Extrait :
Rhys: I mentioned on Facebook that I was interviewing you and I asked if anyone had any questions for you. The first response was from Jim Steel: "What does he think of the return of steampunk and is he impressed by any of it?" and the second was from Danny O'Dare: "Is Steampunk past its sell-by date? Indeed, is it reactionary?" Lots of concern and interest in 'steampunk'. Care to answer?
Paul Di Filippo : I have of course naturally been following the evolution of steampunk from a minor niche in the SF world to a global lifestyle option with interest, given my early work in and affection for the subgenre. I once thought I understood the literary impulses behind steampunk pretty well--exciting milieus for adventures unobtainable in modern times; exploration of roots of our present dilemma; etc, etc--but now they have been so blended with cosplay and "maker" motivations, that I can no more unpack the current phenomenon than I could unriddle the weird and complex appeal of Lady Gaga or Justin Bieber. I have also been following the arguments of folks such as Charles Stross who find any evocation of earlier, less enlightened times as tacit endorsement of oppression. I don't believe that steampunk has to mirror reactionary beliefs by its very nature, nor that depicting a thing is to endorse it. I can agree with Stross and others that the bandwagon effect has produced lots of half-assed and shallow stuff. But this does not rule out future greatness.
As for myself, I am always threatening to write my great "horsepower SF" novel starring Bishop Berkeley, The Philosopher's Star. Please be patient.