Aurealis #41 showcases the talents of Australia’s female speculative fiction writers with an all-female issue of the premier fantasy, horror, and sci-fi mag.Featuring seven original stories from all spectrums of the speculative fiction genre – Aurealis #41 puts aside the usual contenders to showcase some of the country's up-and-coming talents. Horror, sci-fi, fantasy and humour are represented in equal measure showing a real diversity that doesn’t pigeon-hole the authors into any clichés. Sure, many of the stories feature strong female characters, or bring a feminist take on a situation, but the "alternate view" brings an often refreshing spin to familiar themes or storylines.
LJ Hayward’s "The Hounds of Wychwood" is the only story to use a male protagonist, but the period piece about a supernatural scholar who faces Fairy Hounds and Black Dogs in a quiet country village is a real treat. Helen Patrice’s "Ladies Day" puts a fun twist on time travel with a comic tale about meddling in the lives of history’s famous women writers, while Miranda Siemienowicz handles mythological tragedy just as well as she does horror with the beautifully penned "Aleph Mem Tav".
An essay by Patricia L O’Neill about her role in the discovery of the Ebola and HIV/Aids viruses is both educational and frightening, and poignant considering the recent swine flu outbreak.
The only real disappointment here is that Australia’s female artists could not get the same look in as our writers, with all but one of the story illustrations done by men. Whether this highlights a shortage in speculative fiction female artists, I am not sure.
Aurealis #41 continues its run of good form and is well worth its cover price for those looking to see what our home grown girls have to offer.
Aurealis is a bi-annual magazine of Australian sci-fi, fantasy, and horror. Buy a single issue or subscribe for an annual membership here.
18 comments:
"all girl's issue"?
"pidgin hole"?
I have to ask: was this post edited?
People in glass houses...
"See what our home grown girls have to offer"?
Was this review written in 1958?
Also, anonymous poster, either you forgot to add your name, or you're a coward.
I have lightly edited this review, but I left Mark's statements largely intact.
Our policy at HorrorScope when posting reviews is editorial independence - each reviewer posts items without being vetted by me as I have the utmost confidence in the team's ability and integrity.
I regularly skim everyone's posts for editing in case some errors creep in, as in this case.
However, I would urge anyone who would like to raise criticisms of HorrorScope's reviews or the editing process to email me directly (my email is in the side panel) rather than air thoughtless or derogatory comments in a public forum.
I originally typed out a much longer response here, but I don't want to make a storm in a teacup.
1. Sorry if my attempt at snarky humour offended.
2. To put it seriously: the review uses fairly condescending language to describe female authors, specifically describing them as "girls". I think it gives the piece a very patriarchal feel that really isn't necessary - although I think it does perhaps go some length to explain why "women's only editions" of science fiction magazines remain important.
3. If you don't want criticism of the reviews on this blog, may I strongly suggest removing the comments option since that actually invites comment? (Assuming you're not actually suggesting people are only allowed to comment if they have nice things to say.)
No offense with the humour, Grant.
I'm all for freedom of debate, too, but here's the thing... perhaps it's my view of the blogopshere, which encourages people to drop by, throw out witty one-liners, and consider that 'making a difference', but if anyone feels genuinely about wanting to enact change, wouldn't they contact the person(s) responsible and ask them to enact that change?
If anyone here felt like doing more than simply looking witty, then it surprises me that no one has called for specific action to be taken (edit the review, remove the review, etc).
Perhaps my opinions put me at odds with the blogosphere, but when something needs changing, I'm all for taking positive action.
Regarding illustrators, yes, Aurealis has very few female Australia illustrators on its books (only 2 in fact). I get many queries from overseas female artists but very few from Australians. Depending on stories, deadlines, etc I try and choose illustrators who are available to produce an illustration within those deadlines and I also try to choose an illustrator that will fit the story.
I've got to say I'm just happy someone reviews Aurealis. More of the same please. :-)
There was no political/social imperative in publishing this issue with only women authors. I just had a lot of good stories from women and thought it would make a strong issue. I think it works well as a collection.
Similarly issue 42 is by and large a horror issue for the same reason (thank you AHWA members), though I'm not happy with how that issue came together. I stuffed up my story selection and it feels unbalanced, which has scared me off themed issues somewhat.
I can only say good things about the graphic quality of the mag. Andrew's work is brilliant. And what about the covers Adam Duncan is sending us? Amazing. Isn't it great to see a female character on the cover of a SF mag where her boobs aren't the defining feature of that cover? All praise Adam Duncan.
By the way, Stuart (I know you're lurking here somewhere :)), I meant to drop you an email to mention how impressive the cover art for #41 was, but since we're all jawing out in the open here, let me say it in public: top class! My copy of Aurealis #41 arrived about the same time as my copy of the April/May issue of Fantasy and Science Fiction Magazine, and, I gotta say, Adam Duncan's cover blew it away. I don't mean to praise Aurealis by bashing F&SF--it's just my way of saying it was up there with the best of them. Well done to all. Please keep it up.
Regards,
Jason Crowe
I agree, Jason. It's a fabulous cover, very striking. One of the best IMO.
For the record (from a girl's perspective), it's not 'the word' used to refer to me (or my gender, race, status, sexual preference, etc.) that bothers me, but 'the intent' with which it is used.
"One man's meat is another man's poison"
*Girl power to all my girlfriends* ;cP
Heya Russell:
'I have to ask': Have you considered an outdoor hobby? ;cP
Hi all,
As the offending reviewer (or has it has been put) I thought I'd post a quick comment here.
Firstly on the typos, I apologies for these. I posted this article while at work (as the editor for a newspaper in fact) and didn't give it the appropiate double check before I posted.
As for the way my review has been percieved.
I've have always been skeptical of gender specific issues because while they are done with the best intentions, the end result is always a perception by some people that either the collection or reviewers are trying to belittle authors or gender. I assure you this is not the case.
My review was simply to try to capture the spirit in which the issue had been released, as a celebration of some of the up and coming women writers in the genre.
My use of the word girl was not inteded as an insult. If it had have been an all male issue I would have no doubt replied to they as boys in some context.
I feel that people may have gained a misconception of the tone of the review. Really, gender has nothing to do with how good a story is, the skill of the author is all that counts. But when you are presented with an issue that is promoted by Aurealis as an all female issue, of course I am going to highlight that it has been marketed as the fact.
At the end of the day there were some great stories in here and I look forward to reading more from these authors in the future.
And Russell, you'll notice I left a couple of typos in the above for your amusement.
oo eerrr, Aurealis better than F&SF! I'll have to plaster that ALL OVER the... no just joking. Thanks for the praise Jason. It's all down to Andrew for keeping Adam interested and Adam for doing such s**t hot covers. I of course just insist that Adam does the covers till he says no more. :-) Mind you they are a complete bugger to reproduce in print. We have a lot of trouble keeping the cover "atmospheric" while giving them sufficient detail - the cover of 40 is a case in point. Brilliant illustration which is let down by the printing process. No one's fault, it's just a difficult process to get right.
I meant to say in my original post that I wanted to thank Mark for getting the point of this issue straight up. The stories are all good stories (some are very good) by "up and coming" female writers of Australian SF. I had a great story by Lucy Sussex that I decided to hold over to 42 because I liked and decided to develop the theme that, while some of the authors are well known around the traps, they aren't "names" per se. I am low key by nayture, maybe it's coming across in how I edit the mag. The only thing I was determined to do was keep the multi-genre mix happening (SF, fantasy, horror).
Are we playing spot the toipo, btw?
Without wanting to add to the drama surrounding this review, Shane, I do want to take issue with a couple of points, particularly from your comment above:
Our policy at HorrorScope when posting reviews is editorial independence The phrase "editorial independence" is more usually applied to the independence of editorial content from commercial or advertising considerations - if you want to indicate that the views of the writer are separate from those of the publication, as disclaimer is more usual.
Secondly, if you're going to edit something post-publication (particularly something that has caused controversy) you really should include an editorial note to the effect that you've done that, and why.
Semantics are unnecessary at this point, Nick. The debate is done and dusted.
I would also think my statement about the editing of the review would be sufficient notice unless one was a moron, and I'd like to give HorrorScope readers more credit than that.
This is probably a stupid question, but I can't seem to find Aurealis anywhere...and I'm in Sydney.....where do I even sign up for a subscription or ask questions about it, as the emails on the website don't seem to work as I haven't received a reply ever. If someone could help me out, that'd be great!
Tim, Contact Stuart Mayne (me) on editor@aurealis.com.au
or http://www.aurealis.com.au
I'm having a chat with a guy who has had the same difficulties re email. Your name doesn't come up on my past emails and I try to be as quick and direct replying to emails as possible. I'd suggest if you have a gmail/hotmail account your emails are being seen as spam and are filtered out somewhere along the way.
Post a Comment