The Evolution of Science Fiction discussion

She is interesting because
1) She's a really good writer, and has been from the start
2) She's led an "interesting" life: lots of fodder for writing there, and she's used a fair bit of it
3) She started out writing SF/F, but branched out pretty quickly into other genres. She doesn't think of herself as a genre writer.

So: Pertinent for here:
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?411
http://www.sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/...
Her first novel was AMMONITE (SF), which I liked a lot and which won a bunch of awards: http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cg...
Nicholas Whyte wrote a good review here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
-- which I commented on as well. If you missed it, well -- recommended reading!
OK, there's a start. POST before GR loses the thing....

Thanks, Peter. I checked & she is on my important author list.

Here's a 2003 interview in Strange Horizons:
http://strangehorizons.com/non-fictio...
Even after 15+ yrs, lots of Good Stuff here:
• "Writing a balanced, beautiful novel, where plot and character and setting and pacing and narrative structure and imagery and, above all, story work in harmony and true proportion, is fucking *hard*."
• "There's absolutely nothing like the sheer joy of diving into a piece of fiction and just making shit up, feeling the words come purling from the keyboard and the characters start moving around and talking and meeting each other. It's incredible."

Never seen this stuff said better. Enjoy!

I've met Nicola just once, maybe 20 years ago at her pretty little house in Seattle. She was already living with Kelley Eskridge then. They got married many years later. Let me see if I can find a really cute set of pix of the two love-birds: https://nicolagriffith.com/2018/06/26...
You really shouldn't miss these. Trust me on this! ❤️😻😇

You'll see in photo #3 that they were already cat-lovers. Now they have new kittens: two boys! OK, for guaranteed Cuteness Overload: plug "nicola griffith kittens" into Google Images. Oh, my. 😻🐈😍

Peter wrote: "Let me see if I can find a really cute set of pix of the two love-birds."

I had no idea she had bleached her hair white!

More from the 2003 interview -- which just keeps on giving.
"A long, long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, "fiction" meant basically, "this is make-believe, it's not real, people, and it doesn't have to be realistic, just true." All fiction was, in the most basic sense, fantasy. Tales of Paradise, of Gilgamesh and magic lamps and Beowulf and merchants of Venice and melancholy Scottish kings and Frankenstein's monster were classified only as "good," that is, the writer made you believe it, realistic or not, or "bad," that is, they failed to convince you. I wish it were that way still." Amen!

"Decades ago, if you read or wrote SF you were weird. Period. This meant that SF writers had incredible freedom to write about verboten subjects -- communism during the 1950s, gender in the sixties, queers in the seventies -- because no one took it seriously. No one felt threatened: it was just those weirdos writing crap about bug-eyed monsters. The downside of SF being taken more seriously these days is that the genre as a whole is bigger and a lot more conservative. This creates genres-within-genres, niches if you like, which means that straight SF readers can now choose to read only straight SF, and eschew anything with dykes in it as "not Real SF, but a sub-genre." Conversely, it also means that queer readers can read only SF/F with queer characters, if they choose. I think it's a real pity, because both groups are losing out. When you arbitrarily dump a portion of your reading choice, your reading options are diminished."
Amen, again. A wise woman!

". . . when I wrote Ammonite, several people in the business said to me: You can't sell that to a mainstream publisher! I said: Watch me. These days, some might think it privately, but they wouldn't say it out loud."

Ammonite was published in 1992 as original mmpbs, in the US by Del Rey / Ballantine & in the UK by Grafton. Reprinted as tp in US & UK in 2002 (Gollancz SF Masterworks). Multiple awards & nominations, 1992-95. Details: http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cg...

NG's writing: If there is a complete bibliography I couldn't find it. Stuff that Isfdb thinks is if genre interest is there http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?411
More short stories here, https://nicolagriffith.com/2016/11/20... [some online, she says]
-- along with amusing commentary by the author:
She once wrote "a couple of Warhammer stories back in the day." . . .
"I had the best time writing those stories. So much so that in 2006 or 2007 I outlined a big sword-swangin’ fantasy novel based on my characters and plots. I got permission from Games Workshop to publish—if I de-Warhammered them; essentially filed off the serial numbers—but at the last minute started Hild instead. I still think about that novel sometimes. Swords, ponies, sex, angst, magic, war, betrayal, love…"
Heh. Nicola couldn't write a dull para. if she tried!
And HILD covered some of this same ground, albeit with more respect for actual history. First-rate novel, too. Althea Ann's is the review I'd recommend you read: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

So, I started to say:
I've read all of her novels, liked them all & have ratings (at least) up here. I have reviews posted for some, and I'll look to see if I missed any. Best books? I liked her Nebula-winning "Slow River" (1995) a lot. Very likely the only SF novel set in a sewage-treatment plant! Lots of cool sanitary-engineering details. It held up to a re-read too.

After that: the Aud Torvingen books (1998-2007), esp. the first two. Superficially crime novels, they are really character studies, and very effective looks at red rage. And a flat amazing power fantasy!
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Here's Aud, dressing to meet a new client:
"I felt sharp, rich, very good looking. It pleases me to wear silk couture and gold and pearls. I like the way it feels on my skin, the way it fits."
Aud is smarter, stronger, faster and sexier than you, or indeed any mere human. . . .