Things put off as I worked through my research project.
A Scottish hospital. A dying man. A fascist doctor. Will we listen? (The Herald)
We know how the story starts: on a bright cold day in April as the clocks are striking 13. We know how the story ends: in the basement of the ministry of love with a cage full of starving rats. And we probably feel like we know what the story means, what it’s saying, what it’s warning us about. Yet here we are, the story is happening again, and in a different way: in a hospital in Scotland, with a dying man, and a fascist doctor. It is unexpected.
I wonder, as it gets going, this brand new version, if it can have anything left to say, or at least anything surprising. Everyone has read the book, and everyone’s familiar with its dark and disturbing iconography: Big Brother, Room 101, the Thought Police. These are the phrases we use to talk about the state we’re in. They form the questions we ask. Has fiction become fact? In what ways is 2026 like 1984? How Orwellian are we really?
***
The solutions to all of this are harder to come up with – at one point, the Scottish doctor wonders what the way forward might be and Orwell shrugs and says “I don’t know” before coughing up more blood into his handkerchief. In a way, it’s the bleakest, most dystopian way to end a bleak and dystopian story, but the comfort for us, in the audience, is that, even though the parallels are there and they’re strong, Winston’s world is much, much worse than ours, which means there’s much more hope in our world too. It’s hard to watch at times, but perhaps this version of Orwell can remind us of the basics, the sums that make us. Such as two plus two equals four. And Winston’s final desperate statement of an un-disputable, un-editable fact: it takes two to be human.
10 Reasons Why We Didn't Accept Your Submission (Thin Skin) - read this and it might help you revise.
From Literary Hub: What Weimar Berlin’s Most Famous Plays Revealed About Artistic Freedom and What Latin American Literature Can Teach the Current Leaders of Latin America. The latter has more humor than the former, but both should widen your horizons.
A good refresher covering everything: All about perspectives in novels (Nathan Bransford)
Q: Can stories with unsavory characters find a home in today’s lit mag landscape?
Processing: How Nicholas Russell Wrote Observer
Asking Confidently and Advocating for Your Work
That can feel pushy at first. Self-centered. Why should someone want to read my writing? Answering this question is key to seeking your audience’s attention. No matter who you’re speaking to, let whomever is considering your work know quickly that your writing is worth their time. And tell them why, succinctly. In my experience, when I can confidently advocate for myself and my work, the reader—agent or editor—will be more willing to entertain the possibility that it IS worth their time.
We Were the Mulvaneys JCO writes about her novel.
Finally, I have to say of We Were the Mulvaneys that it’s the novel closest to my heart. Passages were transcribed in white heat, as in a fevered dream. I was scarcely inventing or imagining, only just “remembering.” My writing is so much about homesickness. The rural landscapes and waterways of upstate New York, where I was born and grew up on a small, not-very-prosperous farm north of Lockport. The sights, smells and texture of life in a small town. The intense emotions of high school life, ephemeral anxieties and joys. The wounds that can cut deep, and scar for years, or a lifetime.
Novelist Annie Dillard has died (NPR).
I read Annie Dillard's Pilgrim at Tinker Creek while in prison. I thought it was wonderful and recommend it as being along the lines of a modern Walden.
Margaret Atwood: ‘God made the middle finger for a reason’ (London Times) - always witty, always worth listening to.
“They don’t want Democrats being elected.” Wry insouciance vanishes, and raw exasperation with Americans enters her tone. “Yeah, so how about voting this time, instead of doing what you did with Hillary Clinton, because she wasn’t perfect enough? And how far did that get you, nincompoops?”
Atwood has no time for ideological purity or extremism on either left or right. “Defund the police was a really stupid idea,” she says. “An awful slogan. What did they think was going to replace it?” To many fans’ disappointment she won’t even call herself a feminist “because there’s too many different kinds, so what are we talking about?” I suspect she is bored with being asked about gender politics, and when I say so she looks relieved.
“I’m the human rights generation. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was made up for a very good reason, so that’s my point of reference. And if you want rights for women, you also have to have human rights for men.” She fixes a stare. “Radical idea, right? But it doesn’t make any sense otherwise. So what kind of gender politics am I interested in? I’m interested in the legal kind. I’m interested in whether or not you can have a credit card. Or whether or not you can have an abortion, or whether or not you can wear trousers to the office.”
***
Research suggests that people are having a lot less sex, I tell her. Last year, for example, a study by the Institute for Family Studies found that weekly sex between Americans aged 18-64 fell from 55 per cent in 1990 to 37 per cent in 2024. The number of 18 to 24-year-olds who’d had no sex at all in the previous year had doubled since 2010.
“That’s interesting. Well, silly old them. Enjoy it while you can, kids.”
She pauses, then volunteers languidly: “I still get letters from pervy people. Which I’m considering rather flattering, actually, at my age. And no, I am not going to put on black leather and high heels and walk all over your face. Dream on, wanker.”
sch 9/16


















































