But that's so like you! You must put in your oar!
To all of you who expressed your condolences for Nora, thank you. Her parents are setting up a scholarship fund in her name—and a lawsuit—and I will post updates on both as I have them.
Is "mythpunk" now recognized as a valid subgenre of fantasy? I dislike labels, but as an exercise in tetrapyloctomy, I am trying to determine the distinction between this coinage and Terri Windling's "mythic fiction."
Lastly for everyone who shares my love for Balliol's portrait collection, this one really is by John Singer Sargent, circa 1911:

It is my only weakness.
Is "mythpunk" now recognized as a valid subgenre of fantasy? I dislike labels, but as an exercise in tetrapyloctomy, I am trying to determine the distinction between this coinage and Terri Windling's "mythic fiction."
Lastly for everyone who shares my love for Balliol's portrait collection, this one really is by John Singer Sargent, circa 1911:
It is my only weakness.

no subject
Well, I suppose I don't have an Official Truth to dispense. But I know that it's not meant to mean "things vaguely reminiscent of China Mieville's work". The original discussions aren't online any more, but there are some quotes and comments on the quotes here, and it seems fairly clear to me that in broad terms NW is a statement of intent, not a type of fiction. And in broad terms, the intent seems to me to be (a) the fantastic for its own sake, not metaphorical or allegorical, (b) a freedom of content, based on the idea that it's not really meaningful to talk about "science fiction" vs "fantasy", (c) acknowledging that the choices writers make when telling stories are political choices. So (I think) you (a nonspecific "you", there) can't decide to write a new weird story, because there's no common ground of tropes, but you can try to be a new weird writer. Or could have done, anyway; Mieville's gone on record as saying that as far as he's concerned NW is over, and I think M. John Harrison feels much the same -- it was more a moment than a movement, it made its point, it's done.
It seems strangely apt that the wikipedia page is (a) largely nonsense, and (b) has a note at the top saying that "The factual accuracy of this article or section is disputed."
I should attempt a poll.
That's almost always a sound idea. :)
no subject
In accordance with prophecy.