Beware of those who use children to push their agenda.
Good video’
This is a global portal for all novels and movies about climate change and "The Virus," with news links and opeds from blogs to videos to Wikipedia to Twitter to news links and Facebook Groups. See this portal, the only such cli-fi sci-fi portal on the internet. MEDIA inquiries are okay at this point in time, and personal comments may be sent to the editor at danbloom ATMARK gmail DOT com
Sunday, February 24, 2019
Morgan Entrekin and Michiko Kakutani will be intrumental in boosting the fortunes of cli-fi in the 2020s
by staff writer, with agencies
Last year the American novelist Siobhan Adcock wrote a book industry article for Literary Hub, an industry-wide book website, and her piece listing 9 new climate-themed novels received a lot of play among writers and literary critics worldwide via Twitter and Facebook. She wrote mini reviews of each of the 9 books she selected and the editors added the colorful covers of each book as well to the internet page.
And now that ''cli-fi'' has become a popular buzzword in media and literary circles, with dozens, hundreds, of articles about the genre itself archived around the global internet, in dozens of languges in addition to English, it's time to ask: is the book industry warming up the the genre of climate fiction in the early part of the 21st century, or is the book business still cool the rising new genre?
So just how is the publishing industry taking to or not taking to the cli-fi genre? An American reporter is currently researching a news article on this very subject and she is -- from what I hear -- interviewing New York power publishers like Morgan Entrekin as well as literary agents who handle cli-fi books and acquring editors at big and small firms who acquire or try to acquire cli-fi novels.
She is also talking to PR and marketing departments at major and small publishers to try to get a better understanding how these units are warming up to the new genre. The reporter is also interviewing literary critics like Michiko Kakutuni and Amy Brady and Mike Berry to try to learn how they all feel about the new genre as well, while also getting a quote or two from New York Times Book Review editor Pamela Paul.
How do the movers and shakers and players in the book biz feel, one way or another, feel about cli-fi?
Maybe some of them have never heard of the cli-fi term yet. Some have, some haven't. Most Americans and Europeans, in fact, have never heard of this new literary genre before, and I am sure many of my readers here on this blog have not heard of it yet, either. It's that new, it's very new, it's still breaking out of its shell.
In Europe, one novelist, Liz Jensen, has recently penned a 2500-word literary essay about the new genre, titling her piece "Our Home, Our Fire, Our Fiction."
"If climate change challenges the imagination by demanding that we re-frame our relationship to the entire world, then that shift of perception calls for powerful new stories, and powerful new ways of telling them." Jensen wrote. "So, since we are famously a storytelling species, how have the fiction writers of the Anthropocene tackled the rolling catastrophe of a world heading for four degrees of warming in the lifetime of any baby born today?"
She quoted the Indian-American novelist and literary critic Amitav Ghosh of Brooklyn who in a 2016 lecture series and book titled ''The Great Derangement'' argued that literary fiction has been slow to address the issue upon which the survival of our ecosystem depends.
“It’s our job, as writers, to make imaginative leaps on behalf of those who don’t, can’t or won’t,” Jensen quoted Ghosh as saying.
Since Ghosh issued his challenge to world literature in 2016, Jensen wrote, ''the tide has turned: the Chinese curse ‘may you live in interesting times’ has found its moment, and the moment has found its genre: cli-fi."
Jensen added: ''Ghosh's next [cli-fi] novel 'Gun Island' (published later this year) joins a veritable ocean of literature rising to the occasion of our times, while older works such as Maggie Gee’s startlingly prophetic 1998 novel 'The Ice People' are being rediscovered, thanks in part to the increasing surge in interest in the planet’s predicament, and the fictions it engenders.''
Are we a storytelling species? Yes, we are, and climate change fiction stories and beginning to fill our bookshelves and bookstore display windows. It's time. It's Greta Thunberg's time and it's cli-fi's time.
In this context, Jensen argues, "climate fiction is becoming -- all too quickly, the new realism."
I can't wait to to hear what the movers and shakers and major players in the book business in London, Sydney and Manhattan have to say about these new global literary developments, set as they are against the backdrop of annual U.N. climafe conferences and weekly "school strikes for climate" by thousands of teenagers around the world.
Literature matters, my literature professor at Tufts University, Sol Gittelman, told me in 1969, some 50 years ago.
It's still true, and it's even truer today as the 2020s beckon writers to dig in and start tacking climate themes as the spirit moves them. The next 100 years will a new way of writing and a new way of reading. May the force be with you.
Jensen concluded her essay two important paragraphs:
''Historians will look back on this era and note its defining paradox: that while the public imagination was increasingly occupied with the dangers ahead, those in power were either in active denial, busy plotting how best to profit from a range of oncoming disasters, indifferent, or -- at best -- doing far too little, far too late.''
''But those same historians may also note that today´s storytellers, inspired by solid science and the evidence of their own eyes, have begun to reclaim the power of the prophets and seers of past ages by resuming their almost forgotten role as the cognitive avant-garde. And that collectively, they bear a message that the world ignores at its peril.''
What will Morgan Entrekin and Michiko Kakutani have to say about all this? Time will tell.
Friday, February 22, 2019
Listen in as David Wallace-Wells and Robinson Meyer discuss the role of the ''cli-fi'' genre in a somewhat imaginary conversation about David's new 350 page ''panic attack'' climate tome.
Sunday, February 24, 2119
Listen in as David Wallace-Wells and Robinson Meyer discuss the role of the ''cli-fi'' genre in a somewhat imaginary conversation about David's new 350 page ''panic attack'' climate tome.
David Wallace-Wells is the acclaimed (or infamous, as the case might be) author of the new nonfiction book based on a 2017 magazine article "The Uninhabitable Earth," a 350-page timely tome which describes why climate change could use some old-fashioned cli-fi storytelling novels and movies to help get the message across that this is serious business indeed and no longer a laughing matter.
On page 146 of the book, David gives a nice shout-out to the rising genre of cli-fi, so we know he knows the term and even uses it in his chapter on "Storytelling."
So listen in to this somewhat imaginary conversation between David and the Atlantic magazine's climate guru, Rob Meyer.
Robinson Meyer: ''So David, tell me, what led you to embrace the ''cli-fi'' genre of novels and movies as an important way of using storytelling to communicate with readers and movie viewers about the huge ''hyperobject'' of a subject.''
Wallace-Wells: ''Ghosh’s basic argument is that the novel is a form about the inner life of an individual. And the problem of climate change is a very different category of problem for him. You can place the stories of individuals within it, but you end up with something like The Day After Tomorrow, where it’s like, Oh, here’s a person who’s dealing with a struggle, but the story is also about climate change. And the disconnect feels almost corny and staged. And yet at the same time, Ghosh has recently confessed that he enjoys watching cli-fi movies. In an interview with a reporter in Canada last summer, he said confessed that he is a self-admitted fan of some of Hollywood’s cli-fi disaster epics, such as ”The Day After Tomorrow” and ”Geostorm,” and Ghosh said that that he enjoys those films. Here's the money quote:
“I love them! I watch them obsessively,” he told an interviewer last summer in Canada, adding: “My climate scientist friends joke and laugh at me for this because the practical science in a movie like ‘The Day After Tomorrow’ is bad. But I find these movies very compelling. And I do think both film and television are very forward-leaning in dealing with climate change.”
So that's Ghosh for you.
Wallace-Wells: ''I guess it depends on whether what you’re looking for in a narrative is ''polemic'' or ''humanity.'' I actually think that one of the features of my mgazine writing on this subject is that it demonstrates that if you handle them right, the simple accumulation of facts can take on an enormous narrative force. And I don’t really think that that’s something that many other writers about climate have done before, although Nat Rich does something similar in his 66,000 word New York Times feature which is now a nonfiction book coming out in April titled LOSING EARTH. His book will be competing with mine for readers' minds and emotions. I know Nat, I like him. Good guy. Probably a lot smarter than me. He even wrote a cli-fi novel "Odds Against Tomorrow" and I hope someday to write a cli-fi novel as well. We'll see. I'm a storyteller of the journalist kind but I think I have a novel or two in me, too.''
''Of course, Rob, as you know, we are still in the infant stage of figuring out how to tell stories about this issue. Going forward, I suspect that the more interesting cli-fi narrative forms are likely to background climate change and make it appear like the theater in which human dramas are unfolding. Think about, for instance, a climate refugee camp, where the story is effectively some rivalry between two quasi-criminal-like figures in the camp. Or a honeymoon where people are going snorkeling through Miami Beach. The rise of the cli-fi genre is one of the untold stories of the age we now live in. I hope to change that silence about cli-fi by talking about it more. And Rob, cli-fi has gotten a bad rap by many media peiople, who alwys say cli-fi novels are always dystopian and pessmistic and dark and unrelenting, but it's not true. Cli-fi novels can also be uplifting, optimistic and positive emotional reads that produce empathy and action in the reader. I am fully behind the ruise of climate fiction, and I'm glad you asked.''
MEYER: ''I didn't ask. I have never mentioned cli-fi term in any of my reporting or podcasts.''.
Meyer: ''I am getting there.''
Wallace-Wells: ''There are whole imaginative theaters for storytelling about climate that we haven’t yet begun to explore. But if all that is considered “responsible” is optimistic hopeful storytelling about how we can solve the problem, then that’s just—from a narrative perspective, it’s kind of corny. The best climate storytelling has been written by people like J. G. Ballard, William Gibson, and Margaret Atwood, who have really thought about all the weird ways that these forces might transform our lives. So new writers coming up in the literary world will start tackling the cli-fi genre in similar ways. My friends in the publishing world in New York tell me it's just a matter of time. Cli-fi is catching on. ''
Meyer: ''Gibson’s cli-fi novel, The Peripheral, seems like one of the better presentations of how you’re talking about history now—about how day-to-day, lived existence would feel like in a world where progress has gone wrong, where there are cataclysms in the past from which people really haven’t recovered. Some guy in Taiwan is very busy promoting the cli-fi genre, I can't remember his name.''
Wallace-Wells: ''Yeh, I've heard about him and he writes to me now and then. He even wrote a blog post about my hyphenated last name and how it came to me. My brother Ben tweeted about it, too.''
Meyer: ''He writes to me. too.''
Wallace-Wells: ''I know Willism Gibson personally a little bit because I conducted the Paris Review interview with him. We were emailing a few weeks ago and I was like, Oh, I’m just adding a couple sentences to the book, last minute, about how science-fiction writers are likely to be understood even more as prophets because of climate change, and he wrote back and he was like, You know what, every time people say that to me, I always say “We haven’t successfully predicted anything! We got all of our predictions wrong. The only thing we’ve gotten right is the mood.” And I wrote back and I was like, No, the mood is a prediction! It’s a really important prediction, and actually you guys got it extremely right.''
Wallace-Wells: ''My short-form answer is that I think that the 21st century will be dominated by cli-fi novels and movies in the same way that, say, the end of the 20th century was dominated by financial capitalism, or the 19th century in the West was dominated by modernity or industry—that cli-fi will be the meta-narrative of the coming 8 decades, and there won’t be an area of literaatre or cinema that is untouched by it. Often people talk about climate change as a global problem, which it obviously is, but I don’t think we’ve really started to think about how novels and movies can raise awareness of certain issues. Not just THE JUNGLE but also Uncle Tom's Cabin and ON THE BEACH in 1957 and the movie version in 1959.
''My basic perspective is that everything about human life on this planet will be transformed by cli-fi novels and movies. Even if we end up at a kind of best-case outcome, I think the world will be dominated by cli-fi in the coming decades in ways that it’s hard to imagine and we really haven’t started to think hard enough about.
''I am a child of the 1990s. I’m Jewish, I'm American. I grew up in New York. I went to expensive private schools in Manhattan, I went to Dartmouth for 4 years.''
END OF CONVERSATION, slightly edited for amplification and clarification purposes.
Saturday, January 26, 2019
MIchelle Stirling wonders out loud if Greta Thunberg is being instrumentalized by the media and adults around her in Sweden and overseas
Greta Thunberg of the school #ClimateStrike fame made a compelling, if somewhat dystopian, presentation at COP24. Michelle Stirling, Communications Manager of Friends of Science Society challenges Greta's perspective in this video response.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9ZbSaL7JP0
3 minutes video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9ZbSaL7JP0
3 minutes video
View 9 replies
Hide replies
Solar activity is in decline, Milankovitch cycles would have us cooling. The Holocene Optimum occurred 6000 years ago and was followed by a long term cooling trend that ended abruptly when we dumped 1.5 trillions of CO2, a known greenhouse gas, in to the atmosphere, resulting in levels not observed in millions of years. Meanwhile we are warming; 9 of 10 warmest years in the instrumental record occurred in the 21 century. The exception, 1998, was the strongest El Nino event in the previous 50 years.
Using carbon isotope analysis the 43% increase in atmospheric CO2 over the past 2.5 centuries can be directly attributed to the burning of fossil fuels.
Michelle, Greta is much wiser than you.
12 13
View 105 replies
Hide replies
The real deniers are those who denies the real science.
The term “climate change” is so vague and the definition is so changeable that it is NOT a falsifiable hypothesis. It is therefore unscientific nonsense. The term “catastrophic human-made global warming” is a falsifiable hypothesis, and it was falsified long ago – when CO2 rose sharply after ~1940 while temperature declined from ~1945 to ~1977 “the alleged global warming crisis DOES NOT EXIST”.
Current forms of clean/green energy are not green and produce little useful (dispatchable) energy. All they do is destabilize the grid and drive up energy costs, which increases Excess Winter Deaths among the elderly and the poor. Sure there may be better forms of energy out there – but current “solutions” are costly fiascos, due primarily to intermittency. Tens of trillions of dollars of scarce global resources have been squandered on green energy nonsense.
7 8
View 22 replies
Hide replies
Change will come, it does not matter if you like or not. You can not stop the justice. You are just trying to stop this, maybe because someone paid you as always happen with negacionism.
Actually, adults did stole the future with their horrible society, and try to hide it with the sucess of a few.
PD: Greta never said we have to stop the climate change, she knows it is not possible now, she is asking for a society that get prepared for the climate change, it is very different. By this way i can see your wishes to stop de climate justice, and we all knew it was going to happen. But... Negacionism does not work anymore. Change has started and nobody will stop this.
5 6
View 2 replies
Hide replies
View 3 replies
Hide replies
The High Priestess of the Cult of Ra spreads her disinformation. Not one single academy of science in any country on the planet disputes the conclusions of the IPCC. Not one single academy of science in any country on the planet endorses the assertions of the oxymoronically named "Friends of Science.
6 7
View 15 replies
Hide replies
Thank you for this.
I watched and was horrified at how the "environmentalists" used this poor child
for publicity. Is there no depth that they wont sink to.?
Life today is a million times better than before the industrial revolution - the trouble is that
all these environmentalists lead such protected lives and are blind to the benefits that they have.
Complaining about oil as they drive around (or fly around) the world etc etc.
Try swapping with a poor subsistance farmer in india and see how long they last.
Its so hypocritical !
10 11
View 19 replies
Hide replies
She didn't say you haven't done anything at all. She said you haven't done anything to slow down this horrible trend of exploiting this planet past its capabilities. Of course human kind has made extraordinary advances in technology, but we should have been able to do the same in environmental-friendly progress these past few decades. All the more environmental-friendly ideas have been bought by the companies who have economic interests in our current destructive ways, and thrown in the garbage can.
OF COURSE there has been climate change in the past, and sometimes almost all life on Earth has died and sometimes we have adapted and survived, but it has never been sped up by an animal species before. We all know the planet is not "going under", it's not going to die. But life on earth might. Scientists estimate we're now losing species at 1,000 to 10,000 times the background rate, with literally dozens going extinct every day, with as many as 30 to 50 percent of all species possibly heading toward extinction by mid-century. Humans are probably not going to become extinct any time soon, but what will happen when the climate becomes more and more extreme? When people will have no other choice but to leave their homes because it is impossible to stay. Many people's homes will be under water and others' will be destroyed by extreme weather. Where will these people go? I sincerely hope you haven't chosen an equally idiotic president by then, and that no other country has either, because millions of people are going to have to find new homes. The population on Earth has dramatically increased and now we will all have to share less and less habitable land.
We will rue this day for not taking this crisis seriously. The Earth will endure but become more and more inhospitable in the process. I hope that humans endure and become more and more humane in the process, because otherwise a future awaits that I don't want to live in.
1 2
The AGW alarmists never pick up on the fact that there is a diminishing return on the amount of warming that CO2 effect. It only absorbs a certain and small spectrum of light. Once this is all absorbed, there is no more warming. We are probably already at the point where it has almost zero effect. The first 200 or 300 ppm do 95% of the warming. Also, if CO2 were below 150 ppm, all plant life would die.
Cheap energy from oil, gas has been the greatest help to humankind in the history of humankind!!!! These quacks know that, but they LIE to everyone for their own benefit, which is the perpetuation of the Climate Change industry.
2 3
The concern for the children is the encroaching socialist foolishness being taught in our schools!
3 4
Thank you! Thank you. I have a 14 year old grandson who is terrified that he is causing the end of the world. I use satire and facts. But he is convinced CO2 is evil...etc......etc........and that the sun is some meaningless light bulb in the sky with nothing to do with climate. He really believes that humans make climate, not the sun.
4 5
View 12 replies
Hide replies
That is what the world media should be saying but the modern journalist and politician is no longer capable of independent thought .
3 4
View 3 replies
Hide replies
you are deranged and fit well with almost half of americans you should rename to friends of oil industry
3 4
View reply
Hide replies
Even without the evidence of global warming it is obvious that a fossil-fuel based lifestyle is unsustainable. So why not embrace change right now?
1 2
Great video! But what I think Greta really should fear is pollution of our world, its by far the biggest danger of our time! Not CO2!
1 2
Michelle, on behalf of Greta and all the other Gretas, I must thank you for your patronising childsplaining. You and people like you are exactly the reason Greta has no future. Be very glad she is a decent and good person. Others may not be so forgiving to those idiots who believed infinite growth and consumption on a finite planet were achievable. You Michelle are a disgusting shill and have nothing to offer this world but your toxic banalities. Leave the stage before you are booed off it and pelted with rotten vegetables.
4 5
View 2 replies
Hide replies
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

