It Would Be Nice If Something Happened

Apparently, I'm becoming a picky reader in my old age.  Two years ago I was so bold as to ask really good authors to write something that resembled an ending in their works. And here I am now, wanting something to happen in a novel; just a bit of action.

I've said my bit about Among Others, and others seem to agree that nothing happened.  Now, I'm reading The Ocean at the End of the Lane and I find myself reading another novel in which nothing is happening.  I'm getting a bit frustrated...

Added to which I've hit my limit for items checked out from the library at one time (Who knew there was a limit!  Why is there a limit?!).  I almost bought everything on my Amazon wish list, which would have ushered me into insolvency, in hopes of there being one book in which stuff happened as I was too worn out to actually 'shop.'  I'm too worn out to shop, people!

Hell, I'm tempted to go pick up my paperback collection of David Gemmell stuff only because I know stuff happens in those books (even if I have them memorized and even if I'm not sure I could bring myself to read again).

Half way through Gormenghast--nothing is happening...
Half way through The Line Between--nothing is happening...
Halfway through The Ocean at the End of the Lane--nothing is happening...

Thank God for Ted Hughes and Crow; cause it's awesome.  (Thanks for the recommendation Jo Walton.)

What ever will I complain about next?  

Kindling the Fire

Don't worry; I haven't given up books for an e-reader.  I really wanted to post a book commentary this weekend, but I needed to better organize my thoughts before doing so.    Graceling by Kristin Cashore is phenomenal.  Fire, by the same author and set in the same world, is awful.

The overwhelming amount of what I initially wrote concerning this book was bad and it's not that I have an aversion to posting something negative only I feel such comments need to be put into perspective and supported to be valid in any way.  So since I'm not trying to pass this informal post off as commentary I can be as horrible as the book, right?  

Hmmm… Where to start?

Fire is about a woman's period.  Or more specifically a woman's bleeding.  (The author would have us believe that to say 'period' or a host of other phrases would somehow allow the reader to forget the whole 'bleeding' part.  Fire, the character bleeds a lot.  It's not a subtle bit of imagery.)    

I could stop here.  No, seriously; there really isn't much more to the story.  

Fire is also about how women are different from men, because they have a period and their period makes them different and this fundamental difference between men and women is women having a period.  Or 'bleeding' as Cashore is fond of saying.  'Bleeding'  That wasn't redundant was it?  If so, imagine the hell I was in reading 460 plus pages… 

Not only do women have periods and bleed which is awful because you see periods and bleeding are unique to women but this period of bleeding time makes their life more difficult and overall more difficult than a mans: much harder and unaccommodating.  In reading Fire we see that women's lives are far more strenuous and limited than men's because they have a period and bleed or so the redundancy department of departmental redundancy has redundantly informed me.  However, women can overcome this difficulty and not have their lives' governed by their period and bleeding and even though their lives are significantly harder than a man's their rewards can be greater than a man's, perhaps due to their biological bleeding plight.  

The novel kinda made me feel like there was some mysterious silver lining to my being a hardcore dyslectic.  Needless to say; FAIL! 

I wish I could say all that was snark and sarcasm but really, it's not.  I knew at the outset of trying to pre-vent all of my forthcoming commentary venom that I would do so uselessly.  I won't have nice things to say about this book no matter how much I try to be professional (which I'm not) or decent (of which I show occasional sparks) toward the novel.  

I'm not sure if Fire is the worst thing I've read this year--I'm still debating who to select for the meager end of the year dubious honor--but if I could go back an unread any one book I've read, not only this year but in my life, it would be this one.  

I almost put this book down; as in every-other-god-damned-page, I almost put this book down.  I did pick up an excellent short story collection to help get me through.  (Every ten pages read meant I could read a new short story i.e. something good.  More to come on that collection later.)  Taking notes on Fire was easy, so much material to work with, getting through it was a Pyrrhic victory to say the least.  Why did I finish the book?  Why did I read it?  

Because...  Because I'm an idiot and I loved her first book so much.    

Kristin Cashore is amazing.  Read Graceling.  Now.  Go!  

Avoid having your eyes bleed until they explode by reading Fire I mean Fire.  More to follow soon.  

The Absurdity of my Anger

So I've moved.  It happens.  Not particularly happy about it but I'm over it.  New county; new library; so I need a new library card.  I stop in today at the local branch, which is part of the Atlanta-Fulton County system, which is phenomenal all things considered, only to be told that they are making-over their check out system and they can't issue any new library cards for at least a week.

"It will be at least a week.  Perhaps ten days.  Call before you come back."

"Okay.  So what can we do right now; as a temporary fix?" I ask with my stack of books on the counter between us.  She gives me a hopeless stare but can't hold my gaze.  I don't get angry and I don't act a fool (I was tempted).  I just left.  That was all I could do.

It's irrational that I should be angry in this situation only because of how many unread books I have (that was the first box unpacked in the new place).  But I don't own what I want to read right now.  

I'm a bit frustrated to say the least.  I don't know what I'll sit down and crack open in a few moments; I'm sure it will be good and I'll enjoy it (optimism is so foreign to me).  But I still want those books I had to leave at the library.

Now.  

Unrelated to anything, did anyone else see the article in the Saturday/Sunday edition of the Wall Street Journal in the review section called 'My 6,128 Favorite Books' ?  Because that was awesome.

Get your music out of my fiction

I try so hard to keep real life out of blogging, but I can't hold back any longer.  I'm not a musicologist nor do I have a DMA.  A meager bachelor's and master's degree in piano performance.  Outside of a very high proficiency in being able to play the instrument I also had to take many classes that I will sum up as "How western classical music came to be, and how it works." 

Good writers do research on the topics they choose to write about.  If your main character is a surgeon and you plan on talking about surgery in the book, you have to write convincingly enough as to be realistic to any surgeons who enjoys fiction and may pick up your book.  It's a matter of credibility, hence the research.  

Music seems to occupy a unique space when it comes to writers: it's not so esoteric as surgery--after all who hasn't had piano lessons and if you can play open chords on the guitar then yes, you can perform damn-near every song by Bob Dylan--but the auto-didactics armed with a superficial amount of knowledge or those who took 'singing lessons' from that old lady in the church choir are really starting to get on my nerves.  I wish, I truly wish, I had kept a log of all the offenders I've come across in the past year's worth of reading.

Perhaps it is because music is such a basic and integral part in so many peoples lives, but whatever the reasons, far too many authors indulge in overwrought, self-indulgent, and more often than not, erroneous analogies and metaphors that may sound nice and poetic, but to one who knows can kill the prose and story being told faster than the sixteenth notes of an Allegro or faster Chopin etude.  (See?  Even when a likeness if properly made, it's still obnoxious… or at least to me it is.)

I'm happy that so many writers, at least in my reading, seem to make mention of sonata allegro form, rondeau, or a baroque French overture, but if you should feel the need to dwell on these topics make sure you are studying up on the matter to the same degree you would if you were talking about what it takes to get a space shuttle into orbit and not merely relying on those band or orchestral lessons from seventh grade.  

I think I'll keep my log of offending writers ( and critics and bloggers ) in my head as to not have a concrete list of negativity.  The words already printed can't be taken back but there is hope for new writers!   Heed my words!  Know what you are talking about before you commit the crime of ignorance in your novel.  Such a crime not only makes me mildly angry, but also speaks to your quality as a writer.  So next time you are feeling the urge to make an analogy about your characters in fugue or hexachordal combinatoriality, unless you really know what you're talking about; don't.   

A Lament for the Oft Maligned Ignoble Art of Profanity

Strange as it may sound, I'm certain that I'm not the first to express the title sentiment. What happened? How did swearing in the English language fall to it's current state and how can it ever be made to recover? In today's English we have a fist full of 'swear' words with hundreds of variants; and that's it. Not only does this overuse of so precious few words limit us in our variety of speech, but the fact that no one digs down for that eternally creative human spirit that can achieve anything when it comes to swearing is really very sad.

Ever read Shōgun? Now there's some profanity; it gives new meaning to the phrase, 'swearing like a drunken sailor,' cause damn, those sailors can swear. (I just proved my point; 'damn' doesn't even register as a swear word to anyone.) I've been plowing through Aurturo Pérez-Reverte's Captain Alatriste series and he's so good at period cussing I had to pause the first few times I came across certain phrases. (e.g. 'S Blood! Short for Christ Blood!) Pérez-Reverte is hardly afraid of an f-bomb and when it's dropped, it hits hard. The effect is strengthened as no one word or phrase is overused as to become common place: less is more, by cutting back we can make our currently 'casual' swearing have the impact it should. It's a matter of how we swear in between f-bombs.

I'm just now getting around to the second season of The Boondocks, and there is some truly inspired material there, but it makes me sad to think this material is only used for comedic effect and will more than likely never find it's way into the argot of the equivalent of today's foul mouth sailors.

I'm taking a vow; a pledge for the rest of the year. I will wash my mouth out with soap should I allow myself fall back on the crutches of modern profanity in lieu of taking a second to think of something mildly original. I expect I'll over shoot my aims in the beginning as it will be new to me. The learning curve is steep, but the gains are greater still. I'm on a mission to expand the modern vernacular. Why would I burden myself with such an undertaking? Because if there is ever a time when words should mean something to speaker and all parties listening surely such a time is at it's peak when people feel the need for profanity.

Anyone else up to the challenge?

Fan Involvement in the Creative Process

I'm going to tread over thinly veiled ice in what's to follow so if you choose to keep reading, walk softly. There's a growing trend of author interaction with their fans that seems to be the new way of things in publishing. It's good, and for the most part, free marketing. On the whole I don't have a problem with it. Until it comes to fan interaction with an author.

To what degree do writer's need to listen to the voice of their fans? Readers are entitled to their opinions, and they often list all the things they want to see included in a writer's next story. They dictate what they see as a writer's strengths and weaknesses and what they should focus on in their writing. I personally don't think there is any obligation on the writer's part to listen to what is said and there should be no expectation from reader's that their opinions are being given any consideration.

This seems to be crossing a line to me. A writer is entitled to writer whatever story they want. Sometimes they get lucky and other people like it, sometimes not. I can only hope author's take these fan suggestions with a boulder-sized grain of salt, because I don't want to read published fan fiction crafted by the pen of, "Author X."

Fan service is just that. It does not need to be bound and published by Simon and Schuster. Writers, and to expand on the definition of the word, "artist" don't do their work for their fans. Does anyone really think that John Irvine cared if people read or liked Until I Find you? Sure, his feelings may have been hurt if it got crappy reviews and the book bombed at retail, but it was a book that he--as the creator--had to get off his chest and he did so to satisfy himself. The same is true for Beethoven or Michangelo or any other, 'artist' of your choosing.

I once read a book by my favorite author and hated it. From start to finish, I didn't have anything positive to say. It was because of what I deemed a bad book from a writer that I thought so highly of and expected so much from that led me to think, "I can do better than this," and start writing myself.

Input is one thing, and well made suggestions/criticisms are always appreciated, but to see some of the commentary today on author websites, "You betrayed me!" and so on is nauseating. I don't think fans can be betrayed; let down, sure but that's the extent of it. No writer is obligated to write works that will please fans of their previous efforts. (Don't even get me started on pseudonyms.) It's not as if there aren't a few thousand other books published in a year that you might enjoy, times the thousands of other books for all the previous years that publishing has been around.

It seems I've adopted my 'rant' voice. Perhaps that what is to come in the internet age: an endless cycle of complaints in varying degrees of expression.

Shaking hands and signing books at a reading is all well and good, but I don't think that any creative process is collaborative, and so I do get a little bit nervous when see running commentary from a writer to their fans. It seems to me if you don't want to read a story that's written there's plenty of other material out there that may be of interest to you. And if we lived in a different age, a time long out of human memory know as, 'twenty years ago', complainers wouldn't even have had a vehicle to voice their disgust.

Oh, wait a minute… I guess that last bit goes for me too.

A wasted opportunity

So I watched It Might Get Loud the other day. The title may well be the best thing about the film. It is supposed to be a history of the electric guitar told by three rock guitarist of different generations. Perhaps it succeeded on this front, but not really in my eyes.

Even if it did, it could have been so much more. There can be conflict in a documentary and there can be expression; only don't look for them in this film. I felt they asked Jimi Page, The Edge, and Jack White to 'interview' each other, rather than have someone with a storytelling agenda press forward with certain issues. It's not exactly as if any of the three are journalist...

The best underused content to me was Page saying--out loud-- "Pop music is rubbish," and then all parties involved let a comment like that die... even the lead guitarist from a 'pop band' like U2.

It could have been so much more.

Congratulations on your Wedding! Thanks for ruining my weekend…

Yeah. That’s right. I took it there.

I was going to make up a similar hypothetical situation for the sake of objectivity but let us get straight to the heart of the matter. Some friends of yours--or perhaps only friends of your significant other--are getting married. Isn’t that nice? They are getting married on Sunday at two in the afternoon. The wedding is in Savannah, since Savannah is a beautiful city; not that anyone is from Savannah. Savannah is four hours away from where you are and there is a ‘party type thing’ on Friday night. You work Friday. Oh and there is a rehearsal dinner on Saturday and then the real shebang on Sunday.

Your whole weekend gone, shot, done. There is nothing I hate more than to have my weekends planned out for me ahead of time. I don’t exactly have a lot of spontaneity in my Monday-Friday 10:00-6:00 workweek so the last thing I want is to know everything that is going to happen on the weekend spelled out in explicit detail come Tuesday, or worse still two months ahead of time by way of wedding invitation.

Two more people are joining in marital bliss, eternally bound to each other by way of unexplainable happiness and legality and your weekend--the last bastion of true freedom for today’s working man--is over. You have to drive four hours back home and go to work in the morning.

How is this a polite gesture to ask people to undertake? I understand there are wedding invitations that are sent to certain people with no expectation of that person actually showing up but but what about the people that do show up? How are they reimbursed for their pain. Lost time can’t be made up for last I checked. Furthermore, it’s not only weddings; any national holidays that occur during the work week and result with me not having to go to work are even more treasured than a standard weekend. Don’t mess it up for me… Plan you bar-be-que for Saturday or Sunday. There has to be someone else out there who understands what I’m saying here.

All people that wish to be married should elope. At bare minimum put your wedding on a Monday (assuming it’s not a national holiday). Everyone hates Mondays. Monday hatred is a standby of solidarity among the common man; an instant point of bonding. Instead taking up my whole weekend why not take up three days of my work week that I won’t mind? Then I would actually enjoy the whole venture. If I have to take off Monday-Wednesday it is basically a vacation I don’t want to go one; but vacation nonetheless. This way I will enjoy myself especially if you wedding followings the rules of good form and has an open bar. The return trip home Wednesday evening will be a good one. Followed by two days of work and then a nice relaxing weekend.

I wish everyone well in there personal pursuit of happiness, but if you can; try and make sure it doesn’t intrude on mine.

And to anyone feeling self-conscious out there: I'm not talking about you.

Short Story Posers

I forgot to mention that I do not like novel excerpts posing as short stories. I’ve come across a few and regardless of the writing; they tend to make me angry.

There is no background so the characters and situations make little to no impression and furthermore, I don’t know where the story is going. This inability to gain momentum or even have a basis of understanding for static situations makes it very difficult to connect with the story. The few novel excerpts that I’ve come across in collections and anthologies were well written but ultimately uninteresting as it is impossible to tell what the reader was supposed to take away from the excerpt.

Obviously an excerpt isn’t supposed to stand on its own and make complete sense… because it’s an excerpt. If the goal is to generate enough interest to make me want to read the book then why wasn’t I given the beginning of the book, i.e. the prologue or first chapter? This is nothing more than what many a literary agent has complained about regarding submissions from potential clients.

“Please send a query letter, synopsis and the first fifty pages.” The latter of these stipulations only had to be spelled out in recent times to the best of my understanding as some new writers feel their best efforts are pages ninety-seven to one hundred and three, and wanting to put their best foot forward that is the material they submit. Agents rightfully complain that if the beginning isn’t of a certain quality then no one will stick around to page ninety-seven and that when starting at page ninety-seven they have no clue what’s going on making it near impossible to gauge interest.

With this in mind why is it okay for an editor to publish a novel excerpt as a short story? Is it not a disservice to the reader and the author? To those who feel that the short story and the novel are completely different literary entities, how does publication of a novel excerpt as a short story make you feel?

The threat of accountability

We’ve all been on both sides of this: the offender and the offended.  You’re at work; someone comes in or calls and asks you to do something.  Before they leave/hang up, they throw out a seemingly harmless question: “And your name please?”  Depending on your means of conversation there is only one correct way to respond.  If on the phone, hang up.  If you are talking in person, punch them in the face.  

It is always stated as a casual closing comment, one that precedes “Goodbye” or “Have a nice day.”   However it is anything but casual and far from indifferent.  When that question is asked, you are being called out.  Even if you’ve only know the person you are talking to for a few seconds your character is impugned and the, assume-you’re-dealing-with-a-douchebag-until-proven-otherwise mentality is put in full effect.  

Nobody likes being called out, by definition it is confrontational, let alone how good does it make you feel to be called out before you supposedly don’t so something?  I understand getting someone’s name in a business situation is very helpful when it comes to following up and staying in contact, but what I am referencing is a different matter entirely

What are people really saying when they ask you name in this context?  They are saying, "If you don't follow through, I'm on your ass.'  Surely there are exceptions but by and large this is the rule.   

How did we get to point where this is not only acceptable but expected practice?  Do we really have that many apathetic degenerates in the work force?  Because if it is these same apathetic degenerates getting laid off all the time, I’m not sure I mind.  I don’t know what I find more offensive: when someone I’ve never met expects me to slack in my efforts due to a precedent I didn’t set nor uphold or that it may be necessary to do so in todays work environment.

Change brings more of the same

In this article by Mr John Blake I felt the feelings of Barbara McKinzie echoed those of my own heart, yet were vastly underrepresented if not completely brushed aside as fiction.

What is wrong is the perception of the black family in America in the eyes of black Americans.

“Obama didn't shout at his wife, Michelle, to shut up. The first lady didn't roll her eyes and tell Obama to act like a man. No laugh track kicked in, no one danced, and no police sirens wailed in the background.”

Was any other black American offended by that? To think that the above is the default perceived behavior for a black American husband and wife? I am a black American male, and the above is anything but my vision of a black family in America. When did people lower their expectations to the point of accepting what was shown to them on TV as reality? I’m aware of the culture, the lingo, and stereotypes... I also live in the real world where none of that surrounds me. I don’t watch the programs that portray blacks in that light, nor do I listen to the music that reflects upon those aspects. Once all of that is trimmed away there is a plethora of outlets from black Americans that more realistically reflect my reality; material that I wouldn’t be ashamed to watch or listen to among non-blacks.

Of course the Obamas aren’t here to entertain us. The fact that anyone ever thought they were is degrading. Perhaps that's your point Mr. Blake, but I should hope not. The perception of the Obamas should not be that of a standard bearer for a new way of being in terms of how a black family is seen in America, rather it should reinforce all the good that so many blacks have achieved that goes unheralded. The standard of the Obamas as the ideal black American family exist in the eyes of many Americans today, black or otherwise.

“America has often viewed the black family through the prism of its pathologies: single-family homes, absentee fathers, out of wedlock children, they say.”

Without having demographics to support me, I’d go out on a limb and say that the average television show Mr. Blake referenced with the exception of “The Cosby’s” is marketed to black Americans and isn’t kept on the air by the legions of Caucasian viewers. So using the above quotation as an example, who exactly is, “America” referring to?

If the Obamas are to the be new stars of the ideal black family–as it seems they are destined to be–then I would be correct in thinking that any who support a media that sends up these pathologies ( all of which are negative ) would be in serious decline. Now that Obama is in office surely “America” will start thinking twice when ever these pathologies come up in the context of blacks on television or in print and ask themselves, “Gee, I wonder if Barack and Michelle would be watching this?”

I don’t know who the above “they” are but the pathological problems that plague many black families are averted by just as many others, furthermore there are many wonderful success stories from blacks that grew up with such pathologies, and overcame the difficulties.

This new version of black intimacy that so many in Mr. Blake’s article supported was borderline comical: what prey-tell was the old version? Please, spell it out for me. Intimacy is a word; a noun to be specific. The definition does not change with the modification of ethnicity. That intimacy is expressed differently in different races, I don’t doubt, but is their an American ideal of what intimacy is regardless of race, age, religion or possibly even pathological upbringings? It would seem that nouns are less affected by influence and prove to be more structurally sound than some would believe.

I feel Mr. Blake is deceiving himself if he truly believes the “street lit” he mentions is sold or read en masse by anyone other than blacks. “The American public” as he states is not subjected to “Project Chick.” Without any evidence to support me, I will affirm that the buyers of those books are predominately, if not exclusively, black. Black intimacy and the perception of the black American family does need to change; mainly in the eyes of black Americans. Most importantly I would state that this perception--be it by black Americans, “America” as so vaguely defined by Mr. Blake, or anyone else for that matter--needed to change regardless of President Obama. He has many burdens and he is not the President of black America, or “America”, rather all of us as a collective whole ( for those of you who don’t understand subtleties, the entire USA ).