Interview with China Miéville on LiteraryMinded

Thanks to the wonderful Angela Meyer a.k.a. LiteraryMinded, in September I was lucky enough to join her in a fancy hotel room to interview speculative fiction writer and socialist, China Miéville. As a lot of you might know, I’m a big fan of his work and consider myself influenced by him a great deal. Given I’m the only person that writes under the genre ‘Marxist horror,’ Miéville is probably the closest to me in terms of style, sometimes describing his writing as ‘New Weird’ though perhaps he’s a much subtler in his politics.

The interview is published in the Crikey blog, LiteraryMinded in two parts.

Part One

…I like trying to poke at what makes London different than Paris, different than Sydney, different than New York, you know. There’s nothing terribly unusual about loving different cities and writers liking cities but I do like big cities and every time I come to a city – you almost try and get a kind of mouth feel for it, you know, and it’s amazing how quickly it happens. You can get out of the plane and spend two minutes walking through a city you’ve never been to before and you can feel that it feels different from the last one you were at and you’re like okay, what is that? Trying to put words to that. In a way it’s trying to put words to that sense of the specificity of place that I hope is what you’re talking about – it’s very much trying to express that. It’s quite ineffable.

Part Two

Y’no people have talked about this before and to me, it’s kind of a non-issue. I mean there is a tradition amongst some on the left of having a rather fallacious notion of what culture is and how it works and what fiction is, and so you get this kind of pious and unconvincing sense of, y’no, ‘if you are a socialist you shouldn’t…’ or whatever, and I think – it’s not a job recruitment form, it’s a novel, it’s doing a different thing. I’m not asking you to agree with him. I’m not asking you to agree with his choice of job, I’m not asking you to agree with a single decision he makes in the entire book.

Hypocritical Taboos and the Banning of LA Zombie

The Age is running a story this morning around the banning of zombie film LA Zombie mostly on the basis of the ‘sexual content’ of the film. This is outrageous, but beyond just the problem of censorship it’s a clear example of how society views sex as more offensive than violence.

LA Zombie

by ARNO ROCA

The film was banned for its sexual content and was described as ‘gay zombie porn’ because the main character walks around looking for dead bodies and gay sex, though the penises in the film are meant to be clearly fake and a lot of it happens off screen.

It seems that sex, and particularly gay sex, is seen as this absurd taboo in our deeply conservative society which reeks of hypocrisy given all of the violence that gets through (not that I’m for censoring violent films) and not to mention the violence the Australian state perpetrates overseas.

The director, Bruce LaBruce, said that “they pass so many mainstream films that have the most extreme violence, with brutal treatment towards women, and torture and dismemberment, but because they didn’t show a penis, they can be screened with impunity.”

I do wonder if the zombie was looking around for straight sex whether or not that film would’ve been banned. Sexism and the objectification of women in the media is seen as perfectly fine and I can think of many movies, with no artistic merit, that are just frat boy outlets for sexist fantasies.

So the taboo around sex doesn’t extend to these frat boy movies, just movies that might talk about the reality of people’s sex lives and contradict norms, such as homosexual sex and teenage sex.

LaBruce points out that LA Zombie is a metaphor for healing with the zombies coming back to life. This film sounds like it has a strong message far deeper than the media will admit so it’s a real travesty that this film is being censored.