That's why, in once sense, it doesn't matter if the New Weird "actually" exists whether it's just a rogue chill breeze raising goosebumps, or whether there really is a phantom rattling the windows and making discomfiting noises here. Because of the conversation surrounding its possible existence, the New Weird has changed the speculative fiction landscape, widened the horizons a lot or a little depending on where you're standing. For this reason, I expect this particular phantom will continue to haunt the literary landscape for a long time to come.

WORKS CITED.

Harpham, Geoffrey Galt. On the Grotesque: Strategies of Contradiction in Art and Literature. On the Grotesque: Strategies of Contradiction in Art and Literature. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982. McHale, Brian. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982. McHale, Brian. Constructing Postmodernism. Constructing Postmodernism. New York: Routledge, 1993. New York: Routledge, 1993.

Whose Words You Wear

K. J. BISHOP.

THERE IS no doubt some advantage to be had from labelling fiction under rubrics of genre, period, style, and all else that helps a reader find, on the shelves of a bookstore, something to their taste. But there are disadvantages, too, for both reader and writer, the chief of these being, I think, that a label invites a particular reading of the work and discourages other readings. If we are told that a book is Modernist we will most likely read it through a filter made of our knowledge of Modernism. That filter may be useful, and even quite necessary to an understanding of the writer's methods. However, we might be so satisfied with our view of how the book sits in the Modernist canon that we don't think about where else it might fit. A minute's thought about the bookshelves of literature, as opposed to those of bookshops, tells us that they are not simply linear. They are more like the London Underground or Paris Metro, only more complex by orders of magnitude, with books sitting at many-rayed junctions of theme, genre, style, intention, idea, and the taxonomic mind, however exact and exhaustive it tries to make its labels, is not looking at dinosaur bones or mineral specimens, however much it wishes it were. It is working in conditions perfused with the subjectivity that attends all understanding of all art, so it ought not to be too cocky about the labels it comes up with.

The label on the front of this volume, "New Weird," rather obviously tells readers to expect something new and weird. But since both terms are relative, readers may not find their expectations of either fulfilled.

This is a problem with all genre labels. The horror story someone read was not horrific enough, the fantasy was not fantastical enough, the science fiction romance novel was not romantic enough or not science fictional enough then the taxonomist steps in and tries to make things better. I admit my instinct is to see the taxonomist as a ludicrous figure. However, one hears what he has to say about the reading of the label "fantasy," to use the example of that immense genre into which much of the so-called New Weird fits. "Fantasy" has become associated in many people's minds with stories and themes that are very familiar familiar the bil-dungsroman, the war story, the quest ordained to succeed, all decorated with trappings of magic and miracle that paradoxically lose their strangeness when placed in a world where they are known and understood; it has come to be attended by readerly expectations of certain fixes, notably of immersion in a diverting secondary world, wish-fulfillment, and vicarious power-tripping. It therefore might not be entirely useless for a writer whose fantasies are of a different sort to accept, however charily, a label that suggests the the bil-dungsroman, the war story, the quest ordained to succeed, all decorated with trappings of magic and miracle that paradoxically lose their strangeness when placed in a world where they are known and understood; it has come to be attended by readerly expectations of certain fixes, notably of immersion in a diverting secondary world, wish-fulfillment, and vicarious power-tripping. It therefore might not be entirely useless for a writer whose fantasies are of a different sort to accept, however charily, a label that suggests the unfamiliar, unfamiliar, if only to reduce the chance of disappointing readers' expectations. if only to reduce the chance of disappointing readers' expectations.

This acceptance, though, is very different from holding the label in one's bosom. Some writers in this book may feel a sense of personal allegiance to the New Weird; others may feel quite ho-hum about it. There is no New Weird manifesto. Definitions and bibliographies of the New Weird have been made by a fluid, unofficial committee of Adams, few of whom would, I think, erect a barrier inscribed with "Here Be the New Weird; Yonder Be Naught but the Old Ordinary." It's a fuzzy label, really, its very relativity a nod in deference to the difficulty of labelling literature.

But the label exists and I have set myself the task of tackling it a little, so to the "New", which a reading contra contra something old, whatever that might be and Ecclesiastes comes to mind. Literature is a product of its influences. We all riff off something, work against a certain background, mine a vein of thought or style to which somebody else showed us the way. So what is the Old against which the New Weird sets itself? Every writer in this book would probably have a different answer. I'm inclined to say, firstly, hang on wasn't "Make it new!" a Modernist catch-cry, and didn't Postmodernism remind us that we've been living in a pile of bric-a-brac since a month or two, give or take, after we came down from the trees? something old, whatever that might be and Ecclesiastes comes to mind. Literature is a product of its influences. We all riff off something, work against a certain background, mine a vein of thought or style to which somebody else showed us the way. So what is the Old against which the New Weird sets itself? Every writer in this book would probably have a different answer. I'm inclined to say, firstly, hang on wasn't "Make it new!" a Modernist catch-cry, and didn't Postmodernism remind us that we've been living in a pile of bric-a-brac since a month or two, give or take, after we came down from the trees?

Perhaps the only sensible and seemly reply is to say that you're trying to make a semblance of newness out of the bric-a-brac. (I feel Jerry Cornelius leering over my shoulder but Jerry wanted more than semblance, I now remember.) Eclecticism, writerly text, non-linear structures attempt to introduce into fantasy species of narrative not native to the genre, defamiliarisation of the ordinary and insertion of the ordinary into the fantastic, and, I would argue, a tendency to thin or vandalise the fourth wall while generally, though not always, stopping short of knocking it down, are all common features of texts found under the New Weird rubric; however, these tactics are not new, nor have they rusted in a cupboard since the heyday of the British New Wave (writers including Richard Calder, Jonathan Carroll, Iain M. Banks and Hugh Cook come to mind), nor were they even new then.

Another reason to be suspicious of "New" is the very good one that binary oppositions are always suspect. New is young, alive, snappy; old is senile, incontinent, annoying. Alarms go off at this point: one does well to be careful and not be arrogant. Personally, I don't set myself against any writer, style or theme. I consider myself an enthusiastic fan and disciple of many writers, alive and dead. If I have a fogey bogey it's a bogey in the form of a word, namely the word "should." How many times does one hear "A novel should be." "Characters should be." "A plot should." "A sentence should."? Once, in fact, is too often. The art world has discarded "should," but the mass-market economics which support the writing world, and probably, too, the time investment literature requires of readers, make such a casting off, on a large scale, much more difficult. Much so-called New Weird fiction, however, doesn't -it seems to me pay much mind to "should." By dint of that, perhaps something new has come or will come; but even if not, by casting off "should" one at least removes an impediment to the growth, if such is possible, of new narratives and new myths.

As I read over this essay, which does not seem very well-jointed to me, I remember that it is very hard to analyse a phenomenon from within it, and while it is still alive and changing; still, it seems a better idea to have a go at it yourself than leave it to other people to decide for you, after you're dead and can't say it wasn't that at all.

European Editor Perspectives on the New Weird

SHORT ESSAYS BY MARTIN SUST, MICHAEL HAULICA, HANNES RIFFEL, JUKKA HALME, AND KONRAD WALEWSKI.

IN OUR TRAVELS IN 2006 throughout Europe, we found many "echoes" of New Weird, and many different ways in which it worked as a stimulus to both publishing and other writers. For this reason, we asked editors from the Czech Republic, Romania, Germany, Finland, and Poland to respond to questions about New Weird, with the results published herein as short essays. THE EDITORS

Martin ust, editor, anthologist, and writer CZECH REPUBLIC.

As foreign rights assistant and book editor at Laser Books, Martin ust runs imprints such as New Weird and New Space Opera. He serves as the editor-in-chief of the Czech edition of THE MAGAZINE OF FANTASY & SCIENCE FICTION THE MAGAZINE OF FANTASY & SCIENCE FICTION and also works for the Czech SF/F magazine and also works for the Czech SF/F magazine PEVNOST. PEVNOST. In addition to editing three New Weird anthologies, he has edited an anthology of British New Space Opera called In addition to editing three New Weird anthologies, he has edited an anthology of British New Space Opera called THE FIRES OF STARS, THE FIRES OF STARS, with an American volume called with an American volume called THE DUST OF STARS THE DUST OF STARS scheduled for next year. He has won nine awards from the Czech Academy of Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror. ust can be contacted at scheduled for next year. He has won nine awards from the Czech Academy of Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror. ust can be contacted atmartin.sust@seznam.cz.

"CREATING NEW WEIRD TO WORK FOR US".

I believe that the New Weird movement started as a provocation, and a good one, but its success may have scared the creators themselves. Several great internet discussions caused a big stir by asking questions like "Is there really such a movement?" with many different answers. But in the end, however, there was only one one real answer: "Maybe!" real answer: "Maybe!"

"Maybe!" is good enough for publishers and readers because genre fiction needs needs movements real ones or fake ones, it doesn't matter. Especially since there haven't been any movements for twenty years, and everyone knows that we need some great movement every twenty years the movements real ones or fake ones, it doesn't matter. Especially since there haven't been any movements for twenty years, and everyone knows that we need some great movement every twenty years the Golden Age Golden Age with changes in the vein of J. W. Campbell; with changes in the vein of J. W. Campbell; New Wave New Wave with struggles against the taboos, led by Michael Moorcock and Harlan Ellison; with struggles against the taboos, led by Michael Moorcock and Harlan Ellison; Cyberpunk Cyberpunk where science fiction cross-pollinated the old approaches with new ideas, a la William Gibson and Bruce Sterling; and, finally, where science fiction cross-pollinated the old approaches with new ideas, a la William Gibson and Bruce Sterling; and, finally, New Weird New Weird with its crossing genres and fighting spirit a la China Mieville. All movements need only to urge readers and writers toward change while containing strong personalities to start off. with its crossing genres and fighting spirit a la China Mieville. All movements need only to urge readers and writers toward change while containing strong personalities to start off.

So we have something like something like a movement and years pass. Now we can judge: Is it something like a real movement or not? And damned if the answer remains only "Maybe!" There are some strong arguments for both sides of this issue, and we all know them. But for me, as an editor (and forgive me for being so outspoken), there is only one important thing: It seems that the readers are grateful for the chance to read something fresh and new, something that isn't boring like ordinary fantastic literature. With authors like China Mieville, Ian R. MacLeod, Steph Swainston, K. J. Bishop, Jeff VanderMeer, Hal Duncan, or Jay Lake, we created an imprint (and two anthologies) full of new ideas and new attitudes. Maybe it's not really a movement and years pass. Now we can judge: Is it something like a real movement or not? And damned if the answer remains only "Maybe!" There are some strong arguments for both sides of this issue, and we all know them. But for me, as an editor (and forgive me for being so outspoken), there is only one important thing: It seems that the readers are grateful for the chance to read something fresh and new, something that isn't boring like ordinary fantastic literature. With authors like China Mieville, Ian R. MacLeod, Steph Swainston, K. J. Bishop, Jeff VanderMeer, Hal Duncan, or Jay Lake, we created an imprint (and two anthologies) full of new ideas and new attitudes. Maybe it's not really new new for fantastic literature, but it for fantastic literature, but it is is new for our readers. Yes, maybe we only new for our readers. Yes, maybe we only want want to see the connections between these authors and nothing like New Weird actually exists, but here in the Czech Republic we now have an imprint of great titles (all with covers by British art genius Edward Miller) and, for us, this is one big and unforgettable result of New Weird. to see the connections between these authors and nothing like New Weird actually exists, but here in the Czech Republic we now have an imprint of great titles (all with covers by British art genius Edward Miller) and, for us, this is one big and unforgettable result of New Weird.

For the first time we can publish very good fiction in one great book line, with the most successful titles helping the others. The result? All of the books in this line have sold well, meaning we can branch out and buy a few experimental titles as well. For the first time also we have something interesting enough to attract a foreign artist, and with his helpfulness we have created something really extraordinary in the "look" of the books. For the first time we, as a small foreign publisher, can compete on equal terms with the American market and publish not only commercial bestsellers, but really interesting titles too.

How do we pick books for our New Weird line? Every book must have something more than cross-genre leanings (science fiction, fantasy and horror). Every book must do more than attempt to create a story with the use of techniques more common to mainstream literature (like surreal visions for example). It must have a truly unique spirit and the desire to create something both good and new. These are qualities you see in the works of such New Weird predecessors like Gene Wolfe, Mervyn Peake, or M. J. Harrison. I realize that what I've detailed may still seem too general, especially since I have to convey them in a foreign language, but such difficulties are at the heart of the issues with the New Weird movement itself.

All of this success and interest has helped in other, tangential ways as well like creating a Czech edition of The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, for example. It has also forced other Czech publishing houses to make room for books by fresh new fantasy writers like Daniel Abraham, Elizabeth Bear, Tobias Buckell, Alan Campbell, Scott Lynch, Joe Abercrombie, David Marusek, Cory Doctorow, and Charles Stross. Perhaps even more importantly, we can also publish special editions of anthologies containing work by foreign newcomers who don't even have books published in the Czech Republic. for example. It has also forced other Czech publishing houses to make room for books by fresh new fantasy writers like Daniel Abraham, Elizabeth Bear, Tobias Buckell, Alan Campbell, Scott Lynch, Joe Abercrombie, David Marusek, Cory Doctorow, and Charles Stross. Perhaps even more importantly, we can also publish special editions of anthologies containing work by foreign newcomers who don't even have books published in the Czech Republic.

This is the only true answer to the question. For us, it isn't "Maybe!" For us, the New Weird movement exists. Maybe it doesn't exist in the United States or Great Britain, but we have our own version in Czech Republic we've created it to work for us.

Michael Haulica, editor-in-chief, Tritonic Publishing Group ROMANIA.

In addition to his work for Tritonic, Michael Haulica is editor-in-chief for the FICTION.RO FICTION.RO magazine and a decorated writer who was Romania's Man of the Year in Romanian SF&F for 2005. Haulica has had over fifty short stories and novellas published in Romanian, English, Danish, Croatian, Hungarian, Bulgarian, and Australian magazines. Haulica has also written several award-winning books while also writing columns on genre fiction for two of the most important Romanian literary magazines. magazine and a decorated writer who was Romania's Man of the Year in Romanian SF&F for 2005. Haulica has had over fifty short stories and novellas published in Romanian, English, Danish, Croatian, Hungarian, Bulgarian, and Australian magazines. Haulica has also written several award-winning books while also writing columns on genre fiction for two of the most important Romanian literary magazines.

"THE NEW WEIRD TREACHERY".

For me, New Weird is science fiction, fantasy, and horror mixed together, with a literary approach. That's why the New Weird authors transcend the genres and anger the "hardcore" fans, especially the fans of any genre who feel they and their devotion have been betrayed by these authors. In the meantime, New Weird authors seem to forge greater alliances with "mainstream readers" those who usually don't read genre fiction but do read these weird tales because they are extremely well-written, like any other kind of "high literature."

Therefore New Weird novels are the literary shuttles between two worlds: genre and mainstream. They form first contact expeditions, and, in some cases, the second and third contacts come soon after.

New Weird is also a literature for twenty-first-century readers written by the real twenty-first-century writers. This is true even if the history of New Weird has roots in the last hundred years in H. P. Lovecraft's works, H. G. Wells's The Island of Doctor Moreau (1896), The Island of Doctor Moreau (1896), Adolfo Bioy Casares's Adolfo Bioy Casares's La invencion de Morel (1940), La invencion de Morel (1940), and many other writers who lived with the consciousness that the world is a very weird place. and many other writers who lived with the consciousness that the world is a very weird place.

In Romania, New Weird has taken genre literature from the "genre ghetto" and given it to a larger audience. After I published China Mieville's New Crobuzon Trilogy, the first in a book line without Science Fiction, Fantasy, or Horror as a label on the covers (a trend continued with M. John Harrison's Viriconium Viriconium omnibus), many "mainstream readers" began to read our science fiction and fantasy books. After that, it was easier for us to publish and attract readers for Jeff VanderMeer's omnibus), many "mainstream readers" began to read our science fiction and fantasy books. After that, it was easier for us to publish and attract readers for Jeff VanderMeer's Veniss Underground Veniss Underground and K. J. Bishop's and K. J. Bishop's The Etched City. The Etched City. Readers who enjoyed this "first contact" then moved on to books by Geoff Ryman, Kelly Link or Roger Zelazny. Readers who enjoyed this "first contact" then moved on to books by Geoff Ryman, Kelly Link or Roger Zelazny.

This New Weird movement in Romania followed another Romanian movement in the mid-nineties. Readers and critics referred to me and other writers from this period as the "cyberpunk generation." However, it wasn't really "cyberpunk," in that the cyberpunk motives, attitudes, and technology were wedded to distinctly Romanian touches in terms of historical and mythic touchstones. Now, ten years later, I call it "technopunk fantasy." For example, we have created a weird being, the motocentaur, motocentaur, half-human, half-Harley Davidson (or any other motorcycle brand), writing fantasy like cyberpunk. These were good times for authors like Danut Ivanescu, Don Simon, Sebastian A. Corn, and me. half-human, half-Harley Davidson (or any other motorcycle brand), writing fantasy like cyberpunk. These were good times for authors like Danut Ivanescu, Don Simon, Sebastian A. Corn, and me.

At the moment, the nearest thing to a New Weird Romanian author is Costi Gurgu, who recently published a novel called Retetarium, Retetarium, about a fantasy world where the supreme goal in anyone's life is to be a Master of Cooking Recipe Receipts. The author lives now in Canada, and I hope he will be published soon in English. He is a unique addition to the field, in my opinion. about a fantasy world where the supreme goal in anyone's life is to be a Master of Cooking Recipe Receipts. The author lives now in Canada, and I hope he will be published soon in English. He is a unique addition to the field, in my opinion.

However, all in all, I don't think there's a difference between the Romanian approach and the general New Weird. We are all writers in the same world. Sometimes a Weird World. Like our novels.

Hannes Riffel, acquiring editor, Klett-Cotta GERMANY.

Hannes Riffel was born in the blackforest, Southwest Germany, in 1966 and has been running a SF/F/H bookshop for fifteen years now. He has translated, among others, Sean Stewart, Bruce Sterling, Hal Duncan, and John Clute and edited, again among others, German editions of stories and novels by Robert A. Heinlein, Theodore Sturgeon, Ursula K. Le Guin, JeffVanderMeer, Mark Z. Danielewski and Maureen F. McHugh. He is the editor of PANDORA PANDORA magazine and lives with his wife, the translator/editor Sara Riffel, in East Berlin. magazine and lives with his wife, the translator/editor Sara Riffel, in East Berlin.

"THERE IS NO NEW WEIRD".

We do not have anything like the New Weird in Germany. Europe may be culturally dominated by the United States, but that does not mean that we are on the same level of theoretical debate. Most of the important English-language writers get translated (China Mieville, Jeff VanderMeer, Hal Duncan), but there is little reflection going on about whether they are different and in what way. One of the laudable exceptions is Ralf Reiter, whose essays in the Heyne SF Jahrbuch display a sharp eye for literary evolution, and some articles published in Franz Rottensteiner's Quarber Merkur.

This may have something to do with why, for me, the New Weird is not a certain form or school school of literature, but a gut feeling. As a bookseller and genre editor I have to read so much cliche fiction, that every time I discover something special, something that goes against the grain, the butterflies in my stomach go wild. It may be a useful description that those butterflies buzz around the work of China Mieville, and that they get excited in a certain way while I read Jeff VanderMeer, Steph Swainston or Hal Duncan. But they get excited as well when I read Elizabeth Hand or Kelly Link, and I would not consider those two ladies as being part of any kind of New Weird. of literature, but a gut feeling. As a bookseller and genre editor I have to read so much cliche fiction, that every time I discover something special, something that goes against the grain, the butterflies in my stomach go wild. It may be a useful description that those butterflies buzz around the work of China Mieville, and that they get excited in a certain way while I read Jeff VanderMeer, Steph Swainston or Hal Duncan. But they get excited as well when I read Elizabeth Hand or Kelly Link, and I would not consider those two ladies as being part of any kind of New Weird.

To be honest, I never thought New Weird existed at all. I felt the same way about Cyberpunk: some guys and gals wrote stuff that was different, referenced from each other, broke rules in a way that at least from the outside looked similar. But in the end Cyberpunk is only useful to highlight a certain development in the history of Science Fiction. We can talk or write about the way Snow Crash Snow Crash took its password from took its password from Neuromancer, Accelerando Neuromancer, Accelerando from from Snow Crash, Snow Crash, and so on. and so on.

Names like New Weird and Cyberpunk are just that: names. As a bookseller I try to find out what people like and get them turned on to books of the same ilk which is mostly like set theory, where you have to find out what goes together. To my mind naming things just pigeonholes them, and no one wants that to happen with a story or a book they've written. As I do not earn my money writing academic papers (although I've taught at university, so I know what it's all about), I try to stay away from compartmentalizing things.

Even if New Weird does exist, from a publisher's standpoint, it isn't healthy in Germany. Mieville does not sell too well here, and the fact that he's published by a mass market house with no record of quality translations does not help either. He gets some recognition from fans, and there's some interest in possible predecessors like Gormenghast Gormenghast or or Viriconium. Viriconium. But, all in all, editors like me still have to go out on a very long limb to publish people like VanderMeer or Duncan. Germany has a tradition of not recognizing fantastic literature as such if it is labeled high literature. Books published by major literary houses, from Garcia Marquez to Susanna Clarke, are widely praised, but not because of their opposition to realism. Right now I am ushering But, all in all, editors like me still have to go out on a very long limb to publish people like VanderMeer or Duncan. Germany has a tradition of not recognizing fantastic literature as such if it is labeled high literature. Books published by major literary houses, from Garcia Marquez to Susanna Clarke, are widely praised, but not because of their opposition to realism. Right now I am ushering House of Leaves House of Leaves into print, and we are doing our best not to market it as horror, god forbid! This is, of course, a postmodern novel which only makes use into print, and we are doing our best not to market it as horror, god forbid! This is, of course, a postmodern novel which only makes use of.you know what. of.you know what.

As for homegrown talent that might buy in to the New Weird tradition, there seems to be none in the German language. As much as science fiction seems to be slowly reaching the same level as in the United States of the 1960s, the writers of fantasy stick so close to Tolkien you can hear their orkish ears grind, while the darker writers still chew up Lovecraft. I may have missed someone out of the mainstream, and I do not want to be unjust; but even the better story writers Malte Sembten, Michael Siefener, Boris Koch have not yet spread their wings and left the shadow of tradition. Hopefully, someday they will. . . .

Jukka Halme, freelance editor and critic FINLAND.

Jukka Halme has been active in Finnish fandom for many years, and headed up the organization ofFinncon 2006. In addition to writing for many publications, he recently edited an anthology of primarily American and English "New Weird" writers called New Weird? Halme appears regularly in TAHTIVAELTAJA, TAHTIVAELTAJA, one ofFinland's finest genre publications. one ofFinland's finest genre publications.

"BLURRING THE LINES".

In my 2006 anthology titled Uuskummaa? (New Weird?) Uuskummaa? (New Weird?) published by Kirjava, I wrote the following definition of New Weird in the introduction: published by Kirjava, I wrote the following definition of New Weird in the introduction: New Weird is a form of speculative fiction that tries to blur the borders between various genres (science fiction, fantasy, horror, mainstream, etc.) while aiming for a more literate style of writing.. It is an idea of fresh fantasy, sharing common ideas about mixing together various genres, politics, freedom from the cliches, and with an overwhelming tendency to play with the form. It wants to create something new, both linguistically and literally. It is not a movement per se, since when a movement takes shape it establishes itself, stops moving and thus changes into something academic and New Weird stands for Change. It needs constant interaction between the Reader and the Writer as well as bold, new ideas.

How would my answer change today? Not by much. I like the idea of a loose literary "movement" that isn't too formulaic and set in stone. Therefore, no manifesto, even though it might be fun to have one, but more like general guidelines. I like New Weird as a tool with which to bind together great stories that share originality and are spontaneously different from anything else before written.

I'm not sure when the idea of this whole new fantasy that is more literary inclined, more daring and/or genre-free, came about, but I do remember that in early 2001 the genre fan and writer Gabe Chouinard wrote something about a revolution that was about to happen in the field of SF and fantasy. He called it the Next Wave and I realised I had been feeling the same rumblings for a while as well. It took me a few years to gather my thoughts, but in the end I was thinking that there isn't necessarily a single next Wave hitting the field, but waves. waves. So many interesting old and new writers were doing en masse what probably many had been doing all the time alone, thus forming something that could be construed as a movement, like New Weird. A flood of great works came out during that time: So many interesting old and new writers were doing en masse what probably many had been doing all the time alone, thus forming something that could be construed as a movement, like New Weird. A flood of great works came out during that time: Perdido Street Station, Light, City of Saints and Madmen, The Etched City, The Physiognomy, Stranger Things Happen, Perdido Street Station, Light, City of Saints and Madmen, The Etched City, The Physiognomy, Stranger Things Happen, etc. And this "movement" is ongoing, if I think of New Weird as something that combines new, weird, innovative, ground-breaking, and border-breaking, well-written fantastic fiction for example, Steph Swainston, Hal Duncan, Theodora Goss, Jay Lake, Nick Mamatas, Holly Phillips, M. Rickert, Sonya Taaffe, and Whoever-Else. Are they writing New Weird? Hell if I know, but I'd like to think so. Do new writers still break barriers? Do they write about important things, with style and verve and gusto? I would be seriously disappointed if not. etc. And this "movement" is ongoing, if I think of New Weird as something that combines new, weird, innovative, ground-breaking, and border-breaking, well-written fantastic fiction for example, Steph Swainston, Hal Duncan, Theodora Goss, Jay Lake, Nick Mamatas, Holly Phillips, M. Rickert, Sonya Taaffe, and Whoever-Else. Are they writing New Weird? Hell if I know, but I'd like to think so. Do new writers still break barriers? Do they write about important things, with style and verve and gusto? I would be seriously disappointed if not.

Are these writers creating, based on a common set of predecessors? To some extent, yes.

Personally, I like to think that Mervyn Peake is The Predecessor. Gormenghast, Gormenghast, that brilliant baroque fantasy, combines the Weird from that brilliant baroque fantasy, combines the Weird from Weird Tales Weird Tales with absolute mastery of the language. One could argue about the importance of the original with absolute mastery of the language. One could argue about the importance of the original Weird Tales Weird Tales authors like Lovecraft and the lot, or David Lindsay and Lord Dunsany but to me the first among equals is Peake. He combines everything I see as New Weird in authors like Lovecraft and the lot, or David Lindsay and Lord Dunsany but to me the first among equals is Peake. He combines everything I see as New Weird in Gormenghast, Gormenghast, especially with the first two parts. In a better world, Peake would be just as strong a fantasy-father in terms of sales as Tolkien. especially with the first two parts. In a better world, Peake would be just as strong a fantasy-father in terms of sales as Tolkien.

As for the impact of New Weird, no one can say for certain, but I hope it has has had an impact in the sense that it has brought more visibility to the writers labelled as such, preferably in a positive way. I think it has also had some level of influence on, for example, book design, with weirder and more original art replacing standard science fiction/ fantasy images. I may be totally wrong here, but also I have this feeling that there hasn't been truly a proper appreciation for more literary fantasy before, other than with the exceptional works of the field. Would it be wrong to say that New Weird has changed the profile of fantasy? Could New Weird be used as a vehicle for marketing this Really Good Fantasy? Should one dismiss New Weird as a subgenre and just use it as a marketing tool for this Really Good Stuff? had an impact in the sense that it has brought more visibility to the writers labelled as such, preferably in a positive way. I think it has also had some level of influence on, for example, book design, with weirder and more original art replacing standard science fiction/ fantasy images. I may be totally wrong here, but also I have this feeling that there hasn't been truly a proper appreciation for more literary fantasy before, other than with the exceptional works of the field. Would it be wrong to say that New Weird has changed the profile of fantasy? Could New Weird be used as a vehicle for marketing this Really Good Fantasy? Should one dismiss New Weird as a subgenre and just use it as a marketing tool for this Really Good Stuff?

In Finland, the impact has been moderate in terms of author popularity. Looking back for the past few years, nearly everything in genre fiction that could be described as New Weird has come from the small presses, including my own part of the "revolution": Jeff VanderMeer, Jonathan Carroll, Stepan Chapman, M. John Harrison, you're small press here, baby! (This seems to parallel the trend in the United States, in terms of the most innovative work coming from independent publishers like Small Beer, Subterranean, Ministry of Whimsy, Prime, through venues such as Leviathan, Lady Churchill's Rosebud Wristlet, Electric Velocipede Leviathan, Lady Churchill's Rosebud Wristlet, Electric Velocipede and and Fantasy, Fantasy, just to name a few.) just to name a few.) However, in terms of an explosion of "New Weirdish" Finnish writing, a lot of the Finnish adult fantasy could well be described as New Weird: Leena Krohn, Johanna Sinisalo, Pasi I. Jaaskelainen, Anne Leinonen and so on. There is a definite commonality of authors willing to break those shackling borderlines, and use the abundant possibilities of our own language in as varied and as rich a way as possible while seeking out new ideas, new taboos, and new territory. The same can be also said about writers for children and young adults, like Jukka Laajarinne and Sari Peltoniemi among others, who are constantly breaking the mould and creating something new and well, again weird.

Interestingly, a local literary movement rather like NewWeird is being used as a label for works that aren't "really" SF and fantasy, but realism-fantasy ("reaalifantasia"). This doesn't translate well at all, as realism-fantasy definitely isn't about being Real Fantasy, but more about (and I'm paraphrasing here): "genre-free writing, that flows between mimesis and fantasy; only the ratio of how much mimesis or fantasy there is, varies." A bit like New Weird, I think, since they add: "Realism-fantasy operates strongly in the everyday reality, but is not afraid to use all those methods that are unfamiliar to Finnish realistic writers, such as magic realism, science fiction, fantasy, psychological thrillers, detective stories etc."

Finnish fiction in general tends to have a very strong flavour of its own, with deep-rooted distrust for things fantastical, unless they derive from the local mythology and folklore. Johanna Sinisalo's Finlandia Award-winning novel Troll: A Love Story Troll: A Love Story dabbles there, New Weirdishly, between various genres and styles, but staying still very much Finnish. dabbles there, New Weirdishly, between various genres and styles, but staying still very much Finnish.

New Weird as I see it out there is similar but different from our domestic form. Our New Weird is possibly a bit more toned down, more rooted into our Finnishness.

Konrad Walewski, acquiring editor, translator, scholar, and anthologist POLAND.

Konrad Walewski is a Polish scholar, specializing in Anglophone imaginative literature, literary critic, translator, anthologist, and, most recently, the editor-in-chief of the Polish edition of THE MAGAZINE OF FANTASY & SCIENCE FICTION. THE MAGAZINE OF FANTASY & SCIENCE FICTION. He received an M.A. in English Studies from Maria Curie-Sklodowska University in Lublin, Poland. For the last five years he taught various courses on American literature at the American Studies Center, Warsaw University, Warsaw, Poland. He has translated into Polish, novels and short stories by such authors as Pat Cadigan, John Crowley, Kelly Link, and many others. Since 2005 he has been editing annually the anthology of foreign imaginative fiction entitled He received an M.A. in English Studies from Maria Curie-Sklodowska University in Lublin, Poland. For the last five years he taught various courses on American literature at the American Studies Center, Warsaw University, Warsaw, Poland. He has translated into Polish, novels and short stories by such authors as Pat Cadigan, John Crowley, Kelly Link, and many others. Since 2005 he has been editing annually the anthology of foreign imaginative fiction entitled KROKI w NIEZNANE (STEPS INTO THE UNKNOWN). KROKI w NIEZNANE (STEPS INTO THE UNKNOWN). It is the continuation of the cult anthology series under this name edited by the Polish translator and editor Lech Jqczmyk and published back in the 1970s, which at that time was perhaps the only book-form presentation of Western science fiction in communist Poland. It is the continuation of the cult anthology series under this name edited by the Polish translator and editor Lech Jqczmyk and published back in the 1970s, which at that time was perhaps the only book-form presentation of Western science fiction in communist Poland.