Most fans of fiction know about Livia, from Robert Graves’s “I, Claudius.”  She was the scheming Roman Empress who calmly plotted, murdered, and poisoned her way through eight or nine relatives to ensure that her son became the next Emperor. Cold, amoral, ruthless, and detestable… but at least the woman had style.

Unfortunately, it is really is hard to admire Livia when you’re facing someone just like her in real life. The only  difference is that this one has no style.

There is a good-old-boy social network in a certain midwestern town that pretty much run things… which includes twisting and or breaking and ignoring the law when they feel like it. Most of the judges and attorneys are either in their pockets, or they’re part of ‘the club.’

… and somehow, our Livia has managed to put her hooks into several of them, and is getting them to dance to her tune.

Like Livia, this one is not above doing anything to achieve her goals.

She is methodically stripping a family, who never did a thing to her except offer her support… of it’s fortune, its dignity and its sanity. She is destroying an old man with Alzheimer’s disease and using the mans own lawyers to help her destroy and steal from the family… by playing them one against the other.

Sadly, in the end, they will most likely find themselves as mentally and emotionally broken as his daughter, the only one who has been putting up a fight to protect her father. They will wind up with nothing… and wonder how it happened.

When this is all over I’m going to write it up, publish it and give copies of the book away  all over town.

I thought at first to fictionalise the place and use different names… but the personalities, attitudes and ‘voices’ would be them… every stinking last one of ‘em… but the more I see, the stranger it gets… and now I’m not so sure (about fictionalising it).

I’ve never written a true crime novel. This may be my first.

Stay tuned.

One of the headlines in the paper yesterday was:

Inspectors Fear Iran Is Hiding Nuclear Plants

I wrote that in my opinion they were welcome to them because I certainly did not wish to have any of those in my gardens.

I asked, “Can you imagine what they’d do to the poor roses?”

The responses were anything from Huh? to a dissertation on the subject of Armageddon.

My comment was, however, not intended to encourage discourse on the subject of nuclear arms control, but instead the way we use and/or mis-use words.

A plant – “is a living organism of the kind exemplified by trees, shrubs, herbs, grasses, ferns, and mosses, typically growing in a permanent site, absorbing water and inorganic substances through its roots, and synthesizing nutrients in its leaves by photosynthesis using the green pigment chlorophyll.”

A factory, or foundry, or… in the archaic (a manufactory), “is a place where one manufactures finished goods by processing raw materials.”

As I hypothesised, the words that people picked out were ‘Nuclear’ and ’Iran’ , which was why they ‘looked askance at my cavalier attitude toward fanaticism’ and wondered.

Which, I must admit, was the point of the posting: How often we mis-use words.

We see and hear terms like this used so often in the print press, on television and radio, on the Internet, and even in textbooks, that we become so inured to this arbitrary assimilation/usurpation of their definition that we adopt the usage.

We may all speak English… but in truth… We do not.

Which, when speaking to someone who speaks a different language, or even to someone who speaks the same language but who is from a different country… is, like Douglas Adams Babel Fish, the primary cause of misunderstandings that have so often led to long, bloody wars.

Self publishing can be, and often is, the nearest thing to gambling… without the complementary room. cocktails and hors d’oeuvres.

It is less of a gamble when it is shared, and when it’s an e-pub that costs you only time and effort, it can be a joyful experience.

That is, unless you’re the editor. Then it can be blood, sweat and tears… both of joy and of frustration.

That said, I am pleased to say that a new anthology of short stories… with a twist… will be published in early December.

Twenty authors, twenty stories… plus a handful of extras by the same authors.

Ménage-à-20

Coming soon to free download site near you.

As everyone who knows me is well aware, I usually neither comment on, nor do I promote books.. either by word of mouth or in this space. I prefer to keep to commentaries on the subject of the process of writing and on issues related to publishing.

What follows is NOT an exception to that rule!

What this column is about is learning the process of writing, editing and some of many arcane and obscure issues related to getting published.

An author I highly respect, Lynn Flewelling, is offering a course on writing… and to make it even more fun, the course will will be taking place on a cruise ship.

The inclusive dates are 23-30 May of 2010, so make your reservations early.

See the details at Lynn Flewelling’s home page

… and don’t forget your shades, the sunscreen, your bathing suits and the Dramamine.

You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time. (P.T. Barnum)

Or can you?

It seems to me that the media, both broadcast and Internet, got suckered big time over the Balloon Boy stunt this past week. Meanwhile the important issues of the day were buried in the noise.

And now that it’s been proven that it was all a hoax, what is the press saying about it… that they got suckered, that it’s the fault of those who perpetrated the sham, and that it’s not their fault.

Really?

Sold a lot of newspapers, didn’t they? Many of the Internet News (and I use the term loosely) sites and televised Journalism (?) programmes were full of reports that in the end meant nothing but that people willingly closed their eyes to the truth and got suckered.

What happened to responsible journalism?

It seems to me that much of what the todays press reports resembles what in the past was referred to as Yellow Journalism… Sensationalistic stories filled with prurient innuendo and little, if any, truth.

Are we so desperate as a society that outrageous stunts and scandalous behaviour are more important than the events that affect and shape our lives and the world around us?

Have we, as a society, been conditioned to truly be that gullible?

I fear the answer is yes.

On Dec. 31, 1975, former Lake Superior State University Public Relations Director Bill Rabe and his colleagues cooked up an idea to banish overused words and phrases. Rabe distributed the list on New Year’s Day. In the following weeks, when nominations for the next year’s list came pouring into his office, Rabe said he knew the list would endure. He was correct.

The LSSU PR office still receives thousands of nominations every year from people who never seem to tire of talking about words and language.

And so, without further ado, the 2009 banished word list from LSSU.

This December, if all goes well at the Large Hadron Collider, they will be testing one of the most bizarre theories in science.

Nothing as revolutionary as extra dimensions of space-time or dark matter or even black holes that will eat the Earth.

What they will be testing is the notion that the collider is being sabotaged by its own future.

A pair of physicists have suggested that the hypothesized Higgs boson, which physicists hope to produce with the collider, might be so abhorrent to nature itself that, like a time traveler who goes back in time to kill his grandfather, its creation would ripple backward through time and stop the collider before it could make one.

I recently realised that I spend at least a quarter of each waking day reading; journals, magazines and newspapers… most of which have gone digital. Then there are e-mail messages, blogs, messages on a dozen or so on-line forums, manuscripts and other documents.

So much content, so little time.

I have a library, which is fairly large, not too dusty or musty, which is full of books and documents that date from ages past to the present, all of which have been carefully indexed and organised so I can find what I want.

Of course, many of them now also reside in a digital version of that same ‘library’… which is a several terabytes worth of manuscripts, e-Books, PDF formatted documents, soundtracks and albums full of digital images, audio files, video files and a ‘digital jukebox’ loaded with copies of my CD’s and DVD’s.

All of this content resides on several different systems, all of which are carefully and religiously backed up across several redundant raid arrays and archived on several different back-up media.

… And nearly all of which I can access nearly instantly from almost anywhere on or near this large sphere we call Earth as long as I have a cellular telephone, PDA, computer or
some other form of digital reader.

In a recent article on eBooks in the Guardian Robert McCrum led his column with this interesting bit…

“The experience of reading a sustained piece of prose is not going to be fundamentally altered by a new delivery system.”

He’s right. Whether it is in printed with ink on paper, or digitally on electronic paper, or formatted for a book reader, or even done in audio format, the experience of reading will not be fundamentally altered… because it requires the human mind, with it’s ability to imagine, to make the experience of those words come alive.

Will alternate multimedia forms of books change the experience?

Not appreciably, or at least I hope not.

“Private opinion creates public opinion. That is why private opinion, and private behavior, and private conversation are so terrifyingly important.” – Jan Struther, English poet (1901-1953).

There is a lot of noise and debate about the proposed Google Book Settlement. On one side we have Google, with the Author’s Guild and American Association of Publishers.

On the other we have the Open Book Alliance, the Open Content Alliance, and everyone else… writers, agents, independent book store owners, and on and on goes the list.

To understand the disagreement, you have to understand that the Authors Guild and the American Association of Publishers represent only a small cross section of the industry, and a small percentage of it at that. Neither represent authors or industry members in other countries.

… and no other country is considering amending their copyright laws.

Only in the USA is Google attempting to force a change favourable to themselves in this regard.

Part of my problem with it lies in the fact that the agreement is deeply convoluted (read the 350 pages for yourself), and in the long term benefits only Google.

The other part of my problem with it is the fact that they tried to accomplish this by using the federal court system, which is an intentional attempt to bypass the Congress of the United States; the only governing body that has the right to change or amend the laws of the country.

Believe and choose as you will, but my vote is NO to Google.

I encourage the courts and congress to say NO as well.

This article, re-published intact, comes from the July 12, 2009 issue of The Guardian (guardian.co.uk) Newspaper.

The author is Jimmy Carter, former president of the United States of America.

The words of God do not justify cruelty to women.
Discrimination and abuse wrongly backed by doctrine are damaging society, argues the former US president

“Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status …” (Article 2, Universal Declaration of Human Rights)

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28)

“I have been a practising Christian all my life and a deacon and Bible teacher for many years. My faith is a source of strength and comfort to me, as religious beliefs are to hundreds of millions of people around the world.

“So my decision to sever my ties with the Southern Baptist Convention, after six decades, was painful and difficult. It was, however, an unavoidable decision when th e convention’s leaders, quoting a few carefully selected Bible verses and claiming that Eve was created second to Adam and was responsible for original sin, ordained that women must be “subservient” to their husbands and prohibited from serving as deacons, pastors or chaplains in the military service. This was in conflict with my belief – confirmed in the holy scriptures – that we are all equal in the eyes of God.

“This view that women are somehow inferior to men is not restricted to one religion or belief. It is widespread. Women are prevented from playing a full and equal role in many faiths.

“Nor, tragically, does its influence stop at the walls of the church, mosque, synagogue or temple. This discrimination, unjustifiably attributed to a Higher Authority, has provided a reason or excuse for the deprivation of women’s equal rights across the world for centuries. The male interpretations of religious texts and the way they interact with, and reinforce, traditional practices justify some of the most pervasive, persistent, flagrant and damaging examples of human rights abuses.

“At their most repugnant, the belief that women must be subjugated to the wishes of men excuses slavery, violence, forced prostitution, genital mutilation and national laws that omit rape as a crime. But it also costs many millions of girls and women control over their own bodies and lives, and continues to deny them fair access to education, health, employment and influence within their own communities.

“The impact of these religious beliefs touches every aspect of our lives. They help explain why in many countries boys are educated before girls; why girls are told when and whom they must marry; and why many face enormous and unacceptable risks in pregnancy and childbirth because their basic health needs are not met.

“In some Islamic nations, women are restricted in their movements, punished for permitting the exposure of an arm or ankle, deprived of education, prohibited from driving a car or competing with men for a job. If a woman is raped, she is often most severely punished as the guilty party in the crime.

“The same discriminatory thinking lies behind the continuing gender gap in pay and why there are still so few women in office in Britain and the United States. The root of this prejudice lies deep in our histories, but its impact is felt every day. It is not women and girls alone who suffer. It damages all of us. The evidence shows that investing in women and girls delivers major benefits for everyone in society. An educated woman has healthier children. She is more likely to send them to school. She earns more and invests what she earns in her family.

“It is simply self-defeating for any community to discriminate against half its population. We need to challenge these self-serving and out-dated attitudes and practices – as we are seeing in Iran where women are at the forefront of the battle for democracy and freedom.

“I understand, however, why many political leaders can be reluctant about stepping into this minefield. Religion, and tradition, are powerful and sensitive area to challenge.

“But my fellow Elders and I, who come from many faiths and backgrounds, no longer need to worry about winning votes or avoiding controversy – and we are deeply committed to challenging injustice wherever we see it.

“The Elders have decided to draw particular attention to the responsibility of religious and traditional leaders in ensuring equality and human rights. We have recently published a statement that declares: ‘The justification of discrimination against women and girls on grounds of religion or tradition, as if it were prescribed by a Higher Authority, is unacceptable.’

“We are calling on all leaders to challenge and change the harmful teachings and practices, no matter how ingrained, which justify discrimination against women. We ask, in particular, that leaders of all religions have the courage to acknowledge and emphasise the positive messages of dignity and equality that all the world’s major faiths share.

“Although not having training in religion or theology, I understand that the carefully selected verses found in the holy scriptures to justify the superiority of men owe more to time and place – and the determination of male leaders to hold onto their influence – than eternal truths. Similar Biblical excerpts could be found to support the approval of slavery and the timid acquiescence to oppressive rulers.

“At the same time, I am also familiar with vivid descriptions in the same scriptures in which women are revered as pre-eminent leaders. During the years of the early Christian church women served as deacons, priests, bishops, apostles, teachers and prophets. It wasn’t until the fourth century that dominant Christian leaders, all men, twisted and distorted holy scriptures to perpetuate their ascendant positions within the religious hierarchy.

“I know, too, that Billy Graham, one of the most widely respected and revered Christians during my lifetime, did not understand why women were prevented from being priests and preachers. He said: ‘Women preach all over the world. It doesn’t bother me from my study of the scriptures.’

“The truth is that male religious leaders have had – and still have – an option to interpret holy teachings either to exalt or subjugate women. They have, for their own selfish ends, overwhelmingly chosen the latter.

“Their continuing choice provides the foundation or justification for much of the pervasive persecution and abuse of women throughout the world. This is in clear violation not just of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights but also the teachings of Jesus Christ, the Apostle Paul, Moses and the prophets, Muhammad, and founders of other great religions – all of whom have called for proper and equitable treatment of all the children of God. It is time we had the courage to challenge these views.”

• Jimmy Carter was US president from 1977-81. The Elders are an independent group of eminent global leaders, brought together by Nelson Mandela, who offer their influence and experience to support peace building, help address major causes of human suffering and promote the shared interests of humanity.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2009