Talking About Fantasy With Storm Constantine GJ: You're a confirmed-and-out fantasist. But doesn't everyone have a fantasy life, a tissue of lies that's going on in their head all the time? SC: I believe we all live in a very subjective reality, that there is no true 'realness'. Yet I've met people who do not appear to have a teeming capacity for fantasising in quite the same was as other people I know. I am constantly enacting dialogues in my head - little mind-screen plays- as I wash up, as I Hoover, as I walk down town. It's automatic, and only sometimes do I actually use any of this stuff in my work. I feel this ongoing inner-soap opera helps me practise making my fictional characters more realistic. Other writers I know do this and so does my husband who is neither a writer nor an artist -someone you might say is not extravagantly creative minded. Mark (my husband) tends to act out situations in his head involving people he knows -arguments, saying what he really wants to say to someone and their response. Whereas my fantasy dialogues usually involve invented people and situations. Yet one person I know looked completely blank when I talked about this once. They did not know what I meant by these little fantasy 'sketches'. This surprised me, because I thought everybody did it. Perhaps they do, generally, and this person was just abnormal. GJ: Did you have a bookish background? SC: As soon as I learned to string simple sentences together I wanted to use them to tell stories. I wanted to communicate my fantasies to others from a very early age. My mother read me tales about Ancient Greece and Egypt, and I was drawn to those worlds. To me they seemed so much better than the one I was inhabiting. I was a romantic even as a child -something I've not grown out of! So I made up stories about those ancient worlds, embellishing on the existing myths. I was very lucky in that I was encouraged in this at school and by my family -despite the fact that I told whoppers occasionally. From my father and his mother I acquired my interest in the 'supernatural' and science fiction. I can still remember my grandmother saying to me, "I don't believe in ghosts, but I am afraid of them." My great aunt also had some spooky experiences when she was young and I used to make her tell them to me whenever she came up to visit. They would scare me stiff, I couldn't sleep for thinking about them, but I just had to hear them again and again. Even now, whenever I meet someone new, and if we're in a situation where everyone's relaxed (read, slightly merry) I ask them for their Fotrean-type experiences. Nearly everyone seems to have had one, and those that haven't know people who have and can tell their stories to me. The novel I'm working on now actually stems from a friend's experiences as a child. Her stories were so mind-stopping, I interviewed her thoroughly when we were sober, and wrote them all down! GJ: Everyone said to me, you can't just be a writer, you'll have to have a job as well. Did you get that? SC: Not until I gave up my day job! The only people who have said it to me were agents and editors. I don't know whether it's because they're anxious that writers might go absolutely peculiar if all they did was write, or whether it's based on sound common sense. I think it's best to have more than one string to your bow, as it were, so I do several other things as well as write. Now, I don't resent it, but when I was working full time for local government, I loathed it passionately. GJ: You went to Art College. Does that mean you had artistic career plans -other than writing- at the time? SC: I went to Art College because I was very good at art at school. Strangely enough I didn't consider writing as a career, then. That was something I did for pleasure, just for my friends. I wasn't much of a forward planner, and never thought in terms of how I would support myself in the future. This was the early seventies, after all! My family were pretty laid-back about what I did, and never tried that desperately to get involved in my decisions. I suppose they were rather bohemian. As a teenager, I ran a bit wild, and education went out of the window. I never pursued art as a career, because college disillusioned me. I and a couple of my friends there were very much into fantasy art -that was all we wanted to do- but of course it was frowned on. So, I rebelled again, and got an office job. I continued to write, and to produce art- work, and also set about educating myself, although this was not a conscious decision. I'm just naturally curious, but balk against being told what to do. When learning was my choice, I was avidly into it. GJ: What's your view of genre classification? Did you think about where your work fitted in? SC: When the Wraeththu books were first accepted by MacDonald, I felt strongly that I didn't want them to be marketed as science fiction or fantasy. To me, the fantastical side of the books was incidental. It wasn't as if I'd chosen to write in that genre. The stories were there inside my head, irrespective of classification. To me they were about loss, passion, obsession, grief, learning, growing, lust -the gamut of human experience. I still believe I'm writing alternative myths, metaphors for twentieth century life, rather than fancy- dress soap opera. GJ: My image of the typical genre fantasist, is of someone who lives entirely in their head: and when you meet them, there's nothing to see on the outside. But not you. I have to comment on this, because your appearance, your attitude, in a gathering of British sf writers, is so outstanding. The wild black hair, the goth regalia... SC: In actual fact, I'm not often aware of my appearance being that different to anyone else's. My regalia, my image, is something I've built up since I was a weird little kid into horror and sf. I was into the Gothic scene before it was called that simply because it embraced all the subjects I was interested in: occult, beguiling, hopelessly romantic. I'm still surprised when people point my appearance out to me, and to be honest I'd rather not think about it. Perhaps rather naively, when I'm in a social situation, I forget completely what I look like and believe I blend in with the crowd. I prefer to keep thinking that, otherwise I'd be desperately paranoid. I'm not happy being labelled a 'Goth writer' because it implies I'm a fashion victim, which I'm not. I shall probably be a batty old woman with dyed black hair, being avoided by people in the street, when I'm older. It's just me. It's true I do have a fulfilling and varied life outside of writing. I manage a band, and work for a couple of other bands, writing for their fan club publications, and doing desk-top publishing for them. I also write training material for a company who produce course-ware for Windows applications -a very different kind of writing. I feel that does me good, helps discipline me. At present I'm also the Finance Officer for the county branch of a charity, dealing with their accounts and also organising their computer equipment, training etc. I work out twice a week at the local recreation centre, to keep my brain cells alive and my body active (still hasn't got rid of writer's bum, though), so I don't have a minute when I have nothing to do. GJ: Your books are full of wonderful names, not least your own. How did Storm Constantine evolve? SC: I think everyone should be given the chance to change their name whenever they want to, whatever their age. At the moment, you're looked on as a bit strange if you take the step of changing your name by deed poll, as I did. Why? I really don't think it's fair that we have to be saddled with names that our parents liked, and which are not really us. It's okay if you happen to like your given name, of course, but I hated mine. When people embark upon a magical path, it's customary for them to 'find' a new name for themselves, which they use when they're working magic. This name represents their spiritual self, and should have significance. Why can't this apply to the names we use in everyday life? I can't remember exactly how I 'found' the name I have now, but when I made the choice, it was as if I stepped free from invisible constriction. It was like a casting away of unwanted baggage from the past, a sloughing of skin. Very therapeutic. I think I have become 'Storm' thoroughly now, because even my father calls me by that name, which I never thought he would. The fact that he does so means a lot to me, because it shows me he has respect for me as an individual, and does not regard me as simply 'his daughter'. GJ: 'Gwyneth' means 'blessing': I don't like it much, but I rather like arbitrary conditions -this is the name that fell on me, out of my control. Do you still reinvent yourself occasionally? Or have you settled down? SC: I don't reinvent myself, but there are minor changes to my appearance since I last saw you. I got a bit sensitive about the way my body was changing as my thirties galloped past, so I tend to wear more flowing clothes now. The skin-tight mini dresses are out! I care more about the body beneath the clothes than the clothes themselves and ageing does not agree with me at all. I wish I'd kept myself in shape when I was younger, but I didn't appreciate my body then. Now, I try to look after myself more, pamper the machine that houses my personality, keep it running smoothly. It's a shame I only realised this fairly recently. I have to work harder to keep fit now because I neglected such things when I was younger. I don't want to be incapacitated when I'm older. The charity I work for is involved with the welfare of older people, so I see enough to frighten me. My story, 'The Green Calling' (Interzone 73 July '93) was inspired by my fear of ageing. Have I settled down? I hope not! If anyone said to either Mark or myself that we had, we'd both be very depressed, I think. Perhaps most people reach an age when they feel they need a sense of security, which they either didn't need or didn't realise they needed, in youth. Although marriage does provide a sense of security, it's not easy getting used to the constraints that living with someone entails. Marriage in some peculiar sort of way seems to amplify them. Being married has probably made me more political, more aware of women's place in society, so I am more of a feminist now. The fact that I'd always been independent, even when I was in a relationship, blinded me to the truth of how other women live -have to live- their experiences and how they are viewed. Now, I know. Or at least I have a wider perspective. It's small, subtle things that make me angry, the fact that as Mark's wife, I'm still seen as his chattel by building societies, insurance companies, etc. The fact that Mark's always called Mr Constantine by people who know we are married and have never bothered to find out his own name: they just assume I've taken his! GJ: Can you say something about the Wraeththu trilogy? (to paraphrase, for people who haven't read it, the Wraeththu are a new kind of transgendered human: the product of a sexual and physical and painful transformation, which happens to beautiful young men.) SC: Although I hate to admit it, I am getting a bit fed up of talking about the Wraeththu books, as I feel I've moved on a long way, gone on to new things. As I said earlier, I hope my perspectives have widened. Perhaps I can talk about things that I've discovered recently, as I've re-read those books, that I wasn't conscious of at the time I wrote them. It is all to do with my views on ageing in relation to gender, but some of this is quite personal and I've no desire to externalise it. These things have only become apparent to me since talking about it with close friends. If people want to extrapolate further from the novels that's up to them. A writer expects that. I am interested in the ageing process, and how it appears - physically- to affect men less than women. The Wraeththu looked like physically beautiful immortal young men, and I indulged my female fantasy in that aspect, but psychologically women have much more to interest me. Maybe that's because women are often more interesting than men. But like I said, men seem to suffer less cruelly from the passage of time. Now, I see other things in the books which I didn't see when I was writing them. As to where it all came from, this is a question I have answered many times. It's a compilation of all sorts of things I was into at the time. It was on a slow-burn for years, so it was pretty much all written in my head by the time I came to write it. GJ: This transformation: this ruthless tearing apart and rewiring of human sexual identity. Is this real for you? I mean, is this something you've decided the human race needs? SC: I did think so at the time, but I'm not so sure now. As I intimated earlier, I feel I'm thinking about all these issues in much wider terms -social and political- now so in a way maybe I'm readdressing the same issues in more recent work, trying to look at them from slightly different angles. For example, I'm beginning to feel more and more uncomfortable with prejudice. I know some people who on the face of it are politically right-on, proud to number among their friends other people who don't fit easily into sexual/gender stereotypes: and yet their actions and comments betray the most deep-seated prejudice. I myself try to respect 'otherness' because as you've probably gathered, I do kick against the traces of convention, but at the same time I realise I am conventional too. I admire people who are open-minded and brave, thought they might look very conventional, twinset and pearls types. As for rewiring or rewriting human sexuality, maybe it's more important for all of us to begin just by practising tolerance. GJ: The Wraeththu are all young men. I found this aspect of Wraeththu refreshing: a woman talking about men, as gorgeous sexual beings. That's rare in sf. But don't women need to change? SC: Wraeththu was a timely women's fantasy, untypical of the genre. I like men. As I've said, I'm interested in the way they appear to age differently. They seem to escape or delay the physical ravages of time more easily than women. That's physiologically and socially. Maybe there was some kind of transference going on. And the Wraeththu were a means of at least jumping the sex/gender traces. Do women need to change? The short answer is, I think we all need to change. GJ: It's a change for beautiful men to have dreadful physical things happening to them. It's as if they have periods, and childbirth to cope with: all the messy things. And of course rape. Was there an element of conscious irony in all that? SC: Not conscious, no. I didn't intend there to be. But maybe unconsciously I thought 'Let men have some of what we have to put up with for a while, if only in my fantasy world'. GJ: Sex is important in your books, and often very weird. Does this reflect your personal opinions? SC: I don't think sex is weird -we've got the bits, they're functional, so why not use them? It's no more weird than eating food, which in fact I think is weirder. At least sex is designed to carry on the species, whereas the fuelling seems really primitive to me. However, again politics comes into sex, and rape is an abuse. I suppose I believe that sex isn't weird as long as it doesn't involve abuse. It if does, it's not just weird it's downright wrong. In the Wraeththu world sex was intrinsic to their religious beliefs, and therefore sacred, and rape was regarded as worse than murder. They had terminology to define different kinds of rape, rather as we have different terms for different types of murder. I feel that sex should be sacred, and that rape should be regarded as an abomination. I think that rape in fact is a kind of murder, because it can kill some part of the victim. Rape victims who survive their ordeals enough to walk in the world again are as brave, if not braver than 'war heroes'. But the heroism of rape victims is rarely recognised. GJ: What d'you think about the way sex is treated in fantasy/sf? I think mostly it's dire. SC: I do wonder what some sf/fantasy writers' lives, thoughts, experiences consist of, when I read some of the staid stuff they come up with. Isn't it an amazing irony that within the fantasy genre there's a whole bunch of self-sustaining stereotypes and cliches? Maybe this is something that's wrong with it today. I'm refering to the 'is fantasy/sf dead' debate GJ: We should get back to that. But I want to know more about sex and magic first. There's Hermetech, when you have a story where sex is going to utterly transform the world. It seemed a bit harsh on your character, "Ari".She spends the whole book a virgin, wondering what it's going to be like. Finally it happens and that's the end of the story. The message seems to be that sex: both sex and passion, are a means to an end, things you pass through and leave behind? SC: Girls are often lead to believe that when they eventually experience sex/orgasm, they will be changed and their world will change. Ari's story's a metaphor for any girl's journey towards womanhood. In the book, the apocalypse of her experience affects the world. I like to think that whenever a girl discovers her sexual identity the world feels the small explosion and subtly changes. Hermetech is specifically about the power of female sexuality and the feminine sexual experience. Men can make women afraid of sex, and this is disempowering. I don't think we pass through sex, passion, romantic love and leave them behind. It's something that keeps on happening. It's a conceit for us to think much older people don't experience these things, because I know they do. Perhaps people become less obsessed with sex than they were when they were young, but I think there might be gender differences here. Men seem to retain something of their youthful sex drive, and its utter compulsiveness, while women appear to move on. Their perspective on sex changes. As a woman friend once said to me: sex becomes both less important and more important. GJ: Do you every feel sorry for your characters, for what you put them through? SC: I'm not aware of pitying my characters: I can be quite ruthless with them. But it's rare that anyone doesn't have a satisfactory resolution to their dilemmas in my work, because I do like to end on an 'upper' as it were. When I first began writing, I hated the thought of killing any of my characters off, especially ones I particularly liked. Now, I've steeled myself to that a little. The tragedies I see around me in the world sometimes make me despair, and it's these terrible things that often crop up in my work. I feel more sorry for the people who inspired the stories, that for the fictional characters. GJ: What about cyberpunk? You know I've called your futuristic fantasies 'organic cyberpunk': what's your reaction to that? SC: The majority of cyberpunk books seem to me like rock videos. I've read a few -quite some time after they came out- and the thing I admired most about them was the visual imagery. The writing, I felt, often left a lot to be desired. That, however, is my subjective opinion, coloured by what I do and do not like to read. I don't want to be dismissive of cyberpunk, because of the impact it made and the creativity it inspired, and I don't feel qualified to criticise because I haven't studied it deeply. I do feel it was rather a boys' club, though. GJ: You've said you'd like to 'put more science' in your books, if you could handle it. But Hermetech has a lot of tech in it, lots of information technology, virtual reality, gene therapy, in a kind of apocalyptic meltdown with New Age beliefs. Is there a balance that you aimed at, between (magical) art and 'science'? SC: I was spending a lot of time with people who were into the newest aspects of science and technology, and I learned a lot from them. All writers want to use their new knowledge and I'm certainly no different. Personally, I'm not sure whether I'd consider Hermetech to be science fiction. A friend of mine, who is more of a mainstream writer, read it and enjoyed it as a thriller, whereas some critics called it fantasy. But I hope the book showed that I don't dismiss technology. I am interested in new developments in science, and sometimes I will write about them. But I am not obsessed with them. I didn't consciously aim for a balance between science and magic in Hermetech, but perhaps I wanted to illustrate that the two subjects are not as disconnected as they may seem. GJ: D'you think it's harder, as a woman, to be confident about the language of science? SC: Despite the emergence of many women writers in the genre, sf is still a male enclave, and perhaps when women use the language of science they feel they have to convince the men that they know what they're talking about. I myself would be very reticent about flinging techno-speak about unless I could back it up with fact, even if those 'facts'; are fantasies cobbled together from various scientific theories etc. I think mistakes and inaccuracies probably are more tolerated when they come from men, whereas if women make these sorts of mistakes the criticism of them can become sexist. GJ: Do you think artists who use high tech - like musicians, video- makers, are more creative, more genuinely experimental with these new tools and toys, than working scientists? SC: Not really knowing any scientists, I can't comment and I don't wish to generalise. I'd like to think that techies live in their own imagination/fantasies as much as anyone else. My instinct is to reply, but yes of course artists are more creatively free than techies, but I recognise my own subjectivity in that. GJ: What about you -I mean, with the new tools and toys? SC: I occasionally play computer games and yes I have a modem. My computer is a fairly thoroughbred animal, and I've bought her some bits and pieces to enhance her pedigree. Computers are worse than cars for making you want more speed, more power, more utilities. I'd like a CD ROM drive, a flatbed scanner, a bigger hard disk, a tape streamer, oh the list is endless. Mark shares my craving for computer bits, so we encourage each other in a very unhealthy manner, drooling over the wishing-books of Computer Shopper and its ilk. I've been involved in video work and I'd get involved again if I was approached by the right people. The last video I worked on ended in tears when the people involved started getting nasty about wanting to earn money from what they were doing. They didn't seem to appreciate that in all the creative fields you have to do a lot for nothing to get recognised. I wouldn't particularly want to earn money from this kind of project anyway. I think it's something that should be done for the fun of it, the sense of achievement. GJ: Do you regret that you chose to be a writer? It's a dying art, surely. Would you rather be a film director, a games designer? SC: It wasn't a choice. I am an innate story- teller. I think it's a shame if books really are threatened as a life form, but to be honest I'm not convinced by the evidence that this is so. People are buying more books now than they ever did. I think it only appears to authors that things are getting worse, because they now have to compete in a much larger market. If there were only three sf books coming out a month in the UK, it's likely an sf fan would buy them all. Now they might have to chose from dozens of books. They also have to choose between books, videos, and computer games so its an economic conundrum. I'm sure if people had enough money they'd buy more books, more videos, more games. I do not have any aspiration to be a games designer, and much as I like the idea romantically of directing a film, I don't think my skills lie in that direction. GJ: What about the spiritual side of your writing? And your life? SC: I was never a practising Christian, but I was pushed off to Sunday School by my family. Probably just to get me out of the way fro the afternoon! Spiritually, I've always been pagan in my heart, although I didn't realise this until I came across the literature associated with it during my teens. Even then, I didn't actively practise it as a religion. People who are heavily into religion, whatever it is, seem to be obsessive about it. When I finally joined a coven for a while, I learned that all religions are basically the same, and only the terminology differs. There are still power structures and hierarchies, people taking control. Often pagans scorn Christians because Christian belief is based on a book, the Bible, and the words of a 'great man', Jesus. Pagans, however, should admit that they have their own 'great men' and 'bibles'. Because I discovered there are rules and regulations, despite the propaganda, I withdrew from the group side of things. I have my own belief system now, which I change according to my mood and circumstance. Basically, I believe that all god-forms are symbols that we use to get our heads round impossible ideas about the universe. I don't believe in discarnate beings floating around on clouds, booming out pronouncements against humanity or actively interfering with our world. Neither do I think we have to appease some Great Being, through prayer or praise, in order to avert fates worse than death, after death! More often than not (depending on mood) I do think that there is intelligence behind the universe, multiverse, or whatever you want to call it. I think it is present in all of us too. What I've read in the popular science books on quantum mechanics has more in common with my religious beliefs than what I've read in The Bible or books on witchcraft! Quantum physicists are possibly the new priesthood. Now, there's a prediction for you... I'm an sf writer after all. GJ: Contact with this immanent intelligence is achievable: not something handed down from on high, but something we can do... Magic is in the future, not in the past.This is great as metaphor. But I have a problem with the concrete, the manifestations. I actively believe in God, yes, sometimes: you're right, belief is a such a fluid thing. But the image of divinity created by humanity, emerging from some newly invented arcane ritual: I can't help it. I get an irrepressible image of Mr StayPuff The Marshmallow Man (you remember him? In Ghostbusters?) I know this is an impossible question: but are you serious? SC: How the hell am I going to articulate this? If you can suppose that we create reality through our perceptions, including our own futures, through the way we act and react in the present, and how we perceive the world around us, then it should be possible to effect changes in our lives through the the imposition of will. Simply put, this is positive thinking. If you have a bad self image, more likely than not life will often appear to be a barrel of shit. You can become a victim, sucked into an ever- descending spiral of defeatism and pessimism. If you can empower your self image, re-program yourself, then you should be able to cope with life in a much more positive frame of mind and the knocks, when they come, are not so debilitating. One way of doing this is by using the props, both physical and psychological, of ritual. When you create a god-form in your imagination, I think you are really creating a more powerful aspect of yourself (if you suppose that what you imagine comes solely from your own mind.) Addressing this symbol, whether through prayer or celebration, means you are accessing a stronger part of yourself. This inner strength is what I see as 'Godness' in the universe, the cohesive and binding energy. I don't see god as being apart from us, but that god- energy is within us. I read somewhere that god is a verb rather than a noun. GJ: Magic, magus: it's a word for power. I think the mystique that surrounds that word, our mythology about 'magic', all springs from an awe and reverence for people who could manipulate language, for the invention of reading, writing; for storytellers. It is absolutely real and powerful, it changes the world. But the power has become so familiar we're no longer gobsmacked: just the way we're blase about aeroplanes and wordprocessors. We want the kind of special fx you only get in fantasy novels, whereas in fact the magic is happening around us all the time. Would you agree? SC: There's very little I can add to that because I think you put it so well, and I agree with you. Magic is all around us. Words are powerful, and can change the world, especially if those words are believed in. Belief, I think, is a very strong force, and causes all kinds of spontaneous conceptions. Belief in oneself is the magic of self-empowerement, and we can use carefully chosen words to augment the strength of that belief. GJ: After the Wraeththu, you wrote two books set in a world dominated by brutal matriarchy (Monstrous Regiment and Aleph). You've said that Monstrous Regiment was based on your experiences in a consciousness raising group. Oh yes, I remember those days! In my CR group, we were infiltrated by the local lesbian community, looking for fun. I got a lot of attention because (and I quote) I looked so sweet and feminine. So much for escaping from being a sex object! It seems funny now but at the time I was furious. SC: Being in that group was one of those cataclysmic learning times, when you wake up a little to reality. I believed wholly in the woman who was running it, in a very naive way. And yet as time went on, it seemed as if she was trying to undermine my self confidence and attack my personality, implying I was deceitful and selfish. I don't know whether this was deliberate or not, or whether she had a spiritual motive for what she did. It did help me grow, eventually, but at the time it hurt me terribly, because I have a very strong sense of justice and hate hurting other people. Also I am quite strict about honesty nowadays. Probably because, as a child, I found out that lies are always discovered and rebound on you relentlessly. The woman was also sarcastic about people who used 'pretty words' - which stung, because to me poetry and theatre were part of ritual work we were involved in and I took that as a personal attack. So, I spent a good few months agonising about myself, wondering if I really was this horrible, shallow thing the woman had implied that I was. Then, with the support of another woman in the group, I realised the problem was the group leader's not mine. I shrugged off the self-despising and realised I should just be myself, and not be cringelingly apologetic all the time. It seemed clear that the group leader had problems about jealousy, and considering people as threats, not just me but other women too. I began to look coldly at the way nobody stayed for that long in any of the groups this woman ran. One moment people were in awe of her, the next they just never bothered coming to the meetings. I suspect a few of them had experiences very similar to mine. Needless to say, in the face of this epiphany I left the group. I felt a lot stronger afterwards, and had the confidence to approach the subject of belief in my own way, not slavishly following what people had done before. Perhaps this was the woman's intention, her function, who knows? GJ: I get the impression you were pretty disappointed with the rock chicks movement of your time as well. What d'you think of the Riot Girrls stuff: the 'girls are powerful' gigs...? SC: I have always wanted someone to ask me what I think of Riot Girrls, and the answer is this: "I don't empathise with them. I've never had any trouble getting a boyfriend." That of course is a very bitchy response, and not exactly serious. I don't think this Riot Girrrl stuff is really politically motivated. To men it seems a pose, a lot of girls-only groups have jumped on the bandwagon hoping to secure a record contract. It's so calculated. I've read about this new 'women-in-rock' think in the music press and haven't been impressed by what I've seen. The fact that Courtney Love, from the band Hole, was criticised for wearing makeup and so-called sexy clothes on stage at a women-only gig, for example, made me curl my lip. I can't stand it when feminists get all high and mighty about women wanting to be feminine. You don't have to be a muscle-bound shaved- scalp brute to be a feminist, you can have relationships with men and even like them, and be a feminist. If I went to a women- only gathering, I'd still wear makeup and dress up. I don't do it for men, but for myself. If that's wrong in the eyes of some women, they should be tolerant about it. Wanting people to be all the same is a very dangerous idea. GJ: You seem to have more and more to say about women and female power. You do a really good mother and daughter relationship. I'm thinking of Ari and her mother in Hermetech, and SallyAnn and Mel in the Interzone story 'Built of Blood'; and a bleaker version in the story 'The Green Calling'. The older woman, disillusioned, whose life is full of secrets, (maybe her bad experiences). The daughter who has to look after her mother, and avoid getting burdened with all this debris... Did you decide you wanted to do mothers and daughters, or did it just happen? SC: I didn't consciously decide to write about mothers and daughters...This seems to be the answer I'm giving all the time, I must be a very 'unconscious' writer. My own relationship with my mother was dreadful, and coloured my view of all women for a long time. It was only when I discovered paganism, and had to get my head around the concept of a female god, The Mother, that I rid myself of all the baggage that my early teens had dumped on me. I had a very negative image of The Mother as an archetype, and my mind resisted accepting it. Possibly, my interest in androgynes was the intermediate step between a deep suspicion of mother figures and an acceptance, I don't know. Now, my women friends supply me with the womanly affection and support that I felt I lacked as a teenager, and I have a very good relationship with my step-mother so I was lucky enough to be given a second chance at having a mother figure. As one famous person said, "We can't choose our family, but thank God we can choose our friends." GJ: I loved the language in Wraeththu. You get all sorts of literary experiments in sf, but you rarely find that kind of joy in beautiful words. Did you enjoy poetry from an early age? I know you used to write poems, do you still? Had any published? SC: I love words and enjoy browsing through old dictionaries to gather up new words. I don't think I'm a brilliant poet, although I have written a few dozen poems. I still read a Lot of poetry, and sometimes it inspires short stories. There are plans for Inception, my information service, to produce a chap book of my poems, illustrated by members of the service. I don't know when we'll get round to this, but probably soon. GJ: You've said you devoured Michael Moorcock and Tanith Lee when you were a teenager. Do you still feel the same way about them? What about other influences: musical, dramatic, figurative? SC: Tanith Lee is still up there on the highest throne of my autorial pantheon. I love her work because she too loves words. Her writing is so evocative. I think the work she is producing mow is the best she's ever done. When I'm feeling blocked creatively, I generally watch some of the animated films of Jan Svenkmajer or the Brothers Quay: that gets the creative juices flowing. I also like Peter Greenaway's films, because of his imagery. It's like a visual fix. GJ: After the Monstrous Regiment double, you did a kind of vampire book Burying the Shadow, about fallen angels. What made you want to do a vampire story? SC: I wanted to write a book about angels and vampires that did not have the word 'angel' or 'vampire' in it. I thought it might be especially difficult to write about vampires without resorting to the cliche name, but in the even it wasn't that hard. The eloim in 'Shadow' are not traditional vampires, after all. The plot and characters for the novel came to me before I decided to attach the angel/vampire connotations. Originally the 'vampirism' was going to be a psychological phenomenon. Then an editor asked me if I could write a vampire novel and I sent a sketchy synopsis in. It wasn't accepted but I put the ideas in that together with the ideas for Shadow, and think that the result worked very well. It's still one of my favourite pieces of work. GJ: And then there was Hermetech, which I've talked about; and most recently Sign For The Sacred. In Sign there's a messiah figure, a miracle worker. But what he actually does, and whether he does anything, is left completely ambiguous. Instead of the world disintegrating, it's the apocalypse that seems to disintegrate. The utter transformation of reality that ends Hermetech, is diluted and diffused into a mild social revolution. Is this the end of that particular trail? SC: Who knows? As I think we've established, I write very unconsciously for the most part. Things just come out in my work that I obviously needed to explore at the time. The 'climaxes' in my books are often anti- climactic because I feel that real life rarely witnesses massive events where suddenly everything changes. In the dramas of our everyday lives, activity and tranquillity rise and fall like waves. There might be a few hours, or even days, of rapid information transfer, heated tempers and feelings that Armageddon -in a domestic sense- is nigh, but eventually the tide ebbs and we carry on. When you expect something to be mind-blowing and cataclysmic, it often isn't. Then you can breath a sigh of relief and address the next crisis. GJ: How do you feel about your career so far? Are you pleased with what you've done? Any regrets? SC: Like all writers, I wish I earned more from my writing. It's hard not to feel bitter when you see 'sex and shopping' novels attracting six figure advances, and you know the only reason they'll sell is because of the massive publicity campaigns behind them and the fact that publishers damn well make sure the books are available in the shops. Sometimes, I can't help feeling that publishers look on their sf/fantasy lists as tax writeoffs. Still, there's no point in being sour about it. The only book I'm not satisfied with is The Monstrous Regiment. If that was ever reprinted I'd want to rewrite some of it, in the light of the way my perceptions have changed Every other book I've written was me writing to the best of my ability at the time, so I have no regrets about them GJ: Did writing short stories come after writing novels for you? It seems to me it did, though you've now clocked up quite a few, for Interzone, and the shared-world projects Warhammer and Midnight Rose; among others. SC: I wrote my first short story "The Pleasure-Giver Taken", for David Garnett's Zenith Anthology. Since then I've written about thirty five and have sold most of them. I do find it harder to write shorter pieces. Most of the stories I've produces could easily have been novels, and I hate cutting out what I think is good stuff, in order to fit into a word limit. I would very much like my stories to come out as a collection, but I'm always told that collections don't sell very well, so my publishers have not been that keen. I keep mentioning it to my agent though. GJ: You've talked about writing a magical- realist novel, is that in the offing? SC: My next project is hidden beneath a veil at present, and I don't want to talk about it too much. By the time this interview is published, the details about this book might be old knowledge of course, but I'm feeling all superstitious about keeping it secret at the moment. It's all in the lap of the gods, I'm afraid, and bearing in mind what I've said about gods, I've got a lot of positive thinking to do.