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.

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.

The Battle of the Trough

I have long held to the belief that Americans (and I specify only because I don’t know if it carries over into other nationalities not because I feel others may be immune) only consider two traits in whether or not the food is good when they go out to eat: is there more than enough to feed one person on their plate and is it hot—temperature not spice.

Gluttony has long made up for quality.  Mediocre anything is somehow better if you can gorge yourself.  If the food you serve is terrible and serving size is smallish no one will like you or your restaurant.  Temperature I think only confuses people.  If there is steam billowing off of it in quantity enough to fog up ones glasses they can be distracted by the heat and not even notice the poor quality of whatever they are eating.  

Steak: warm at best but served by the pound and further obscured by some manner of sauce or “gravy” sums up my argument perfectly.  Soup: it’s all kinds of hot and people get more caught up in the somewhat odd eating/drinking rituals concerning soup to ever really comment on quality.

“Is the soup good?”

“Oh yeah,” you saying while dunking your spoon in for a small taste only to pause and blow on it.  “It’s so hot.”

It almost sounds like a compliment to the chef.  

I was recently treated to a buffet this past Easter.

A buffet is the culinary equivalent to an all-in-one office machine, the “Jack-of-all-Trades” and master of none.  Want some over cooked vegetables and too-salty ham, soaking in God knows what kinda juice/water for God only knows how long?  Good, glad you’re interested because we’ve got a lot of it.  

The quality of your buffet is going to be on par with the restaurant.  A five star establishment’s Easter buffet is probably gonna be a cut above Shoney’s daily affair.  Where else will you be given a chance to see people in their Sunday finery push, shove, and stop short of elbows to be the first to get some of the fried shrimp.  

Perhaps the most amusing potential conflict came about when the Great Strawberry shortage hit and people were left wondering if they could just stick their straws in the fondue pot.  I actually watched a woman skewer the last 6 of said strawberries and dunk them in chocolate and then stuff her cheeks; six times in a row.  To the victor go the spoils (and possibly some late evening Muddbutt.^Tm)  

What bothered me the most was the fact that considering the location, dress of employees and standard menu, every other day this particular restaurant is open I’d bet they have great food: proper quantity, temperature and attention to preparation.  I should like to go back and try it some day but I’m afraid of see the defeated and victorious from the Sunday buffet sitting around too stuffed to move and eagerly awaiting the next mention of all you can eat cocktail shrimp.

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 ).

The Iron Curtain of Class

Planes are strange.  At best you have an international flight with no creepy-yelling-Tourette's -lady, but foul smelling Herr-stanks-a-lot-von-Kaiser.  At worst you’re stuck with an Asian reeking of decade old kimchi and an infant that screams like Satan is tickling it’s taint with the sharp end of his trident.  My passport, my wallet all that can confirm or deny my identity is on this plane.  If I get up to stretch my legs or use the toilet, it could all be gone at the will of some asshole who thinks it might be fun to steal my stuff.  But it doesn't happen.  Further more people are (generally) on their best behavior on a plane.  Ass-hats will always exist--for the moment I’ll turn a blind end to a certain Jihad-ing band of said ass-hats--but for the most part, air plane ambiance is a model for human behavior.  

“Please sit down and fasten your seat beats.”  No one gets an attitude when they hear this; they just do it.  People don’t talk on their cell phones in the same obnoxious manner the do in the grocery store or bank, they even use their inside speaking voice when conversing with their neighbors,  People are generous and polite in their conversation and even cordial in making niceties they really don’t give a good-god-damn about with other people.  

How is this beautiful state of mass existence possible and can it be created outside of a plane?  I have no answers but if it wasn’t for the leg room I’d be all for trying to maintain the air plane atmosphere at all times.  

Oh yeah, and on some international flights the booze is free… that can’t hurt anything.   

Sadly our high altitude utopia is not as flawless as it seems.  There was a great divide on my flight, a separation of class among all the plane’s passengers if you will.  All the French people I spoke with were very kind and as genuine as you can expect a human being to be.  Now as for the bilingual staff… Wow, I’ve never seen such a superiority complex in a person before (and this is coming from a guy who wakes up in shock of his own sex appeal everyday).  Happily, there was only one person of this type on the plane to the best of my knowledge.  She went to the University of Wisconsin where she majored in French language studies--as she made it known she was an unpleasant person, I did all I could to learn about her as to properly represent/hate on her here in my blog.   She is all done with school and is a flight attendant for Northwest who apparently holds herself in higher esteem than all other non-French speaking Americans.  

Why?  Does the ability to speak another language actually set us apart; particularly if we share one in common?  Here, I bring up again that it was her, and not the native French people on the plane, that seemed pained--somehow offended--when she had to speak English… her native tongue.  To foreshadow my next blog entry, I bring this particular person up because during my trip I feel I discovered a bit of the Language of the World.  There is a universal denominator for communication and not it’s not American (or French) Idol.  I had a blast in France, and some of the best time I spent was in the company of people that didn’t speak English.  Mitigating circumstances didn’t allow me to learn even the most basic French, but that didn’t stop me from truly communicated with people.  How is a flight attendant, whom I did share a language with, was at such odds with with her native tongue?  

I am really good at reading people for first impressions, beyond the first one I don’t have much skill, or perhaps--more than likely--I lose interest in the individual to really notice how they act.  This particular flight attendant didn’t like me.  This was made apparent the more I made her answer my questions concerning her education, travel experiences and employment.  As the seven hour flight worn on, I failed to grow on her despite my best and repeated efforts.  I know what I did to pissed her off, and I wasn’t out of line.  Nonetheless, her visible contempt of having to speak to me in English in a section of the plane that was so heavily loaded with French people was really too much for me to handle.

An American on an airplane being an asshole stood in stark contrast to all the super polite Parisians, not to mention the almost over bearing generosity of the citizens of Bailleul, I dealt with in my seven days abroad.  And here I thought extreme douchebaggery was a French claim to fame.

Class has nothing to do with the price paid for a ticket character can’t be paid for and class--and the lack there of-- is an innate possession that can be shared but not sold.

And why should you have to make up your own mind?

Okay. I’ll come out and say it; hate if you want, but you know I’m right. The world is going to hell: McCain, Obama--Bob Barr if you like--will lead us into a new era of doom. DOOM, I tell you! Worse than a fate of spending the next four years in an inferno picking fleas off a camel’s crotch is the fact that not the next President, rather the American people who vote for him will lead us there. I present to you, public enemy number one: roughly eighty percent of the voting population.

No science or opinion polls were consulted in coming up with that number, because this is my blog and I can make up statistics if I want to. Democracy is a beautiful idea, but in practice I’m not so sure. The thought of everyone having a ‘voice’ is very appealing, but the problem with giving everyone a vote is that most of ‘everyone’ is a moron.

“Did you listen to Obama’s speech?” a co-worker of mine asked another the day after the DNC. “No. It was late, and it was a long day. I just figured I read about it online and listen to what the ‘talking-heads’ had to say.” This is a real conversation that I heard between two people that are allowed a vote in our system. One person asked a question seeking quasi-intelligent conversation. (Quasi because nothing concerning politics is really worth listening to.) The other… well; there’s no need for name calling.

Allow me to make things worse. The ‘talking heads’ in this situation consist of Neal Boortz, Noam Chomsky, and Sean Hannity. Nothing wrong with that lot; all very educated and well informed personalities, but they do have a certain hardcore spin on all the talk about. Scariest of all, it’s not just this one co-worker that thinks like this, hence my fictitious but plausible statistic above. The only thing worse than voting straight down party lines due to some indefinable belief that the other guy is wrong is taking the gift of democracy and putting it in someone else’s hands. I’m doing my best to stay objective and feel it necessary to say that the three listed above aren’t the only ones out there influencing people’s vote. Liberal thinkers do it to. (Though I do find it ironic that conservative radio personalities are the more outspoken ones.)

Influence is okay: it’s nothing more than what the candidates are trying to do. Not listening to a speech in an election year is okay. (In Obama’s case I think it’s necessary; through no fault of his own, he’s gift for oratory is phenomenal, thus dangerous. Read his speeches, then figure out if he said anything...)

A brief moment of patriotism: (disgruntled Europeans living abroad, beware…) American history is perhaps most boring to Americans. It is common place and beaten into our heads from first grade. Try to view it with virgin eyes and I’m sure you’ll agree that despite all our founding fathers hypocrisy they had some phenomenal ideals at heart. In America there are certain, “ inalienable” rights that citizens have, like owning projectile weapons designed to kill people, and spousal abuse. In explicit detail, we legislate who can do what and why; sadly we don’t revoke these peoples same rights with any amount of haste. At the risk of sounding undemocratic, I don’t think many American rights are inalienable, rather, they should be earned.

When we come of age, we are made to prove to the state of our residency that we are capable of driving a car. Make enough mistakes and the right is taken away. Why is the same not true for having children? If I may be blunt: if you are over the age of sixty and your car is longer than a Toyota Camry, you should have your driving privileges revoked. The same is true if you are female, asian, and have a profound urge that leads you to drive in the far left lane. If you are unable to determine which candidate is the best to vote for, then you shouldn’t vote and be held legally responsible for your action if you do in fact make an ill-informed (not your own) decision. Ignorance to the law has never been an excuse, but if you are ignorant or just plain unwilling to choose sides (make a stand) your voice still counts? Is that contradictory to anyone else? Kinda like McCain hating on Obama for having a platform of ‘change’ and having Palin go out and preach ‘reform.’ Or Obama calling McCain elitist because he’s richer than Midas and to old to remember how many houses he has while Obama eats an arugula salad...

Have you ever had a salad comprised of nothing but arugula? Seriously?

(Liar.)

Delegates, Super delegates. Do you know what they are? Do you how Bush got in office two straight terms? I feel that myself and others should be super Delegates of sorts that have the authority to revoke peoples right to the popular vote. A little un-democratic I know, but the system has many flaws, so allow me my suggestions.

The eighty percent that I referred to earlier are also made up by the people I overheard at lunch last week while dining on margaritas and hot sauce. “I just don’t trust that Oh-BAM-ah, fella. I don’t know why, but nothing good is gon’ come a that one.” “We need to pray for our Savior and future Sovereign: the Good Mr. Sen. John McCain.”

R. Kelley, pee on me if I’m making this up. People actually said this out loud. Don’t trust Obama? That’s fine, only give me a reason why. Is that asking too much? A little justification for your belief or is it so much easier to escape the physical effort of thought and seek prayer?

I don’t care who you vote for I really don’t. And to those that are concerned that my political apathy is in jeopardy rest assured; I’m as indifferent as ever. After all, we survived Bush for eight years, what could Obama or McCain possibly do to ‘and-one’ that?

“Morons of nations--(present readership excluded)--, heed the call and head to voting office this November. Cast your vote for whomever you deem worthy, but please--on bended knee in a most humble gesture of earnest supplication, I beseech you; make sure your vote is your own.”