In Which the Madness Comes to an End . . . for Now

I have made acorn cakes!

“Cakes” is the best word I can think of to use. It reflects, incidentally, one of the only actual changes this experience has led me to make in Rabbit and Cougar – I changed the name of the nut “scones” they had, which seems now highly unlikely to me, to the more ambiguous and certainly possible, “cakes.”

My acorn flour yield was about one and a quarter cups. It dried coarser than I’d thought, but usable. The recipe I used – basically made up in the moment – was the following:

1.25 cups acorn flour
1 tbsp canola oil (Rabbit’s family would have access to seed and vegetable oils)
2 eggs
1 tbsp milk (the milk they have is more like goat milk than cow milk, but I didn’t have access to that)
2 tsp honey, plus more to serve with

I buttered a skillet (my friendly neighborhood Internet assures me that goat milk can be made into butter), mushed the flour into small patties, and fried them a little on each side.

It is worth noting here that nut flour has no gluten, so it does not rise and is difficult to make stick together. I knew this. It is part of why I had to prove to myself that food of some type could theoretically be made with nut flour alone.

How to describe the acorn cakes . . . Well, when they were cooking, they smelled eggy. During and after cooking, they resembled nothing so much as tiny hamburgers. Indeed, when my parents and I ate some of them, their texture was extremely hamburger-like, though their taste was somewhere vaguely between egg, honey, nut, and Rice Crispy treat.

I discovered, rather unfortunately, this morning, that my acorn cakes seem to be one of those foods that are all right when eaten warm, but pretty unappetizing once cooled. And here I’d thought they’d make a great breakfast food, being as they are a strange compromise between biscuit, egg, and meatless sausage.

All in all, a pretty successful first try! I’m quite pleased with the few minor changes I ended up making to Rabbit and Cougar thanks to this experiment.

Life Imitating Art

I’m continuing to edit Dragons Over London for submission to a contest, but in the meantime, I am doing one of those strange, researchy things that I sometimes do. I’m attempting to make food out of acorns.

More specifically, I am attempting to make acorns into flour, that I might add this flour to other ingredients that would be available to Rabbit’s family in Rabbit and Cougar. Since there is a feast scene set in his remote forest village, I want to know that the ingredients available to the villagers (a) could, practically speaking, make all of the foods that appear in the scene, and (b) would not cause those foods to taste horrible, or to look bizarre in some way that I should note and have not.

So: acorn flour. I used the lovely instructions on the blog Ramshackle Solid and an online article from Backwoods Home Magazine for reference in the endeavor.

First off, I collected a big bag of acorns from a Chestnut Oak, convenient in its proximity and in that the acorns are huge, so needed fewer. I then attempted by various methods, including sunlight and the oven, to dry them. This was not especially successful, and the oven-drying business ended when my dad preheated the oven while my trays of acorns were in it.

It is difficult to tell whether these acorns are much worse for the wear, so I am continuing the attempt. I’m now shelling them and chopping the kernels. Next stop: blender! And rinsing acorn kernels of poisonous tannic acid!

Of course, my methods are not . . . um . . . canon? What I mean to say is that Rabbit’s family does not have a blender. They could achieve the same effect with a mortar and pestle, but I don’t think my family has one, and I don’t have that kind of free time anyway. They would do a few other things differently, too: I’ve read that acorns can be effectively drained of tannic acid by being tied in a bag and left in moving water for about a week. For large volumes of acorns, this would probably be more efficient than the method I plan to use.

So, huzzah! Authenticity!

Literary Enough

One can hardly be expected not to be silly after rewatching the 1982 movie version of The Scarlet Pimpernel. Rather, one can only obtain new lj icons (they’re literary, right?) and post a link to a place where any who desire can download a fantastic Scarlet Pimpernel moodtheme.

Call it a public service post, if you will. But it really is kind of writing-related, as part of the reason I love Sir Percy so much is that he’s what my foppish character Dexy from Rabbit and Cougar wants to grow up to be. See icon.

Also, fans of steampunk, check out this book trailer, by far the awesomest I’ve ever seen:

Books of Several Stripes

Of late, I’ve seen people online tossing around the idea of making new books available in multimedia packages: the hardcover book plus the e-book download plus, maybe, a downloadable audiobook. As far as I know, there aren’t companies actually planning to do this anytime soon, but it’s an idea that a lot of people like. I definitely do.

Publishers would, of course, have to make this available separately from all of the individual formats, and charge a little more. After all, they’d be technically selling three copies of the book, and that could potentially provide copies to three different people who would otherwise have bought their own. However, that certainly won’t always be the case.

I think families might benefit from this the most. Most nuclear families I know share books, and are unlikely to purchase more than one copy of the same title. Still, they may prefer different formats. Some families have one avid paper-book reader, one person who loves listening to audiobooks during commutes or while exercising, and one who packs a Kindle while traveling. These families – the ones I know, at least – are unlikely to buy several versions of a new book, but might shell out a few extra bucks to get the options.

I don’t know too much about the e-book situation at the moment, not being myself possessed of an e-reader, but here’s my understanding of it: E-books are usually released months after the hardcover book, with Dan Brown having defied that practice with his newest book. Publishers are concerned because e-books are so much cheaper that they fear hardcover sales will drop if they release the e-books at the same time. Unfortunately, the availability of the paper books without the corresponding e-books means that pirated copies hit the Net with no competition, and the publishers (and authors) lose money anyway. The multimedia package could be a way to prevent this from happening – although, of course, it sort of assumes the simultaneous release of hardcovers and e-books.

Thoughts?

***

Linkety Fun!

1. After struggling a little with the specific ages of two characters in The Dogwatchers, I liked this fellow’s pondering of characters’ ages in literature. Includes a link to the blog project he’s working on, which will contain a male and female literary character of every age from, apparently, conception to seventy. (Don’t hold your breath, though – he’s still in the toddler years now.)

2. A brief article analyzes trends among the 7,200 books left behind in UK hotel rooms over the past year.

3. Silly examples of how some classic books might have been titled differently were they published today.

Just Another Book on the Wall

Grade school is relevant to me just now because we at the library are taking down our Summer Reading display. (Which is on the wall. And it’s books for schools. So there’s a Pink Floyd reference. See? NO, I AM DEFINITELY NOT REACHING.) These are the books either assigned or recommended by several of the local public schools. We get special funding to buy between one and six copies of each one, and they occupy a special shelf all summer. I’ve worked with the Summer Reading books for the past three years, but this year seems to have brought a larger selection.

A few of these books have been required reading here since my own middle/high school days. Specifically, I remember reading Edith Wharton’s Mythology, Robert Lacey’s The Year 1000, and John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. The main difference between these lists and mine is that the shelf we have now holds mostly recommended, rather than required, books. I don’t remember any recommended reading at all.

If you ask me, having the schools recommend additional books is a great idea. Many great books for kids and teens can’t realistically be made into required reading – they’re controversial (His Dark Materials is on the list), too difficult for some kids in the class, or don’t fit well with course material. Naturally, kids who are already readers will find books, but there’s no harm in teachers pointing out some good ones.

I also hope that seeing the books on that list – and that shelf – tells parents that these books have a lot to offer their kids. This is especially important because the recommended books include Eoin Colfer’s Artemis Fowl, Avi’s Poppy and Perloo the Bold, Scott Westerfield’s Uglies, and about half the works of Beverly Cleary. While many parents love to see their kids reading, period, a few unfortunate parents are seriously judgmental about what their children read, especially when science fiction and fantasy. Maybe, with a teacher’s recommendation, these parents won’t take issue when their kids pick up a book with a mouse riding a motorcycle on the cover.

Perhaps one of the most valuable benefits of the recommended reading, though, is its potential to win kids’ trust in their teachers’ judgment. While I liked a lot of my teachers, they were, as a group, the people who forced me to read Wilson Rawls’ Where the Red Fern Grows, John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath, Richard Wright’s Black Boy, and William Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury AND As I Lay Dying. My apologies to anyone who liked any of those books. I hated them all desperately. True, teachers also assigned Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird, Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities, George Eliot’s Silas Marner, and Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn, all of which I liked, but these were still not the kinds of books I would have read on my own. It would have helped me relate to my teachers to know that they approved of books like Artmis Fowl – to hear them even acknowledge, let alone recommend, books of the kind that you read just because you like them rather than because they are classics, like them or not.

Tangent time! If you glance at the first three books in my "hated desperately" list above, you might not guess what I remembered most about all of them: the violent death of an animal. Yes, even The Grapes of Wrath. Teachers think I’m learning about the Great Depression, but you know what I’m seeing? Their dog is smeared all over the highway! We’re reading about intestines! Smeared on the highway! And the protagonist of Black Boy – who is, I think, supposed to be sympathetic – actually hangs a kitten. Let me say that again: Protagonist. Hangs. A. Kitten. I don’t remember anything else about that book, except saying to a classmate at the time, "I hope the AUTHOR is dead!" Funnily enough, the other day I ran into another girl my age who also read the book for school, and it’s the only scene she remembers, too. It isn’t a pivotal scene plot-wise, as opposed to the dogs’ death in Where the Red Fern Grows, but it’s all either of us took home from the book. I’m pretty sure Black Boy was supposed to have other elements to it. Too bad. Maybe teachers should consider kids’ priorities and emotional responses before they decide which books to assign.

Also: In third grade, after reading Where the Red Fern Grows, we watched the movie in class. When the dogs died, I cried, and a boy (whose name I still remember, but who shall here remain anonymous) laughed at me. Something else for teachers to think about.

Basically, when I was a kid, it seemed like my teachers and I thought that reading was meant to provide two totally different, if sometimes overlapping, things: education versus enjoyment. The recommended reading list shows kids that teachers really believe in both.

Random bonus links:

1. A great intro to fanfiction as a concept. Because yes, some people – like my parents – do not know what it is. This article is heavily pro-fanfiction, but it also does a pretty good job just explaining what it is and why it appeals to some people.

2. Silly profile of a standard Regency romance hero. Her next entry describes the typical leading lady. I don’t read the genre, but was still entertained.

More Internet Surfery

. . . Because I’ve discovered neat things I want to share with you guys. Not at all because I’m lazy.

1. Author Libba Bray writes a funny piece on writing a novel, as love story.

2. A publishing-house intern made awesome chart of elements appearing on the covers of popular 2008 fantasy books. The winner: “swords,” followed by “glowy magic.”

3. Here’s an interesting article on vampires by Guillermo del Toro, who just co-wrote a vampire thriller called The Strain. My favorite part of this piece? I never knew this, but del Toro says the popularity of Dracula came in part from the book’s being excitingly high-tech at the time. Telegraphs, typing machines, blood transfusions – all pretty cutting edge in 1897, apparently.

4. Neato book trailer. Put the sound on – the music is maybe my favorite part.

5. At the Public Query Slushpile, we have a fun joke query.

6. In conjunction with the book Rampant, on which I commented enthusiastically last week, we have the official website of the National Unicorn Control Agency. Awesomeness.

7. Literary agent Rachel Gardner’s blog was discussing overused words, and posted a list of words writers might want to use sparingly, with the suggestion of using the Search function on words that you personally tend to abuse. Right there with you, Rachel – I’m thinking of searching my novels for “rather,” “almost,” and “just,” two of which make

Reading, Boys and Girls

I know I posted recently about writing characters of different genders, and this is related, but I found some things that made me want to post again about “boys’ books” and “girls’ books.”

This makes some great points, though some of them are taken directly from (and fairly credited to) this other article. Basically, both are reacting to a librarian’s article in School Library Journal that boys could be encouraged to read if publishers changed female protagonists – those that “aren’t really about being female” – to male ones.

This pretty much makes me bang my head against the wall. Most of the good points to be made here have been made already by one or both of the pieces above, but in case you’re not feeling love for the links, I’ll sum them up here.

1. It’s a terrible idea to purposely make “male” the default. It would be equally terrible to make “female” the default. Implementing this suggestion would mean that all characters who aren’t “girly” or totally focused on their female identities would be boys, thus presenting a literary world wherein all women are overtly feminine and/or dealing with specifically female issues, whereas men come in a full range of personalities and encounter all kinds of issues. What kind of message is that?

2. Are we seriously, as a culture, okay with the fact that so many boys apparently won’t read books that follow girls? One of the posts I mentioned has an effective metaphor for this: race. Try to picture a parent saying the following aloud in public: “Gosh, this book is a genre my kid likes, an appropriate reading level, and is highly recommended, but the protagonist isn’t white, so I don’t think my kid would read it.” Yeah, didn’t think so. Then why do so many parents shrug and say, “My son won’t read a book about a girl”?

3. One of the posts I cited discusses the importance of letting kids learn through books what life is like for people different from themselves. I agree that this is important, but would say it is perhaps more important to show kids how similar other kinds of people really are to themselves. This is why I didn’t like that, in middle and high school, we had to read a bunch of books where black protagonists faced mostly race-related issues. (I especially remember disliking the book Black Boy, but then, there’s also the fact that that protagonist kills a kitten. Seriously.) If it weren’t for the fact that my school was sixty percent black, and I could just look around and know that black kids cared about friends and family and grades and clothes and what they were doing this weekend and a whole lot of other things besides being black, some of those books might have given me the impression that they literally didn’t think about anything except race.

(That is the other problem with the librarian’s suggestion: Girls would get sick of reading about girls who all cared intensely about being female all the time.)

It’s vital to understand the unique experiences of people from different backgrounds, but I think that’s mostly because this helps you see the why for some of the ways that they are different from you. Religion is a good example here. If you understand the underlying beliefs, you can look at an unfamiliar religious practice and think, “Given those beliefs, I or people I know might do that.” If you don’t understand a group’s beliefs and experiences that are different from yours, it’s easy to fall into the trap of exoticizing or even, in extreme cases, dehumanizing, that group. Keep in mind that all people are different from each other to greater or lesser degrees. Knowing the history of a group is like knowing the history of a person. It can make the difference between, “That’s crazy,” and, “That’s not me, but I see why it is that way.”

4. Maybe I don’t entirely have the right to feel this way, given how many female protagonists are out there now, but I resent that for so long most children’s books followed male protagonists. Girls were expected to read them or nothing. True, that was mostly before I was born, but as a result, many of the classic children’s books follow boys. That never stopped me from reading them. Indeed, I’ve always preferred, say, an adventurous fantasy with a male protagonist to a story where girls go to school and make friends.* But then, I’d also rather read an adventurous fantasy with a female protagonist than a story where boys go to school and make friends.

Basically, what I’m getting to is that when girls had to read books that followed boys, it seems like, overall, they dealt with it. Now, at least according to this librarian, boys – what? Can’t find books with male protagonists? Harry Potter and Artemis Fowl and Percy Jackson and Octavian Nothing not good enough for you? Anyway, they’re having trouble finding current books with male protagonists, and so they’re not reading. If this is actually the case, then caving to these kids would be like responding to a finicky toddler with, “Okay, don’t finish your supper! Have some cake, instead! At least you’re eating!”

***

Naturally, this does not apply to all guys. Nor are they the only ones behind the boy book/girl book division. For every boy who reads only sports books (notice how I don’t even know the names of any series . . .), there’s a girl who only reads Babysitters Club. In my work at the library, I sometimes want to tell kids of both genders, “You know, if you were equally willing to read Hardy Boys and Nancy Drew, you’d have twice the selection to choose from!” And when I was at William & Mary, the president of the Harry Potter club said that when she’d gotten the early books as presents, she’d refused to read them for months “because there was a boy on the cover!”

These aren’t the only options, anyway. Some books don’t exclusively follow any one character. As a kid, I loved The Boxcar Children and its sequels, the Redwall books, and – when very young – the Bailey School Kids books. All of these mostly follow groups of characters that include both genders. My brother read all of these series, too, and some are mentioned as appealing to guys on the Guys Read website.

Obviously, tastes differ between kids at least as much as between genders. Still, whether because of nature or nurture, some books tend to have more appeal to one gender than the other. Yes, in a perfect world, boys could read A Little Princess on the playground without getting teased. Also, there would be elves and centaurs, and David Bowie would perform the song “Magic Dance” at all gatherings except for maybe funerals. Sadly, we do not live in that world. Still, some books have tremendously broad appeal and, I think, do a great job illustrating that people shouldn’t let their reading be limited for stupid reasons. For example:

1. Harry Potter, obviously.

2. His Dark Materials by Philip Pullman. If you’re a guy who happens to be Catholic, you might not love this trilogy, but it won’t be because of a protagonist’s gender.

3. Ralph S. Mouse by Beverly Cleary. He’s male. He’s also a mouse. It’s an easy call which one makes a bigger difference to the story.

4. Matilda by Roald Dahl. She’s a girl. She’s also telekinetic. See above re: importance to the story.

5. Calvin and Hobbes by Bill Watterson. The main two characters are male, and Calvin’s pretty anti-girl, but his schemes are often foiled by by Susie Derkins, the girl next door, making the books actually pretty girl-friendly (as well as hilarious and well-drawn).

There are tons more that I could list, but they mostly follow the pattern in 3 and 4 above: the character has, as you’d probably expect, a gender, but that’s not what the story is about. The book may be “about a girl,” but it isn’t “about girls” – it’s about a girl who time-travels and gets stuck in Ancient Egypt or runs away to live in a museum or learns to turn herself invisible. Similarly, a book with a male protagonist that is widely read by both genders is not usually “about boys,” but about a boy who solves mysteries or discovers a living dinosaur or is raised in the jungle by wolves. This, incidentally, is why I’ve referred to “books that follow girls” or “books with male protagonists” rather than “books about girls/boys.”

What books do you think defy gender categorization? Which ones do you see unfairly and unfortunately pigeonholed as “girl books” or “boy books”?

***

*Once, as a kid, I picked up a book called Silver Blades: Ice Princess in the library, read the back cover, and put it down in disgust. “It’s about skating!” I told Mom. “Who would possibly have gotten that from that cool-sounding title?” Mom assured me that it was, in fact, possible.

Things Learned in the Blogosphere

I made my weekly rounds of agent, editor, and writer blogs, and I came up with a few interesting things.

– Many of you may know this already, but I hadn’t heard about the Amazon snafu of last Friday. Basically, someone uploaded some pirated e-books to Amazon, and customers bought them, thinking they were the real deal. Upon making this discovery, Amazon refunded those customers’ money and remotely deleted the books from their Kindles. Lots and lots of people proceeded to freak out, writing articles galore about the impending censorship crisis and apocalypse of free thought. That might not have happened had the deleted books not been works by George Orwell, including 1984.

(That’s what his estate gets for refusing to let David Bowie make a musical of 1984 back in the seventies.)

Amazon says they’ve changed their policy and will no longer delete purchased books from users’ devices. The agents whose blogs commented on this mostly seemed to think it was silly.

I can see a couple of views on the matter. A student says he lost all the notes and annotations he’d been making on his e-copy of 1984 when it was removed, so that’s obviously a problem. Overall, though, it seems to me like a good idea to take pirated books out of the system while refunding the customers’ money so that they can buy the real thing, with royalties going to Orwell’s estate. It was pretty silly of Amazon not to realize that the media would go crazy over the deletion of these specific books, but I think the principle is sound. Ideally, an e-mail would go out first to say that the books were being recalled and why, and to explain how to transfer any notes, etc.

– I doubt this link will be around long, but this is insane! I wince, especially when I read the words “fiction novel.”

– The Writer Unboxed blog has a fun contest for wacky metaphors, in which you can win free books! Submission time ends in just a day or so.

– In other news, everyone should join me in eagerly anticipating the release of a book about man-eating unicorns and the badass women who hunt them. Early reviews have compared it to Buffy, and the author’s blog is fun and interesting, boding well for the quality of her book.

It seems the author has done quite a bit of research for the book, called Rampant. At first, I was surprised by the “unicorn hunters must be descendants of Alexander the Great” bit – Alexander the Great? Hunh? Why? Supposedly he got his warhorse, famous at the time, by rescuing it from men who were about to put it to death because it could not be tamed and ATE HUMAN FLESH. Later, people decided that the horse was actually a type of killer unicorn, and Alexander the Great became known during his lifetime as a unicorn tamer!

Also, today I restarted my part-time job at the library! Huzzah!