Having taken on the task of learning Italian over these past two years, I've found language has taken on even deeper meaning foo me.  For any writer, words are like air or water; they are a vital component to one's daily life.  Words represent communication, art, emotion, intelligence, and release.  Learning a new language adds a whole new set of words to one's palate, but it also adds a greater dimension to the way one thinks about coloquial speach, word choice, and even grammar.

Learning to speak a foreign language forces one to slow down and really think about what s/he wants to say--and why one chooses to say it one way, and not another.  As a writer, one with a whirlwind of words dancing around in my head at any given time, I think I took for granted the ease in which I could find just the right word.  I found that, when speaking in Italian, I had to search for that word a little longer.  I had to think about my use of tense.  It makes me think even more about the words I use more regularly.

Learning a foreign language has also offered some fun insight on the use of coloquial language and swear words.  One sees one'e coloquial language change over the years, with old words going obsolite and new words taking their place (when I was little, "totally," "rad," and "gag me" were common in coloquial speech in California, but more recently, words like "phat" and "dope" would be better received).  When I think about the language cautions I learned regarding Italian swear words, I couldn't help but think about what makes a swear word; I concluded that social acceptance of a word's symbolic value is all that makes any word what it is.  Strange, though, how we decide some words are dirty and others are sophisticated--and they are because we agree they are.

I wish the U.S. had more dual emersion gradeschools, as I consider how differently I would view words now, had I learned a second language back when I was a child.  I find it amazing that we don't teach our young multiple languages, as great as the benefits would be.

Wells, Vonnegut, and many others wrote it.  The canonical literature list includes it.  It is the strongest possible way to write social commentary--and yet, here in the contemporary U.S., there seems to place for it.  The typical reader calls it "depressing."  Everyone seems to want that happy ending.  I sympathize with those who want a "happily ever after" in all thay they read, really I do; however, happy endings to not affect change.  They do not reflect the realities of life and society.  "Happily ever after," when it all comes down to it, only exists in fairy tales.  Yes, there is a place for it--but there is also a place for change, for gritty reality, and for statements about the complacency in society.

Many of my works break against the current trends, in the belief that mainstream fiction is primed once more for speculative, more intellectually stimulating works.  My novels are for an audience that is ready to be shocked, to be intrigued, and to be made to think about the world in a different way.  Yes, this can be depressing at times, but it is also necessary.  Without a focus on the negative, we cannot focus on creating the positive.  Without dystopia, all that remains is complacency.

So, what do you think?  Is America ready for something new and different?  Is America ready to think?  Ready to face reality?  Ready for change?  I think so ... but I'm interested in what you have to say about it.