers designed for clearing away debris in their path as strobes, to communicate with us,” said Gish.

Gregor nodded. “Yes, yes. Simple digital message, as fast as lasers can be switched on and off. Not designed for communications,so cannot transmit as much data as normal. But pretty good.”

Why do I mention this? Well, guess what’s just been done by NASA? Take a look:

Here’s an excerpt from the associated article:

NASA has turned the Mona Lisa into the first digital image to be transmitted via laser beam from Earth to a spacecraft in lunar orbit, nearly 240,000 miles away, thanks to a technology that may soon become routine.

The experiment took advantage of the laser-tracking system that’s in operation aboard NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, which has been circling the moon for the past three and a half years. NASA sends regular laser pulses from the Next Generation Satellite Ranging station at Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland to the space probe’s Lunar Orbiter Laser Altimeter, or LOLA, to measure its precise position in lunar orbit.

I love to see my predictions come true.

 

Jim Downey

With thanks to Wendy for sending me the article!



Moonwalk.

This is lovely.

 

Jim Downey




Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started