|DEL|
|REY| The DEL REY BOOKS Internet Newsletter, Number 137 (July 2004)
PART FOUR
IN DEPTH
A Conversation with CHINA MIÉVILLE whose latest novel, Iron Council, debuts July 27, 2004.
Del Rey: Your new novel, Iron Council, returns to the city of
New Crobuzon. Where does it fit into the events that took place in
your previous novels, Perdido Street Station and The Scar?
China Miéville: Iron Council takes place more than two decades
after the events of the previous two books, which occurred more or
less straight after each other. Several of the events of those earlier
novels are alluded to, but in passing, as historical events.
DR: Do these books share more than simply a setting? In other
words, are you telling a larger story, one in which each book might be
thought of as a single chapter, or a facet? Are you, for instance,
writing a kind of history of New Crobuzon?
CM: It's very important to me that each of these books is a
standalone--you don't have to read them in any order; you don't have to
read all of them: each tells its own story. At the same time, though,
there are references and characters and settings and events that
recur, that are mentioned and then reformulated, so that it's intended
that each book will riff off the others. So if you do read all of
them, particularly in order, there'll be certain threads of continuity
and implication that will come clear.
This will sound ridiculously pretentious, but I think of the three
books as an anti-trilogy. They're each standalone, but they also work
to create a sort of unity. Structurally, they respond to each other:
The Scar is sort of the anti-Perdido Street Station, and Iron Council
is intended as a resolution to the previous two.
DR: The term "new weird" often comes up in conjunction with your
work, and the work of several other new speculative fiction writers.
Is it a term you embrace? What does it mean?
CM: "New Weird" started as a provocation, but it also, to my mind,
did a real and a persuasive job of pointing to a tendency--nebulous, to
be sure, but I also think genuinely there, somehow--toward a kind of
generic slippage and grotesquerie, combined with literary facility and
moral/political complexity on the part of some recent fantastic
literature. Like any label, it's an unstable categorization, but yes,
I think it was certainly more useful than it was unhelpful. The
starting point for any argument about categorization has to be, do you
think something is happening in the direction you're pointing.
It seems to me that there are things going on--among writers like M.
John Harrison, Steph Swainston, Liz Williams, Jon Courtenay Grimwood,
Nick Mamatas, and loads of others--and that the resistance to
categorization runs the risk of not letting us talk in general terms
about changes of literary mood, which I do definitely think can occur.
I've written a couple of pieces about New Weird in a couple of forums,
including a longish piece for the upcoming Nebula anthology, and I
figure I should try to let those be my last words on the matter.
Otherwise you become a self-parody very easily, always cranking out
the same old shit.
DR: Who are some of your influences as a writer, and as a writer of
fantasy? Do you see your work as part of a tradition in fantasy
literature?
CM: The problem with any discussion of influence is that you're not
conscious of everyone who influences you. And then there's another
question, which is who are the authors you admire. Who may or may not
influence you, directly or indirectly. And then who are the authors
whose work you like, for whom the same applies. Four different
questions, with only some shared answers.
For years, for example, I forgot to list Michael de Larrabeiti among
my influences--that wasn't because his magnificent Borrible trilogy
isn't an influence, but because it is so deep an influence I'd
forgotten it. I'm happy to rectify that now.
To list just a few of those I'm conscious of being influenced by: M.
John Harrison; Michael Moorcock; Dambudzo Marechera; Mervyn Peake;
Philip K. Dick; Charlotte Brontë; Jane Gaskell; Borges; HG Wells:
Lovecraft; William Hope Hodgson; the Surrealists, particularly
Benjamin Péret; Iain Sinclair; Ambrose Bierce... It gets a bit
breathless, this list of names, particularly because there are ten
unnamed for every one I've named.
I definitely see myself as writing in a tradition: more specifically,
I see myself triangulating off two traditions. One is that of the
Weird Tales writers like Lovecraft; the other is the New Worlds
writers like Harrison and Moorcock. I'm interested in traditions that
stress grotesquerie and the baroque, the surreal, radical
estrangement.
DR: What are your feelings about the work and influence of Tolkien
on contemporary fantasy?
CM: This is another of those areas where I've become a self-parody,
performing the China-Doesn't-Like-Tolkien show... My attitude to Tolkien
is a matter of record. In short, I admire his neurotically precise
world-creation, but I dislike his bucolic romanticisation of
pre-industrialism and his moralism. He's immeasurably better than many
of his imitators, of course, but I do think his influence has become
something of a bane, a barrier to invention. Thankfully I think that's
shifting.
DR: Your work also has a strong political dimension, to a degree
that seems unusual in fantasies.
CM: It seems to me that all writing is political, insofar as it is
"about" the time and place in which it's written, whatever the author
intends. Obviously, there are degrees of directness, and some writers
work with that quite consciously, and try to do things with it,
whereas others try to step aside from it.
It's important not to think that to be "political" a piece of writing
has to directly parallel or metaphorize reality in any obvious and
direct way--there are plenty of bits of writing I think of as
enormously political, but which are very opaque (M. John Harrison is
an example). That said, I tend to express political concerns and
interests in my fiction, in a none-too-disguised way. I'm politically
active, and that way of looking at the world informs me very much, so
of course I try to investigate it in the fiction. Questions of
oppression and conflict crop up a lot in the books. What I try to do,
though, is to have it that if you're interested in those sorts of
questions, you'll find a texture and a hinterland there, but that it's
not necessary--it's also, I hope, a ripping yarn, that keeps people
turning the pages, and has some cool monsters in it. More than
anything, I'm in Weird Fiction for the monsters.
DR: There are elements in the three New Crobuzon books that chime
with our own mythology. For instance, The Scar features a vampire. You
go even further in Iron Council by clearly basing one of your main
characters, Judah Low, a master of golem magic, on the historical
figure of Rabbi Judah Lowe of Prague, reputed by legend to have
created a golem. First of all, what drew you to the figure of Rabbi
Lowe? And secondly, are you implying that there is a connection,
however tenuous, between the worlds of Bas-Lag and the Earth we know?
If not, why make the allusion so explicit?
CM: Mostly I try to create new creatures, but I'm also interested,
as with the vampire in The Scar of taking really fairly stock
monsters and trying to do something somewhat new with them. As to Iron Council, the character you're talking about isn't based on Yehudah
Loew (his name seems to be spelled a thousand different ways!), so
much as being a reference to him. The character was always going to be
in the book, and was always going to be someone who used golems, and
as I thought about the various myths of the golems, I thought a nod to
the Rabbi would be a respectful thing to do. I'm not making any claims
at all about analogies between the two--my relationship to references
is more scattershot than that.
Similarly, for example, the scarab-headed race in my world, the
Khepri, are a reference to the ancient Egyptian god of the same name,
but where that god is a symbol of rebirth, I just thought the idea of
people with beetle heads was really cool... It's a kind of cheerful
philistinism of influence.
That said, I'm not so naïve as to not know that the particulars of
(say) the Prague golem story didn't enter my head and influence me in
ways I'm not conscious of: I'm just saying it's very much not the idea
that it should be read as what the book is "really" trying to express.
I don't think Judah Low is anything like Yehudah Loew, necessarily,
other than the golem thing (and even that they do differently).
The worlds are connected, but only in the sense that we live in this
world and we're reading about the other one! I don't think of it as
any more direct than that; I just enjoy references. There are
countless, countless references in all the books. In The Scar, for
example, there are whole rosters of characters taken from other
maritime literature--characters from books by William Golding, from
Lewis Carroll's The Hunting of the Snark, ship names from Jules Verne
and William Hope Hodgson. If the reference is too intrusive, obviously
it doesn't work, but the aim is to make it that it doesn't have to be
got at all, but that if it is, it adds a bit of texture.
DR: You really go to town with the idea of golems in this novel!
Judah turns out to be a genius in their creation and manipulation.
What is it about golems that interests you? It struck me at one point
that writers are a kind of golem makers, and books are language golems...
CM: Each of the Bas-Lag books involved me getting interested in a
different way of how to conceptualize what I think of as Weird
Science: i.e., something that would be impossible and magical in the
real world, but which is rigorously and scientifically delineated in
Bas-Lag. The first book has Crisis Energy, the second Possibility
Mining, the third Golemetry. I was interested in golems for a whole
number of reasons, one of them being the idea that they are a vivid
expression of human creativity, bending matter and material to do
their bidding. And also, yes, as you suggest, once you really start
developing golems as a theme, you can interpret all sorts of
counterintuitive things into that schema, which I enjoyed.
And, from the point of view of my grotesquophilia, the notion of
ambulatory clay (and other stuff) is just very cool.
DR: How integrated in your mind are the various races and magics,
even alternate histories, characteristic of Bas-Lag? Is this a
fictional world where anything and everything you come up with can go,
or are there certain inherent (if arbitrary) rules about what's
possible here, and what's not, that you follow in building the world?
CM: There are definitely rules. I hate the idea of magic being a
Get-Out-Of-Plot-Difficulty-Free card. I have mapped out the parameters
of Bas-Lag, its races, its magic, its religions, in some detail--I
leave space to develop certain ideas as they come up, and I don't mind
changing my initial conceptions so long as it doesn't alter anything
which has been printed and is "canon," but I try to be very systematic
about it.
I reserve the right for anything I think of to come up, but I also
promise to try to integrate it into a consistent universe.
DR: The structure of the races and the magics of Bas-Lag at times
remind me of the elaborate schemata of role-playing games. Did such
games influence your development as a writer?
CM: Absolutely! I played RPGs for some years, especially Call of
Cthulhu and Runequest. Although I haven't played them for a good 18
years, I'm still very interested in them, and buy the rulebooks and
bestiaries and so on fairly regularly.
What interests me about RPGs is two things: the obsessive fascination
with anything fantastic; and the mania for systematization, to express
things in dice terms. Sometimes this leads to real
absurdities--Cthulhu, for example, in Lovecraft's stories, is
completely unthinkable...and yet here he is with all his "stats"!
Strength, 300, Endurance, 200, or whatever they are. This to me is an
act of absolutely heroic point-missing. But it appeals to me! I see
the attraction, even if I think it can be silly.
I also like the elements of contingency and the sheer random in (some)
RPGs, the move away from prophetic notions of "thus it is
written"--because with one low roll, it can be unwritten. There's been
some talk of turning Bas-Lag into an RPG, which I'd certainly be
interested in, even if a bit nervous of.
DR: As a British writer, have you found any striking differences
between the ways your work is perceived on both sides of the Atlantic?
CM: Not as much as you might think. There are certain clichés you
always hear, that certain work doesn't succeed in the US because it's
"too British," which is vaguely supposed to mean depressing, most of
the time. I'm skeptical of that--I think of my work as enormously
British (and some would say depressing, I suppose), but I've been
blown away by my reception in the US.
I'm very lucky, because I get reviewed outside of the genre as well as
inside, and I seem to have a reasonable number of readers who don't
come out of SF and fantasy, but who've come across my stuff in other
ways. If anything, maybe more so in the US than in Britain. It would
be nice and schematic to talk about huge differences in reception, but
I'd be lying if I said I was very conscious of them.
DR: Let's talk about some of your other work. Tell us about The Tain.
CM: That was a novella I put out with the small press PS Publishing,
which to my delight and surprise won the Locus Award for Best Novella
last year. It's sort of a post-apocalypse story, set in a ruined
London, and partially inspired by a snippet from Borges. It's
available in the collection called Cities, along with pieces by
Moorcock, Geoff Ryman and Paul di Filippo. It'll also be in my short
story collection, coming out from Del Rey Books some time next year.
DR: Will you ever return to the story and characters of your first
novel, King Rat?
CM: I may do. King Rat was a very different book, set in contemporary
London, a dark supernatural thriller set in London's music scene. It
feels very much a completed piece, but I'm very fond of various of the
characters, and I think it's a good rule of life never to say never.
Certainly there's space for a sequel or a follow-up, even if I've no
intention now.
DR: What other projects are you working on?
CM: I'm writing a lot of short stories at the moment, or at least
trying to (I love them when they work, but they don't come very easy).
I'm also putting the finishing touches to a non-fiction book which'll
come out probably later this year (it's for a very small market; it's
an academic book based on my PhD, about the philosophy of
international law). Apart from that, I've started work on the research
for the next novel, the first non-Bas-Lag novel for several years.
It's going to be very interesting to do something different.
DR: Will there be more books set in the world of Bas-Lag?
CM: I'm going to take a break from Bas-Lag for probably at least
two books, but I fully expect and intend to come back there again. I
have loads of ideas for stories set in various different parts of that
world. I think and hope it's a world I'll be returning to again and
again for the rest of my writing life. I'm proud of it and I love it.
|DEL|
|REY|
The Del Rey Internet Newsletter is ©2004 by Del Rey Books,
except for the IN DEPTH section, which is copyright by the author. The
DRIN may be reproduced only in its entirety, and not for profit.
Home
Copyright © 1995-2008 Random House, Inc. All rights reserved.