News about the Spinward Fringe Series and everything else written by Randolph Lalonde.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Spinward Fringe Encyclopaedia Entry: Intoxicants
As for the side commentary on the topic of self censorship, well, it was far over blown. The simple truth is that these science fiction books have nothing to do with substance use or abuse, and the reason why I reduced the mention of non-alcoholic substances was because I didn’t want drug use to steal attention from the story and characters. If some Church Lady came along and started screeching about heavy drug use, well, she’s either overreacting or I overdid it on the depiction of substance use in the book, handicapping my own main plot. Why bother risking any of it when it’s not central to the story?
What have I decided after reading the thousands of words written on this topic over the last week or so?
Well, space opera is a funny space to write fiction in. Before drugs and alcohol were used as a tool to help set a scene. Now I feel I can employ them in to a sub plot that I've been considering, and I'm fairly certain that they'll help support the main story in the way I'll be using them, not draw attention away from it. More will be happening in social settings as well, so the role of a casual drink or five at a favorite watering hole will become more visible, and while they will serve alcohol there, other substances and “treatments” will be featured as well.
There will be a nod to consequences and that includes addiction. Why would addiction go away in the future? That’s something so many people supposed, and frankly, current day studies on soon to be approved pleasure substances prove that drug and “leisure substance” companies are constantly trying to find ways to make the new buzz as addictive as possible without breaking the law. That’s not even considering the back room chemist, who is a growing concern in smaller towns across Europe and North America. His stuff is so addictive that, according to addicts, entire lives change with one hit.
Now that I’ve had your help, and I’ve been led down several different paths of consideration, I’ve decided that the future is bright (or dark, depending on your point of view), for alcohol as well as other substances in Spinward Fringe. In fact, I’m ready to write it all in stone. The alcohol loving characters in my little science fiction series will have plenty to drink. The characters inclined to enjoy chemicals will do so right along side them, and the cyborgs will have their neural manipulation software packages and memory packets.
I’ll still balance all that so it doesn’t overwhelm the main plot, but that’s something any writer should do. Thanks to this debate, however, I’ll be using all the brushes in my kit to paint a broader, more interesting backdrop when it comes to what people are up to in night spots and watering holes.
Bring it on Church Lady.
Here's the Encyclopaedia entry:
Alcohol: This age old substance exists in many forms. From fine wines, old scotch, well brewed beers to poor colony moonshine and prison wines. It is at the same time the least expensive intoxicant beverage (a filling and potent worker ale, for example), and the most expensive treat (a fine centennial scotch).
Designer Beverages and Foods: These were once touted as the replacement to alcohol, and became common long ago at great expense initially. Most of these synthetic substances are tailored to trigger any number of emotional and / or physical states. Some of these substances (see: Michnikel – first mentioned in Spinward Fringe Broadcast 1: Resurrection), even cause increasing amounts of memory loss as one becomes more intoxicated. These beverages are commonplace, as they can be shipped as concentrates, or materialized on site in establishments that have licensing agreements in place. While few of these beverages and foods are truly addictive, the emotions and states they cause can increase one’s inclination or attachment to a certain substance.
Treatments: This is the most expensive type of leisure substance. This category covers substances that are not necessary, but are often treated like medication. They are long lasting injections and pills that alter a persons long term fitness level, attitude, outward appearance or other non-essential facet of existence unnecessarily. While the debate concerning what necessary treatments include goes on, these regimens continue to be administered, often unregulated. Many of these substances change the user on a genetic level.
Environmental Intoxicants: Many premium night spots add mood altering substances to the air and / or surfaces. The intention behind this practice is to make their clients more pliant, some times more active (in the example of a dance club), more relaxed (in the example of a issyrian mating den), and at other times more positive minded (this is often seen in government buildings and corporate offices). Most regulated core worlds must post clear signage informing patrons that environmental intoxicants are in use. It’s important to note, however, that most cities aren’t as well regulated.
Mechanical Manipulation: This is software that, through the use of nanotechnology or a neural link (often called a “brain bud”), alters a persons mood, knowledge or other facet of a person’s being. This has been known to go terribly wrong when programmed by an unqualified user.
Regulation: This varies from city to city, government to government and from culture to culture. It’s best to check with local law enforcement before trying to transport, use or seek out any substance.
--
Thanks again for engaging in this debate, it's been a fantastic and enlightening read!
RL
[Addendum: I use the term "Church Lady" in this post. I respect and adore several religious women who I would consider ladies, and when I use that term I was not referring to them. I was using the term to refer to screeching, backwards thinking women (and men, to be fair), who misguidedly use one book to justify the burning and banning of others. If this describes you, feel free to email me at randylalonde@gmail.com with your entertaining insights into how I should entertain people. Keep in mind that I find your complaints quite amusing, and may use it to continue entertaining my readers.]
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Does alcohol still make sense in the future?
As a futurist I can't help but think that every time I put a glass of scotch or whiskey in one of may characters' hands I'm being lazy. Some of you are asking why, and the answer is actually pretty easy. As a leisure drug, alcohol doesn't make sense.
Before some of you rush down to the comments section to tell me why I'm wrong, let me give you a little background on my thinking. By its very nature, alcohol is a depressant. As soon as you add the substance to a social occasion the chances of violent behavior and injury start multiplying. Those are indisputable, proven facts that have come from decades of concentrated research conducted around the world. Alcohol also contributes to many diseases if consumed in too large a quantity (as little as 3 drinks a day, most new research says), and under age drinking has been proven to hamper development as well as cause behavior problems that often last for the rest of a young person's life. Again, these are all facts.
Now, I'm not going to say prohibition is the answer, it certainly isn't, and I'm not going to look down my nose at anyone for having a drink or three. Everyone who follows me on Twitter or Facebook knows I have the occasional drink. The last one I tried was called a "Lemon Bomb" [1 shot lemon juice, 4 shots rum, 7oz ginger ale over ice. I enjoyed it, but next time I'm doubling up on the ginger ale]. My long time favorite is Guinness, however, and I'd have a picket sign in my hand within seconds if the government threatened to take that away!
What I'm asking with this post is simple: In the distant future, wouldn't it make sense for people to socially drink beverages that don't feature alcohol, but some other mood altering substance? I know I explored that a little at the end of the First Light Chronicles: Freeground, where we're introduced to a blue beverage that left the drinker with a euphoric buzz. No one has complained thus far.
In reality, more than one chemical company is looking for a replacement for alcohol that they can introduce into foods and drinks. One such company in London, England is testing this chemical on closed groups, intoxicating them for hours then using an anti-inebriant to completely remove the effects in the space of 5-10 minutes. From the little the subjects could say on the BBC documentary; "Do I Drink Too Much?" the feeling of this intoxicant had most of the highs of alcohol, but none of the lows and very little of the dis-coordination that we all suffer when we've had too many. The reading I did on the topic didn't have testimonials, sadly, so we're left with the single subject's opinion. It was good, really good, but not overpowering, more simply altering. Walking wasn't a huge challenge, and he'd do it again outside of the testing environment. Driving and using heavy machinery seemed to remain out of the question, however.
In one of my books one of the guards threaten to use an anti-inebriant to sober an officer up, what I don't tell the readers is that the officer in question wasn't drunk on alcohol, but a random mixture of substances he drank earlier that night. It resulted in behavior that was similar to alcohol, to be sure, but it was clear he was more than drunk when the chapter was originally written. In the end the substance was written out, since I know parent groups love slamming books that contain drug use. Letting the audience think my character was inebriated due to an over consumption of alcohol would actually draw less attention.
The most recent example of self censorship rests in a drink that Ashley has in Broadcast 5: Fracture - The Licorice Doll. The name is a loose translation of an Asian drink that uses licorice alcohol as a base. As originally written, the beverage has roughly the same effect as Valium, only at a recreational level. To avoid controversy I left that bit of description under the white out, so to speak. I think it's a perfectly fine favorite beverage for that character in particular, it seems to suit her personality.
Back in the reality of 2010, where drug abuse is a real problem, and the fight against recreational drug use is well justified, I'm left to wonder how necessary those edits are. I'm against drug abuse, including the over-use of alcohol and legal drugs. I also think that future recreational drugs should be vigorously tested before they head to market, and wonder what would have happened if we tested the heck out of alcohol 30,000 or so years ago when our ancestors were getting buzzed on fermented berries. Would it be the substance of choice today? Or would we be socially consuming something else?
I don't think society is ready for chemical and food companies to try to replace alcohol just yet, but my futurist thinking leads me to believe that most people will imbibe something with more sure-fire effects. Alcohol will always be around, I think, if for no other reason than how easy it is to make, but I don't think it's the buzz of the distant future.
In the end what I'm asking is if readers are ready for characters in a science fiction series like Spinward Fringe to start openly using the alternative to alcohol. This question is especially important right now because I'm slowly working on final edits of each book in the series, and I'm wondering if I should re-insert the material that includes descriptions of substances that are non-alcoholic mood altering substances. Upcoming scenes in the books I'm working on right now involve settings where beverages and food are served as well, so I'm wondering of self censorship is actually something I have to worry about.
So, what do you think of social consumption of mood altering substances (besides alcohol) in science fiction?
RL
I'm looking for as many comments on this as possible.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Californication: The Last Good Season
Drinking and driving, sex, rock stars, wannabe porn stars, plagiarism, drugs, and a writer who is not at all about the work but into all of the above. I couldn't have been more resistant to liking this show if it starred Big Bird and Freddy Krueger. Actually, that could be fun, bad example.
Suffice it to say it was the show I started watching not sure what I was seeing at first, then I just couldn't look away, and before I realized what was going on I was hooked. Hooked for two whole seasons. It's hard to say, but I'll miss this show.
A few people out there know that there's another season coming, and they're asking; “Randy, why are you mourning the passing of this show when there's going to be at least 13 more debaucherous episodes on the way?”
Well, if the rumours of David Duchovny checking into a sex addiction clinic are true (and the therapy sticks), it really looks like the fun is over. I know, that's insensitive and Dave gets a lot of flack for confessing his sex addiction but I mourn the passing of this terribly offensive show because I can't picture the third season being as edgy, funny, juvenile and adult (yes, it's both), as the first two. With David Duchovny recovering from his addiction, being the star and a member of the production team I see things taking a turn for the tame.
This is one of those situations where I'd love to be proven wrong. I think season three will be crap compared to the wonderful experiences of seasons one and two (that left me feeling dirty and used once a week), and yes, I want to be proven wrong. I want them to maintain the high quality low standard humour that made me laugh out loud at least once per episode.
Until then, if you missed Californication entirely and have a deeply rooted case of guttermind, you'll love this humour. Go rent the dirtiest DVD outside of the curtain, or buy it if you have the cash lying around. Then tune in for season three and see if they took the hard out of the core as I suspect. If I'm wrong, well, I'll be the first to raise a glass.
RL
And THAT my friends, is what happens when someone sends me an Email asking; "I miss ur reviews, why don't u do them ne more?"

