twitter

i'm on twitter now. i'm using it as a moment/thought journal. so far it suits me FAR better than this whole blogging thing. i am really poor at short-form writing. blog posts, articles, short stories... only rarely can i actually accomplish these things. they fill me with cold dread. either i have one sentence in me or i have seven volumes plus a prequel and some appendices, with an index, a companion, and the illustrated edition. even when i write poetry, i end up with a couple pages of digressions. this may be why i am fascinated by haikus. and twitter. follow me as carnivalerian.

i am trying to get motivated to put up sketches here, as i originally intended.

on reading

there's been a BBC list of 100 top/should-read/classic/etc books going around on Facebook. too long to post here, so suffice it to say that i've read 15 of them. most of those are children's books, which i think are more "classic" than a great many adult classics. they (the good ones) are written with ease and warmth and so never come close to being cases of the Emperor's New Clothes, which i really appreciate. i still read all of my childhood favourites over and over. they don't lose anything now that i am Old (or maybe i'm not Old. i am likely still the weird combination of 10 years old and 70 years old that i have always been.)

however, this is one of my pet rants.

while i tend to agree with lists of "classic" books or a literary "canon" (though this BBC list isn't really that) or whatever you want to call it .. in principle - i don't agree with them in practice. i think these kinds of things are a good general starting point for someone interested in a becoming familiar with a wide range of literature, particularly those books which are commonly held up as Good Examples of Being Literate.

but. as soon as you've read a few books.. whether you're 5 or 15 or whatever.. you start to develop a book-y palate of your own. (at least, one had better, or i don't know what one would be getting out of reading. the hypothetical one should probably not force it, in that case.)

i have REALLY strong book tastes. usually i research the living daylights out of a book before i even get around to reading it, so that i'm pretty sure i'll like it, and rarely have i been disappointed. in fact, most of the books i've read and disliked have been books i was assigned to read. (assigned readings have tended to be cases of Must Power Through This for me - excepting medieval literature, which i consistently love.)

despite my exhaustive Book Screening Process, i have SO MANY BOOKS. i am truly being crushed by books. i have plenty of nonfiction (which is usually left off such Top 50 or whatever lists) and a ton of pre-19th century classics (which i also find to be sadly lacking on This Here List! seriously, guys, not even some Plato? there were writers before Shakespeare, BBC. I KNOW RIGHT? who knew.) and every book i have, i want to read. and that's not even the end of it. the other two-thirds of my library is fantasy, dark fantasy, historical fantasy, historical fiction, and science fiction.

these being my favourite genres. (HELLOOO other worlds! get me out of this here reality. but that is another rant.) these being the genres that are only sporadically included in any lists of this type (and if they are, it's usually because the authors masquerade as being Non-Genre - hi, Margaret Atwood! guess what! you DO write science fiction). these being "genre" books that are rarely, if ever, taught in university classes (unless it's a specific class based on a genre, which, i think, relegates that genre into one of Those Genres and as such, not Real Lit. but that's another rant, too. i'll just leave it at: VITRIOL)

but everyone's tastes SHOULD diverge from ANY top 100 classics. these lists, though they're all somewhat different, all unnerve me by their judgement and classification of what's good and what's not. if the book interests me, i don't care if it's a classic or some totally obscure space opera. being a so-called classic doesn't lend it more weight or bump it higher on my to-read list. there are lots of classics up there i'd like to read, some i'd love to read and will read soon, but also a great many which i have no interest in, due to subject matter (for the most part) or (sometimes) style. i won't ever read these if i can help it, no matter how "good" they are. (likewise, there's plenty of fantasy out there which i have no interest in, despite good reviews.)

ultimately, very few of my current favourite books are on the above list (actually, only Sherlock Holmes is - my other beloved authors of the moment, Guy Gavriel Kay, Storm Constantine, Ellen Kushner, Neil Gaiman and PG Wodehouse, aren't on it). but i'd fight you to the death to argue that Guy Gavriel Kay's Tigana beats the pants off To Kill a Mockingbird and Storm Constantine's Wraeththu fucking slaughters Catcher in the Rye.

and you might well disagree. To Each Their Own, right? but having a 100 Books You SHOULD Read defeats that whole principle.

so. so many books, so little time. i am certainly going to die, and i certainly have a finite amount of time in which to read books before i go. i'm not going to waste that time reading Classics of Literary Fiction whose premises bore me just because they're touted as Good, when i have right here some wicked awesome Tanya Huff, George RR Martin, and Jacqueline Carey, filled with wonder and horror, ready to devour my 10 year old (or is that 70 year old?) mind.

fizzle!

oh god, i'm such a failure at this whole blog thing.

i'm done three of my sin/virtue drawings, which i mentioned in my last post, which was about five months ago (hello, September! i remember you. you sucked.) soon i will start posting them. they are pretty.

i have an etsy store: here. it has artist's proofs, which are cheaper than my prints at deviantART and are signed by me to boot.

i have a cafepress store: here. it has some of my Regency ladies on t-shirts, tote bags, journals, notecards... etc...

i think of interesting things. i find interesting things. i read interesting things. why do i never post them to my blog? it is an unsolvable mystery.

OH WAIT. i finally got the boots i've been wanting forever. Fluevogs are incredible! they fit like feet-gloves, feel airy-light, though they look stompy, and are super hot. Super Hot.

oh, sinner.

i've updated my website.. after.. six months.. uhh.. lots of new Regency-era costume drawings!

now i'm working on a series of 14 pieces, the cardinal sins and the heavenly virtues. there seem to be not very many representations of the virtues. but how do you really represent the sins without the virtues? or vice versa? they need to be able to reflect each other. so.. i am doing all of them.

also, i have made them all men. because it bothers me that the seven sins are so often represented as women. and the virtues, too, if and when they make an appearance. it's oddly stereotypical and thoughtless to put them in the female guise just because they've generally been shown that way in the past. women are not inherently more devilish or angelic than men. god.

anyway, my manly sins and virtues aren't all that manly.. of course.. because i am contrary like that. androgynous for the most part; some are girly, some are boyish. ultimately, i am trying to represent concepts, emotional/mental states.. whether it's a man or a woman should be secondary to the representation of the heavenly or hellish characteristic itself.

okay. i have one more to sketch and then i will post them here. it will take a good long while to clean up all the sketches. then i'll make them into a colouring book. and then i'll paint them all.

i really love big projects...

steampunk fashion quiz

Your result for The Steampunk Style Test...

The Aristocrat

68% Elegant, 31% Technological, 33% Historical, 28% Adventurous and 49% Playful!

You are the Aristocrat, the embodiment of steampunk elegance and poise. For you, dressing steampunk is first and foremost about simply looking good, with accessories and details to follow. However, this does not mean that you ignore the demands of creating a “steampunk look.” Your outfits weave together a balance between technology and style, and between period accuracy and beautiful anachronism. While your fashion inspiration may come from anywhere across the Victorian social spectrum, you always find a way to make your outfit beautiful. You will probably be found in the clothes of the steam age elite simply because of the greater elegance available to them. Chances are you dress this way because you like it, and you would still dress in this manner even if steampunk was not a popular interest.

Try our other Steampunk test here.

Take The Steampunk Style Test at HelloQuizzy

yes. gratifyingly accurate. if only work didn't require me to dull myself down. so tedious..

also, where can i meet the gentleman in the photo? his outfit and hair are beyond fabulous.

on my list after i'm done my Regency-era colouring book (which is over half done. i've got several finished ones i haven't posted to dA yet) are Steampunk and Elegant Gothic Aristocrat/Lolita colouring books. i say. they will be amazing.

i'm bad.

whoa, where'd i go. i don't even know. i got a new job, had an art block, went on a holiday, lost track OF MY LIFE! frakking hell. sooooo. how about that then.

okay.

back to the regular updates. yessiree. FOR REAL THIS TIME.

god i hate summer.

flaming feathers

this is beautiful. a friend showed it to me a while ago and i still love it. i was going to write something about it but there isn't really any point. white glowy birdy + luscious red velvets and victorian libraries + brown birdy + birdy on FIRE. makes me feel pretty all over. just needs to be watched.

stationery/notepapers

i just made stationery/notepaper out of some of my arts. each is about 1/2 page size and if you want to print one out for yourself and write tortured, melodramatic poetry on it, i would be honoured.

go see em -> here

xoxo

some lovin'

ooh looky, yaoi getting some love from the sci-fi world [link]

my art is generally fantasy/historical oriented, but as i am also a HUGE sci-fi geek, i find nothing alien (ha) about beautiful men and robots. and lasers. and rockets.

needs to be even more love.

changeable

okay, so, i really hate WordPress (OH BLASPHEMY!) i love all things futuristic, but i'm contradictory enough to also have strong Luddite tendencies, and i can't ever get the thing to work properly or um anything.

so i've moved my blog here. i've just finished reposting my more scintillating posts here to give the place some colour. the full repertoire (from October 2007, so not that long) is still kicking around at the old blog, but i'm only posting here from now on.

onward and upward.