Click covers for info. Copyright (C) Rudy Rucker 2021.


Archive for the ‘Rudy’s Blog’ Category

Hypershadows from Hyperspace. San Juan Bautista.

Wednesday, June 27th, 2012

Our daughter Isabel sent us a link to a video of the shadows of skateboarders. Their arms seem to grow or extrude from their chests, amoeba-style.


[In the Mission at San Juan Bautista.]

I think of a 4D version, with hyperskaters, and we sense their hypershadows as ghostly hologram-like blobs somewhat human in shape. Now now and then a sudden arm or tentacle can push out. The hypershadows are cast, not by our merely 3D Sun, but by a 4D “SUN” in hyperspace. The hypershadows aren’t exactly darkness.


[The obscure base of the waterfall at Castle Rock Park.]

Normally our space is filled with the divine light of that thing I like to call the SUN (all upper-case), and we don’t know it. The SUN shines upon us even during our night. We sense this glow not as light but as the all-is-One vibe of things, the vivacity of reality. That’s what’s fueled by the beneficent 4D rays of the SUN. The hypershadow of a hyperskater is a moving zone of desaturation and unreality. You don’t like being in a hypershadow.


[The East Side San Jose Vaqueros on a Sunday run in San Juan Bautista.]

I’m thinking about a Flatland analogy here. Kids are skating on Flatland. The Flatlanders don’t perceive the skateboard wheels, but they do notice the shadows. The skater shadows and the 3D sunlight penetrate into Flatland. The Flatlanders see these shadows not as darkness, but as a—chill. The shadows moves on and the glow returns.

My wife and I made a run down to San Juan Bautista last weekend, hadn’t been there in maybe ten years. Very peaceful out in the country small town. Checking out the mission, the historical museum, the little shops, and the Sunday bikers.

Great live blues music pumping out of Mom and Pop’s Saloon, but we hesitated to go in and mingle with the partying San Jose Top Hatters, although they did seem quite mellow, as did the Vaqueros, in a different bar down the street.

Saw a historical recreation of a saloon in the museum, though.

And some classic high-button shoes. Very goth, I’m thinking.

It’s amazing to get out in the country, maybe a 45 minute drive from home, the whole pace and vibe so sweet and calm. Beautiful view across the valley to the mountains. Why do I waste so much of my energy worrying about shit?

Clatter, click, there go those hyperskaters across the hypersurface of my space again, our world a Wild West false front, yellow-lit by the SUN.

And the eternal glow’s within us all.

Paperbacks of Craddock’s BE NOT CONTENT and Rucker’s COMPLETE STORIES

Friday, June 15th, 2012

Transreal Books is now publishing quality paperbacks as well as ebooks. As well as our five ebook titles, we now have three volumes out in paper, with more to come.

Be Not Content is a coming-of-age novel set in San Jose, California, in the mid 1960s—describing William Craddock’s experiences as a young acid-head. This is a hip, profound, and wonderfully-written book, a unique chronicle of the earliest days of the great psychedelic upheaval. Be Not Content is filled with warmth and empathy, tragic at times, and very funny in spots, a wastrel masterpiece where laughter plays counterpoint against the oboes of doom.

A mystical underground masterpiece, available in paperback and ebook via Transreal Books. If you want the paperback, it may be easiest to buy it direct from Amazon.

All of Rudy Rucker’s science-fiction stories, a trove of gnarl and wonder in two volumes.

Complete Stories, Vol 1. includes stories from 1976 through 1995, ranging from the cyberpunk to the transreal. As well as Rucker’s solo stories, we have collaborations with Bruce Sterling, Marc Laidlaw.

Complete Stories, Vol 1. includes stories from 1996 through 2011, with fifteen previously uncollected tales. As well as Rucker’s solo stories, this volume features collaborations with Bruce Sterling, Marc Laidlaw, Paul Di Filippo, John Shirley, Terry Bisson, and Eileen Gunn.

Available as a single ebook or as two paperbacks via Transreal Books . Or, if you’re after the paperbacks, it may be easier to get them direct from Amazon: Volume One and Volume Two.

“The Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow”

Sunday, June 10th, 2012

I just read Cory Doctorow’s wonderful Outspoken Authors book The Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow. You can buy it or download it for free from Cory’s site. If you look around, you can even find a series of podcasts of Cory reading it.

This slim volume includes an essay, an interview, and Cory’s novella, “The Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow.” I really enjoyed this tale—it’s modern, au courant, conceptually postsingular. One of the more interesting themes in SF these days is how life will be if and when we really get control over biotechnology in a really big way—big enough to use biotech to achieve the old goals of nanotechnology. Another theme is how things will be when we get a planetary networked computation that evolves into something like a local god.

One perennial topic in postsingular tales is how it might be to live within a “Vearth,” that is, to live as an more-or-less autonomous computational agent within a vast virtual-reality emulation of Earth. Some writers view this as a good thing, others not so much.

I think I’m not giving too much away if I say that at some point within Cory’s “The Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow,” some creatures called wumpuses are disassembling chunks of our planet and coding up the information patterns found within.

And at one point a character is living in a virtual reality that embodies the wumpus-extracted info. The Vearth-like computational engine has some bugs in it, but the character feels like it might be fun to carry on his life in there anyhow. Not that this person has much of a choice…

I tend to have persistent doubts that a world-sized VR could ever match real reality—or that there would ever be much point in trying to create it. And I’m going to explain my reasons below.

In 2007 and 2009 I published my pair of novels, Postsingular and Hylozoic, which took on some of these same ideas.

So now I’ll tell you a few of my thoughts, relating them to Cory’s novella. By the way, I published some of today’s rap in 2008, in a blog post called “Fundamental Limits to Virtual Reality,” . But I’m reposting them today in a re-edited form, fitting them to the flow of Cory’s novella.

So okay, let’s start. The first thing to keep in mind is that physical matter, just as it is, carries out outlandishly complex chaotic quantum computations by dint of sitting around. Matter isn’t dumb. Every particle everywhere and everywhen computes at the max possible flop. I think we tend to very seriously undervalue quotidian reality.

So there’s no reason to assume that a digital version of the world is in any sense “better.” Turning an inhabited planet into a VR simulation might be comparable to filling in wetlands to make a mall, clear-cutting a rainforest to make a destination golf resort, or killing a whale to whittle its teeth into religious icons of a whale god.

Advocates of the virtual-Earth scenario like to claim that nothing important need be lost when Earth is pulped into bits and bytes. Supposedly some vast computer network can run a VR simulation that’s a perfect match for the old Earth. Call the new one Vearth. But it’s not likely the match will be satisfactory.

Let’s take a moment to discuss the problems with trying to replace real reality with virtual reality. We already know that our present-day videogames and digital movies don’t fully match the richness of the real world. What’s not so well known is that no feasible VR can ever match nature because there are no shortcuts for nature’s computations. A VR simulation of Earth can only work if the simulation is running on a “computer” that’s about the same size as Earth was in the first place.


[Repousse medallion by Isabel Rucker.]

This is a limiting property of the natural world related to what I call the “Incompleteness Theorem for the Natural World.” The limitative aspect of the natural incompleteness theorem is that fully simulating a bunch of particles for a certain period of time requires a system using about the same number of particles for about the same length of time.

Putting it differently, naturally occurring systems don’t allow for drastic shortcuts. This means that if you build a computer-simulated world that’s smaller than the physical world, the simulation cuts corners and makes compromises, such as using bitmapped wood-grain, linearized fluid dynamics, or cartoon-style repeating backgrounds. Smallish simulated worlds are doomed to be dippy pseudo-environments populated by simulated people as dull and predictable as characters in bad novels.

But wait—if you get, let’s say, a race of Cory’s “wumpus” devices to repurpose a whole planet into computers, then you do have potentially as much memory and processing power as the old intact planet possessed. It’s the same amount of mass, after all. So then we could make a fully realistic world-simulating Vearth with no compromises, right?

Well, there’s another problem here. Maybe you can get the hardware in place, but there’s the vexing issue of software. Something important goes missing when you smash Earth into dust: you lose the information and the software that was embedded in the world’s behavior. An Earth-amount of matter with no high-level programs running on it is like a potentially human-equivalent robot with no AI software, or, more simply, like a powerful new computer with no programs on the hard drive.

Ah, but wait, Cory has a fix for this too. The wumpuses are going to copy all the patterns and behaviors embedded in Earth’s biosphere and geology, copying everything before they munge it into fodder for the Big Hack. The wumpuses record the forms and processes in every blade of grass, in every bacterium, in every pebble—like Citizen Kanes bringing home European castles that have been dismantled into portable blocks, or like foreign tourists taking digital photos of the components of disassembled California cheeseburgers.

Well, maybe this could work, but now we get to the issue of…why bother? If you want to smoothly transmogrify a blade of grass into some nanomachines simulating a blade of grass, then why bother grinding up the blade of grass at all? Keep in mind any object at all can be viewed as a quantum computation. The blade of grass already was an assemblage of nanomachines emulating a blade of grass. Nature embodies superhuman intelligence just as she is. So there’s not much point in making Nature into a copy of herself.

The long-term prospect I see as more attractive is one where, instead of turning nature into chips, we’ll turn chips into nature. I’m talking about the withering away of digital machines and the coming of truly ubiquitous computation. A Great Awakening.

The Great Awakening will eliminate nanomachines and digital computers in favor of naturally computing objects. We can suppose that our newly intelligent world will, in fact, have some “anti-wumpuses” to crunch up the digital machines, frugally preserving or porting all of that digital data, saving it as tastes, colors, smells, breezes, flames, and flows of water.

And then we’ll be able to tune in telepathically to nature’s computations. We’ll be able to commune with the souls of stones.

When you get right down to it, everything is alive. But Cory already knows this. What makes “The Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow” so engrossing is that, more than being about tech, it’s about the emotions and the personal growth (or lack thereof) of several inextricably linked human beings. That’s the beating heart of the story, an ingredient that an SF writer can all to easily forget too include! The human wheenk.

Hype and Anti-Hype

Monday, June 4th, 2012

Hype and Anti-Hype

I’ve been lost in a fog of hype for months now—what with promoting my Nested Scrolls autobio this winter, putting out Flurb #13 and converting it into an ebook, and recently spending all my time getting my Transreal Books line going.

Not to mention tweeting and blogging. And layering on link tags all over the place.


[Terry Bisson]

I even put out some hype for someone other than myself this week, a book review of Terry Bisson’s great alternate history memoir, Any Day Now. The review is in this interesting new online literary journal, the Los Angeles Review of Books—meant to be a kind of left-coast mirror of the august New York Review of Books.

On the subject of hype, I’ve heard media figures say that they get into trouble when they start believing their own hype. I mean I’ve heard rappers say that, anyway. What is the nature of the danger, exactly?

Maybe, if I believe the hype, I don’t feel a need to even try to write, as I think I’m already so great. Maybe, if I believe my hype, then I’m not willing to put in the work it takes to write because I’m too “important” for the thousand-miles-on-foot slog of writing a novel.

Or maybe, if I believe the hype, I do still want to write, but I become blocked—because nothing I actually do write lives up to the hype? That is, maybe if I believe the hype, when I try and get to work, I freak out over the very real disparity between the contingent and mortal quality of what I actually do write vis-a-vis the much higher quality that my hype ascribes to my oeuvre.

Or, yet again, maybe I am still able to write but, believing the hype, I get lazy and begin neglecting the necessary but painful work of outlining, revision, scientific theorizing, and pre-visualization—this happens to older writers sometimes.

Or perhaps, if I believe my hype, I lose my sense of humor and become pompous and self-referential. “Fatuous,” to use an apt word that I’ve heard Bruce Sterling use (when arguing with me about some revisions to one of our many collaborative short stories). Fatuosity is another danger for established writers.


[Two mayflies in conjugation]

I’m hoping soon to get away from the hype and back to my actual work. Giving the finger to consensus reality. Turning my back on received ideas—even if they come from me.

As I’ve already kvetched in these posts, one thing that’s holding me back from writing at this point is that I don’t feel like working on my new novel, The Big Aha , until I find a path for publishing my last one, Turing & Burroughs. If I don’t get something set up by the end of June, I’ll probably publish Turing & Burroughs via my own line of Transreal Books, just to get it off my back. It’ll be a bit of a blow to my self-esteem to join the ranks of the self-published novelists. But that seems to be the way the wind’s blowing. I heard the other day that the august house of Houghton-Mifflin is bankrupt. Leaving more and more writers scrabbling in the gutter with the literary lepers…

Bringing us to the theme of anti-hype. Somewhere (although I can’t find the exact location) Thomas Pynchon writes that a certain kind of seeker (mystic, writer, or artist) needs an “unwiltable hard-on” of ambition. (Let’s suppose this can apply to female seekers as well, the “hard-on” being, after all, metaphorical—a psychic dildo, if you will.)

In a similar vein, there’s a saying attributed to Rabbi Hillel, “If I am not for myself, who will be?” (Hillel complicates matters by adding on, “If I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?”)

To some extent, I like to think that, if nobody hates what I’m doing, then I’m not going far enough. But if everybody hates what I’m doing—gosh, maybe I’m on a wrong path. But so far, there’s always been a few loyal friends or fans who approve of what I’m doing. So I continue on, largely unchanged.

And there’s always the bitter SubGenius motto: “F*ck them if they can’t take a joke.”

What about the strategy of trying to bend your work to be a better fit for the market? That tends not to work. You get into playing catch-up ball, to use *ack* a sports metaphor, and your style suffers. Or your style stays the same, but nobody believes your claim that you’ve written a steampunk or urban fantasy or whatever kind of book.

I once heard someone ask William Burroughs why he didn’t “just” write a bestseller to make some money. The old master said that something like the following:

“It’s not possible. People may think they can sit down and write a bestseller, but you can’t do it. A bestseller is written up to the level of a man’s ability. You can’t write down to the reading public.”


[Rudy at the Met]

Whatever else it is, writing is pleasant, addictive, and a path to self-knowledge. It’s just nice to have an excuse for doing it. I always seem to find some kind of project to work on, even if it’s not a novel. So what am I writing these days? Well, I’m polishing up my Journals, 1990-2012, getting them into a format that I can publish via, ta-da, Transreal Books. Ebook and paperback, probably.

So for now I’m puttering around, getting those the half million or so words wrestled into a reasonable shape. It’s passing the time in any case.


Rudy's Blog is powered by WordPress