The Ninth Avatar, Thomas Redpool Goes To Hell, Scions of the Shade, and other upcoming projects.
Something is always in the works.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Vacation
Posted by
Todd Newton
Tonight, we leave for our cruise of Alaska. I won't be posting next week, but will definitely catch up when I return.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
SF&F, Disney's bringing out the big guns
Posted by
Todd Newton
Possibly unsatisfied with all but owning the children's movie market (via Pixar), Disney is resurrecting a few old projects to appeal to my demographic. You know, the SF&F fan who is now "too old" to truly enjoy Finding Nemo and its ilk.
First, we had the announcement of a Tim Burton project, Alice in Wonderland. Since many of us have never read the actual fable, our only experience with this particular story is through Disney's original animated version (which, to date, remains my favorite Disney movie, as well as one of the only ones I can stomach watching). Now, though, we have a creepy filter laid over it through Burton's dark vision, Johnny Depp's impeccable performance record contributing to its appeal, and a few other big-name actors (Anne Hathaway, Helena Bonham Carter, Alan Rickman, Crispin Glover) to coax the money out of our wallets. As much as I might complain about Disney, they seem to have hired a few people who know what I like.
Alice in Wonderland trailer (courtesy of YouTube):
Next (and finally), we have TRON Legacy. For those few "early" computer geeks who remember what it was to play on a Commodore 64, you remember TRON was right up your alley. I just saw this trailer on Apple today, and am already salivating over the "zoom" noises of the CG motorbikes. TRON was the first real jaunt into "virtual reality," an adventure inside the imagined world of computers that brought life to it, and the reminder that while computers may serve us they are not our slaves. This new iteration looks to have some weight behind it, with the original Bridges brother (assumedly) reprising his role. With how far technology has come since the original TRON, I can't help but be excited.
TRON Legacy trailer (courtesy of YouTube):
First, we had the announcement of a Tim Burton project, Alice in Wonderland. Since many of us have never read the actual fable, our only experience with this particular story is through Disney's original animated version (which, to date, remains my favorite Disney movie, as well as one of the only ones I can stomach watching). Now, though, we have a creepy filter laid over it through Burton's dark vision, Johnny Depp's impeccable performance record contributing to its appeal, and a few other big-name actors (Anne Hathaway, Helena Bonham Carter, Alan Rickman, Crispin Glover) to coax the money out of our wallets. As much as I might complain about Disney, they seem to have hired a few people who know what I like.
Alice in Wonderland trailer (courtesy of YouTube):
Next (and finally), we have TRON Legacy. For those few "early" computer geeks who remember what it was to play on a Commodore 64, you remember TRON was right up your alley. I just saw this trailer on Apple today, and am already salivating over the "zoom" noises of the CG motorbikes. TRON was the first real jaunt into "virtual reality," an adventure inside the imagined world of computers that brought life to it, and the reminder that while computers may serve us they are not our slaves. This new iteration looks to have some weight behind it, with the original Bridges brother (assumedly) reprising his role. With how far technology has come since the original TRON, I can't help but be excited.
TRON Legacy trailer (courtesy of YouTube):
Monday, July 27, 2009
Style and length
Posted by
Todd Newton
Working on my latest title, Scions of the Shade, I've come to realize a few things.
A lot of writers have a very distinct style. Fantasy authors tend to be on the verbose side. Whether this means they waste words or not, books in the genre I've chosen to read and write can be quite long. Full of description, information, or otherwise, I've noticed that I don't particularly trend this way.
My literary style tends to be very succinct and action-focused. If someone has a knife to someone else's throat, I don't pause the action to explain what color the drapes are. Bearing this in mind, it's practically a miracle that The Ninth Avatar is as long as it is (154,000 words). Thomas Redpool is, actually, fairly short, coming in a few hairs under the 80,000 word "standard" for a novel. It's an arbitrary number, to be sure, but it is touted to be the standard nonetheless.
This makes writing the first draft a bit easier, I must say, but the general consensus seems to be that authors cut from their initial draft rather than add to it. I'm not so far advanced as to stifle a wonder to whether I'm "doing it wrong," but I have learned by now that a person has to find their own way to do this.
It's like that quote, "There are three rules for writing a novel. Unfortunately, no one knows what they are." (W. Somerset Maugham)
Take today, for example. I wrote a fairly short chapter (2500 words) including the climactic sex scene in Scions. I expected it to be longer, but it seems my style won't allow for that. Having re-read it a few times already, I know I can (and will) add to it later, but that doesn't change the fact of what it is.
Frankly, I think I enjoy writing more when I don't have word count as my goal. Having goals is nice, and all, don't get me wrong, but I don't want to have to adjust my pace to fit the story into a neat little package wrapped up at exactly the proper time. My word count is telling me I'm only 1/3rd of the way through Scions and, though I know how the story is going to end, I'm not 100% sure if that is an accurate analysis.
I will say, though, that knowing the ending this early does make it feel like I'm just coming up with stuff to put in between. Some might enjoy this sensation, but I am fighting hard to keep my story from feeling contrived. I don't want to put obstacles in my heroine's way just because I can or should; I want to put the obstacles there that the story requires.
Ultimately, I'm just glad I don't have to write this perfectly the first time through. If you've just started writing but haven't learned this yet, I feel for you -- sometimes it is all that keeps us from abandoning a project altogether.
A lot of writers have a very distinct style. Fantasy authors tend to be on the verbose side. Whether this means they waste words or not, books in the genre I've chosen to read and write can be quite long. Full of description, information, or otherwise, I've noticed that I don't particularly trend this way.
My literary style tends to be very succinct and action-focused. If someone has a knife to someone else's throat, I don't pause the action to explain what color the drapes are. Bearing this in mind, it's practically a miracle that The Ninth Avatar is as long as it is (154,000 words). Thomas Redpool is, actually, fairly short, coming in a few hairs under the 80,000 word "standard" for a novel. It's an arbitrary number, to be sure, but it is touted to be the standard nonetheless.
This makes writing the first draft a bit easier, I must say, but the general consensus seems to be that authors cut from their initial draft rather than add to it. I'm not so far advanced as to stifle a wonder to whether I'm "doing it wrong," but I have learned by now that a person has to find their own way to do this.
It's like that quote, "There are three rules for writing a novel. Unfortunately, no one knows what they are." (W. Somerset Maugham)
Take today, for example. I wrote a fairly short chapter (2500 words) including the climactic sex scene in Scions. I expected it to be longer, but it seems my style won't allow for that. Having re-read it a few times already, I know I can (and will) add to it later, but that doesn't change the fact of what it is.
Frankly, I think I enjoy writing more when I don't have word count as my goal. Having goals is nice, and all, don't get me wrong, but I don't want to have to adjust my pace to fit the story into a neat little package wrapped up at exactly the proper time. My word count is telling me I'm only 1/3rd of the way through Scions and, though I know how the story is going to end, I'm not 100% sure if that is an accurate analysis.
I will say, though, that knowing the ending this early does make it feel like I'm just coming up with stuff to put in between. Some might enjoy this sensation, but I am fighting hard to keep my story from feeling contrived. I don't want to put obstacles in my heroine's way just because I can or should; I want to put the obstacles there that the story requires.
Ultimately, I'm just glad I don't have to write this perfectly the first time through. If you've just started writing but haven't learned this yet, I feel for you -- sometimes it is all that keeps us from abandoning a project altogether.
Labels:
novel,
status,
style,
word count
Thursday, July 23, 2009
A Good American? (essay)
Posted by
Todd Newton
What does it mean to be "a good American?"
This question occurred to me yesterday during an NPR broadcast. Context was that the reporter mentioned an email written by a retired Lieutenant Colonel to a newspaper, and how (I suppose) that lent credence to his opinion. Irrelevant, but the phrase got me wondering.
In the aftermath of 9/11 (2001), I think the importance of (or emphasis on) our armed forces reached heights it hadn't seen since World War II. Just look at all the "Support Our Troops" stickers sold.
Based solely on this, one would think a good American comes from patriotism, the willingness to fight/die for your country. I don't, however, mean to imply a lack of pride in those heroes who sacrificed their lives, time, or health that day. The policemen, firemen, volunteers, etc.; they received due respect "fighting" in a different way. Battling the tragedy, one might call it. But does that, should that, detract from their daily responsibility (or willingness, in the case of volunteers) to do such work?
Are good Americans "forged," in a way? Defined solely by times of crisis?
I'm sure we'd all agree that anyone's whose face we print on our money can be defined as "a good American." Many of them were Presidents (Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln). So, does being a President define you as a good American? Should we lump Nixon, Clinton, and Bush2 in that same category? Is Barack Obama a good American and, if so, could he be defined as such before he was elected? Some of the faces were not Presidents. Ben Franklin signed the Declaration of Independence. Alexander Hamilton was Secretary of Treasury. They were good Americans, too, I think.
All of this implies a level of involvement in government, or possibly just the country. So far we have patriotism and involvement. But, are both of these required? One? None?
Some would say that a good American is someone who loves their country. Such a subjective word, "love." People kill and die for it, within and without the context of their country. It drives men and women to extremism -- though it's not the only thing to that, of course. Personally, I think it's misleading to assume simplicity in the words "I love my country." Many people love their country, for numerous reasons, and yet I would not say this universally links them all together in a big hand-holding chain.
Maybe that doesn't go anywhere, for me. Too nebulous. In short, "so what if you love your country?" If you merely love your wife, does that equate to being a good husband? I say no, because it's not automatic -- it's expected. You should love your country (and your wife), otherwise why be there, right? But does the fact you call a place your home make you a good countryman? Or, as in marriage, does it require some kind of action on your part?
Membership does not automatically imply value to an organization -- at least in my opinion. So, again, it requires involvement. Let's go a different direction.
Is Paris Hilton a good American? She's an actress, singer, and heiress. More than that, though, I think, she's an icon of American popular culture. Does being a symbol of America make you a good American?
What about the 9-to-5 office workers, or the truck drivers and roughnecks? Aren't they also symbols? Don't these people keep America running? They do America's work and spend their money to buy products from American corporations. Some buy American cars. Most own houses. Are these people as good, or less good, of Americans as Paris Hilton? As Barack Obama? As a WWII veteran? As a National Guard member?
If you know me or Micah at all, then you know we enjoy traveling. Particularly traveling abroad. We went to Japan this year and, while we appreciated that many of the people there spoke English (it is a required course in school in Japan), we did not expect them to do so. We learned some imperative Japanese phrases, including how to say please, thank you, and excuse me. This was out of respect for their country because we were guests there -- we're American, not Japanese.
This is why I was so appalled by a recent blog entry by a good friend, Scottish expat in France, Princesse Ecossaise. Or rather, a comment on it. According to her, visiting Americans sometimes congratulate her on how well she speaks English. In France. English is her first language, being from Scotland. It's just this kind of faux pas that makes my blood boil -- they should feel lucky she speaks English at all, since I sincerely doubt they speak a word of French.
If you played sports in High School, or did any kind of extracurricular activity requiring travel outside its walls, then you probably heard the speech numerous times about representing your school. Your behavior reflects on everyone else.
I'm not a cop, a soldier, or a politician. Probably will never be any of these, but this is how I strive to be a good American. I hope that those who aren't in the Armed Forces, involved in government, or a public servant, would agree. These listed things are professions, and I feel it takes a special person[ality] to do them well, but that all it takes is respect to be a good representative. Respect for yourself, your country and those of others.
Anyone can show respect. It's not something you have to go to college to learn. And yet, so few people realize it can be that simple.
What do you think it means to be "a good American?"
If you enjoyed this post, Follow this Blog or subscribe (below) to receive updates.
This question occurred to me yesterday during an NPR broadcast. Context was that the reporter mentioned an email written by a retired Lieutenant Colonel to a newspaper, and how (I suppose) that lent credence to his opinion. Irrelevant, but the phrase got me wondering.
In the aftermath of 9/11 (2001), I think the importance of (or emphasis on) our armed forces reached heights it hadn't seen since World War II. Just look at all the "Support Our Troops" stickers sold.
Based solely on this, one would think a good American comes from patriotism, the willingness to fight/die for your country. I don't, however, mean to imply a lack of pride in those heroes who sacrificed their lives, time, or health that day. The policemen, firemen, volunteers, etc.; they received due respect "fighting" in a different way. Battling the tragedy, one might call it. But does that, should that, detract from their daily responsibility (or willingness, in the case of volunteers) to do such work?
Are good Americans "forged," in a way? Defined solely by times of crisis?
I'm sure we'd all agree that anyone's whose face we print on our money can be defined as "a good American." Many of them were Presidents (Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln). So, does being a President define you as a good American? Should we lump Nixon, Clinton, and Bush2 in that same category? Is Barack Obama a good American and, if so, could he be defined as such before he was elected? Some of the faces were not Presidents. Ben Franklin signed the Declaration of Independence. Alexander Hamilton was Secretary of Treasury. They were good Americans, too, I think.
All of this implies a level of involvement in government, or possibly just the country. So far we have patriotism and involvement. But, are both of these required? One? None?
Some would say that a good American is someone who loves their country. Such a subjective word, "love." People kill and die for it, within and without the context of their country. It drives men and women to extremism -- though it's not the only thing to that, of course. Personally, I think it's misleading to assume simplicity in the words "I love my country." Many people love their country, for numerous reasons, and yet I would not say this universally links them all together in a big hand-holding chain.
Maybe that doesn't go anywhere, for me. Too nebulous. In short, "so what if you love your country?" If you merely love your wife, does that equate to being a good husband? I say no, because it's not automatic -- it's expected. You should love your country (and your wife), otherwise why be there, right? But does the fact you call a place your home make you a good countryman? Or, as in marriage, does it require some kind of action on your part?
Membership does not automatically imply value to an organization -- at least in my opinion. So, again, it requires involvement. Let's go a different direction.
Is Paris Hilton a good American? She's an actress, singer, and heiress. More than that, though, I think, she's an icon of American popular culture. Does being a symbol of America make you a good American?
What about the 9-to-5 office workers, or the truck drivers and roughnecks? Aren't they also symbols? Don't these people keep America running? They do America's work and spend their money to buy products from American corporations. Some buy American cars. Most own houses. Are these people as good, or less good, of Americans as Paris Hilton? As Barack Obama? As a WWII veteran? As a National Guard member?
If you know me or Micah at all, then you know we enjoy traveling. Particularly traveling abroad. We went to Japan this year and, while we appreciated that many of the people there spoke English (it is a required course in school in Japan), we did not expect them to do so. We learned some imperative Japanese phrases, including how to say please, thank you, and excuse me. This was out of respect for their country because we were guests there -- we're American, not Japanese.
This is why I was so appalled by a recent blog entry by a good friend, Scottish expat in France, Princesse Ecossaise. Or rather, a comment on it. According to her, visiting Americans sometimes congratulate her on how well she speaks English. In France. English is her first language, being from Scotland. It's just this kind of faux pas that makes my blood boil -- they should feel lucky she speaks English at all, since I sincerely doubt they speak a word of French.
If you played sports in High School, or did any kind of extracurricular activity requiring travel outside its walls, then you probably heard the speech numerous times about representing your school. Your behavior reflects on everyone else.
I'm not a cop, a soldier, or a politician. Probably will never be any of these, but this is how I strive to be a good American. I hope that those who aren't in the Armed Forces, involved in government, or a public servant, would agree. These listed things are professions, and I feel it takes a special person[ality] to do them well, but that all it takes is respect to be a good representative. Respect for yourself, your country and those of others.
Anyone can show respect. It's not something you have to go to college to learn. And yet, so few people realize it can be that simple.
What do you think it means to be "a good American?"
If you enjoyed this post, Follow this Blog or subscribe (below) to receive updates.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Getting back on schedule
Posted by
Todd Newton
Recently I reported that I started writing the prequel to The Ninth Avatar.
This morning, I began writing the sequel.
Again, who knows if either (or both) will come to fruition in their current states, and meet my goal of being released at the same time to spread the story in both directions at once, but this is obviously a good first step. I'm excited to write it, to name the characters and decide whose lives we get to peek in on as the arc begins anew. Take that as a good sign.
In conjunction, I've still been reading quite a bit. I've passed the midway point of A Cavern of Black Ice (J.V. Jones) and plan to tear through A Storm of Swords (GRRM) immediately after. I'd recommend Jones' books to just about any epic fantasy fan, but to most people they might seem a bit slow.
Honestly, I find Ice to be incredibly detailed and, for lack of a better word, dense. I mean that in the same way I would talk about a really good cheesecake. It's bound to be too rich for some, but I find the clan culture (the way she talks about "due respect" and the like) absolutely fascinating. It's dense in the same way Kushiel's Dart (Carey) and ASOIAF are. Like the world lives and breathes, and there's always something more to learn. That's why I wanted to re-read Ice and its subsequent volumes (in the "Sword of Shadows" series which, apparently, continues with Watcher of the Dead next year and totally abandons the "colored ice" title themes).
I'm still not sleeping well (when do I?) but I am sleeping better. Hopefully the trend continues past 1 day, and tomorrow I wake up early enough to start the day like I did today (reading and having coffee before the sun comes up).
This morning, I began writing the sequel.
Again, who knows if either (or both) will come to fruition in their current states, and meet my goal of being released at the same time to spread the story in both directions at once, but this is obviously a good first step. I'm excited to write it, to name the characters and decide whose lives we get to peek in on as the arc begins anew. Take that as a good sign.
In conjunction, I've still been reading quite a bit. I've passed the midway point of A Cavern of Black Ice (J.V. Jones) and plan to tear through A Storm of Swords (GRRM) immediately after. I'd recommend Jones' books to just about any epic fantasy fan, but to most people they might seem a bit slow.
Honestly, I find Ice to be incredibly detailed and, for lack of a better word, dense. I mean that in the same way I would talk about a really good cheesecake. It's bound to be too rich for some, but I find the clan culture (the way she talks about "due respect" and the like) absolutely fascinating. It's dense in the same way Kushiel's Dart (Carey) and ASOIAF are. Like the world lives and breathes, and there's always something more to learn. That's why I wanted to re-read Ice and its subsequent volumes (in the "Sword of Shadows" series which, apparently, continues with Watcher of the Dead next year and totally abandons the "colored ice" title themes).
I'm still not sleeping well (when do I?) but I am sleeping better. Hopefully the trend continues past 1 day, and tomorrow I wake up early enough to start the day like I did today (reading and having coffee before the sun comes up).
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Positive charge
Posted by
Todd Newton
Things seem to be going fairly well on both the reading and writing fronts, lately. Well enough, anyway. I'm looking to be about halfway done with Scions of the Shade within the next few weeks, if this pace continues, and should soon be writing the chapter that I've been looking forward to since I first thought of it.
I entered one of our dogs into an online contest (because he's cute). So that's fun.

Oddly enough, work is starting to calm down. We've really hit our not-busy season, so this trend should continue until about October when things start ramping up for the holidays.
Only 2 more weeks left to get a free copy of The Ninth Avatar on Smashwords.com. Just make sure to use the coupon code, and pick any electronic format you like.
I entered one of our dogs into an online contest (because he's cute). So that's fun.

Oddly enough, work is starting to calm down. We've really hit our not-busy season, so this trend should continue until about October when things start ramping up for the holidays.
Only 2 more weeks left to get a free copy of The Ninth Avatar on Smashwords.com. Just make sure to use the coupon code, and pick any electronic format you like.
Labels:
status
Monday, July 13, 2009
False Starts - Reading
Posted by
Todd Newton
The purpose of this post is to illustrate that I not only have trouble with writing (wink, wink) but also with reading, sometimes. Rarely am I an outright "snob" when it comes to reading books, but there are instances where I just can't convince myself to continue with a given book.
The Stormcaller (Lloyd) was one such debacle, wherein the cliché plot and paper-thin characters never quite got interesting. I had a similar issue with Gardens of the Moon (Erikson) though, having revisited the first few chapters in a bookstore recently, I think I might have to give it another chance.
>> Here are a few books I abandoned for similar, or different, reasons. My honest apologies for not having the staying power necessary to power through to the end, but this is in no way a negative endorsement (meaning YOU might enjoy them, but I couldn't). <<
Gone (Michael Grant)
Let me just preface this one by saying Gone is YA fiction. This actually IS one of those areas where I've become a "book snob." I got this from the library based on a recommendation from Bunny Reviews, a review of a later book in the series.
The cover looks almost like a Smallville DVD jacket, and when I got it home and read the actual blurb, I knew it wasn't for me. Got about a page and a half in and just said "no."
Not my thing, but you (or your kids) might enjoy.
The City & The City (China Mieville)
This author came highly recommended from James over at Speculative Horizons -- the book, not so much. While I instantly recognized Mieville's talent to craft a sentence and overall style, and I was quite engrossed in the rapid-fire sentences, this felt more like a high-brow exercise for a creative writing class rather than a novel.
I read through three chapters in one sitting, to make absolutely sure I wasn't crazy, and then had to put it down. This is one of those books that you would read for the enjoyment of the prose, and I'm just not heavily into that type of volume. As James said, the problem was the lack of characterization as well as the slow plot. These were obvious from about page 2, but the writing was sublime.
Mystic and Rider (Sharon Shinn)
This one I got the furthest in. I picked Mystic up from the library on a recommendation of a later volume over at SQT's F/SF Lovin News & Reviews. I have to say, first, that Shinn's work is not bad by any stretch of the imagination, but I was halfway through the book before I realized absolutely nothing had happened. I counted three separate instances where the book tells me "the day was uneventful," a couple even in the same chapter, and felt like saying then MAKE it eventful!
Honestly, there wasn't a lot of geographic movement, zilch in the character development department, and the world being revealed was just one of your standard fantasy "weird names" fare. So I guess I wouldn't say bad, just unimpressive. Disappointing, maybe, except I rarely go into a book with high expectations -- unless I'm already a fan of their work, and I had never heard of Sharon Shinn before.
It's also worth mentioning that I loathe this cover art. One, because it is ... just not a good picture, and two, because it doesn't match the character's description in the slightest.
I might give this last author/series another chance in the future, but right now I need books that grab me a lot harder than this. I've been re-reading GRRM for this purpose; reading good writing inspires me to write. Interesting plots and characters push me to invent my own.
If you're wondering where an author's ideas come from, look no further than their peers.
Speaking of which, I'm still attempting to read Santa Olivia (Carey), but I've put it on hold because it was not quite grabbing me either. I'm not giving up on it, yet, hence why it's not listed here. It has, however, been supplanted by A Cavern of Black Ice (Jones) before I dive into A Storm of Swords again. I'll be picking up a hardcover early edition, I think, of the latter today (if it's still at the store where I saw it).
What have YOU been reading/abandoning lately?
The Stormcaller (Lloyd) was one such debacle, wherein the cliché plot and paper-thin characters never quite got interesting. I had a similar issue with Gardens of the Moon (Erikson) though, having revisited the first few chapters in a bookstore recently, I think I might have to give it another chance.
>> Here are a few books I abandoned for similar, or different, reasons. My honest apologies for not having the staying power necessary to power through to the end, but this is in no way a negative endorsement (meaning YOU might enjoy them, but I couldn't). <<
Gone (Michael Grant)Let me just preface this one by saying Gone is YA fiction. This actually IS one of those areas where I've become a "book snob." I got this from the library based on a recommendation from Bunny Reviews, a review of a later book in the series.
The cover looks almost like a Smallville DVD jacket, and when I got it home and read the actual blurb, I knew it wasn't for me. Got about a page and a half in and just said "no."
Not my thing, but you (or your kids) might enjoy.
The City & The City (China Mieville)This author came highly recommended from James over at Speculative Horizons -- the book, not so much. While I instantly recognized Mieville's talent to craft a sentence and overall style, and I was quite engrossed in the rapid-fire sentences, this felt more like a high-brow exercise for a creative writing class rather than a novel.
I read through three chapters in one sitting, to make absolutely sure I wasn't crazy, and then had to put it down. This is one of those books that you would read for the enjoyment of the prose, and I'm just not heavily into that type of volume. As James said, the problem was the lack of characterization as well as the slow plot. These were obvious from about page 2, but the writing was sublime.
Mystic and Rider (Sharon Shinn)This one I got the furthest in. I picked Mystic up from the library on a recommendation of a later volume over at SQT's F/SF Lovin News & Reviews. I have to say, first, that Shinn's work is not bad by any stretch of the imagination, but I was halfway through the book before I realized absolutely nothing had happened. I counted three separate instances where the book tells me "the day was uneventful," a couple even in the same chapter, and felt like saying then MAKE it eventful!
Honestly, there wasn't a lot of geographic movement, zilch in the character development department, and the world being revealed was just one of your standard fantasy "weird names" fare. So I guess I wouldn't say bad, just unimpressive. Disappointing, maybe, except I rarely go into a book with high expectations -- unless I'm already a fan of their work, and I had never heard of Sharon Shinn before.
It's also worth mentioning that I loathe this cover art. One, because it is ... just not a good picture, and two, because it doesn't match the character's description in the slightest.
I might give this last author/series another chance in the future, but right now I need books that grab me a lot harder than this. I've been re-reading GRRM for this purpose; reading good writing inspires me to write. Interesting plots and characters push me to invent my own.
If you're wondering where an author's ideas come from, look no further than their peers.
Speaking of which, I'm still attempting to read Santa Olivia (Carey), but I've put it on hold because it was not quite grabbing me either. I'm not giving up on it, yet, hence why it's not listed here. It has, however, been supplanted by A Cavern of Black Ice (Jones) before I dive into A Storm of Swords again. I'll be picking up a hardcover early edition, I think, of the latter today (if it's still at the store where I saw it).
What have YOU been reading/abandoning lately?
Sunday, July 12, 2009
The "problem" with stock photography
Posted by
Todd Newton
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
RIP Michael Jackson
Posted by
Todd Newton
Michael Jackson was a symbol, a legend. Even if the "pop" genre was never your favorite, as it never was for mine, it's more than likely you have at least one of his songs memorized somewhere in your mind. I have many: Billy Jean, Thriller, Bad, Smooth Criminal, and more. He was the King of Pop, a title not bestowed lightly among the music world, and his discography includes some of the greatest selling albums of all time.
Even posthumously, he remains a legend. I surmised the day of his death that there weren't many people on planet Earth who did not know the name "Michael Jackson." When you reach that level of fame, your death immediately achieves "tragedy" status. It's much like the North Star has burned out, and we are left scrambling for a new compass.
That being said, I have a specific policy when it comes to celebrity deaths. My mourning period does not last very long. Even when an idol of mine (RIP George Carlin) dies, I prefer not to dwell on it, but give the event the respect it deserves and move on. Think of it as five minutes of sadness, and respect ever after. I don't want to talk about it.
Specifically, I think it is uncouth to discuss Michael Jackson's court cases, his plastic surgeries, his medications, his baby-tipping, and his lifestyle. It's not that I wish to avoid speaking ill of the dead, more like I wish to avoid speaking of the dead at all. And hearing about them. Yet, the news inundates us hourly with reminders, investigation updates, and now snippets of his memorial service. All of it makes me extremely sad.
This morning, Micah told me a woman is outraged over all the press coverage Jackson is getting because her soldier son on the same day and there has been, presumably, little-to-no coverage of that particular event. I'm sure some people feel the same about the economy, world hunger and other human rights issues, North Korea, Russia before them, Honduras, and just about any other crisis going on in the world right now. On the one hand, I see this woman's point; a dead soldier deserves a mention even on a big news day. On the other hand, the soldier was not named Michael Jackson. Sorry, lady.
No one can quite fathom the imprint Michael Jackson left on the world. Pop culture, American culture was forever changed by his music. Forever. I heard a story that back when MTV was still only playing white artists (yes, in the 1980's), Michael Jackson was the first to break that barrier. Not only did he break it, he destroyed it. His mere existence and popularity coaxed people out of their racism-induced walls and showed them a more friendly world. Without a symbol like that, I don't believe attitudes would be where they are today on the issue. Honestly.
So, here is my eulogy for Michael Jackson.
I am not one to clamor outside his hospital eagerly awaiting news, nor would I sign up for tickets to see his memorial service live (as I think that's a bit creepy for someone I did not know personally), but I will write about him.
I will respect his achievements. I will continue to ignore the naysayers, the ongoing investigation, and the controversy bound to never conclude. I will thank him for the change he inspired. I will remember him.
Most importantly, I, like the rest of us, will miss him.
Even posthumously, he remains a legend. I surmised the day of his death that there weren't many people on planet Earth who did not know the name "Michael Jackson." When you reach that level of fame, your death immediately achieves "tragedy" status. It's much like the North Star has burned out, and we are left scrambling for a new compass.
That being said, I have a specific policy when it comes to celebrity deaths. My mourning period does not last very long. Even when an idol of mine (RIP George Carlin) dies, I prefer not to dwell on it, but give the event the respect it deserves and move on. Think of it as five minutes of sadness, and respect ever after. I don't want to talk about it.
Specifically, I think it is uncouth to discuss Michael Jackson's court cases, his plastic surgeries, his medications, his baby-tipping, and his lifestyle. It's not that I wish to avoid speaking ill of the dead, more like I wish to avoid speaking of the dead at all. And hearing about them. Yet, the news inundates us hourly with reminders, investigation updates, and now snippets of his memorial service. All of it makes me extremely sad.
This morning, Micah told me a woman is outraged over all the press coverage Jackson is getting because her soldier son on the same day and there has been, presumably, little-to-no coverage of that particular event. I'm sure some people feel the same about the economy, world hunger and other human rights issues, North Korea, Russia before them, Honduras, and just about any other crisis going on in the world right now. On the one hand, I see this woman's point; a dead soldier deserves a mention even on a big news day. On the other hand, the soldier was not named Michael Jackson. Sorry, lady.
No one can quite fathom the imprint Michael Jackson left on the world. Pop culture, American culture was forever changed by his music. Forever. I heard a story that back when MTV was still only playing white artists (yes, in the 1980's), Michael Jackson was the first to break that barrier. Not only did he break it, he destroyed it. His mere existence and popularity coaxed people out of their racism-induced walls and showed them a more friendly world. Without a symbol like that, I don't believe attitudes would be where they are today on the issue. Honestly.
So, here is my eulogy for Michael Jackson.
I am not one to clamor outside his hospital eagerly awaiting news, nor would I sign up for tickets to see his memorial service live (as I think that's a bit creepy for someone I did not know personally), but I will write about him.
I will respect his achievements. I will continue to ignore the naysayers, the ongoing investigation, and the controversy bound to never conclude. I will thank him for the change he inspired. I will remember him.
Most importantly, I, like the rest of us, will miss him.
Labels:
eulogy
Monday, July 6, 2009
Transformers: Revenge of the Camp
Posted by
Todd Newton
This weekend, among many other things, I went to go see the new Transformers film. Well, I use the words "see" and "film" a little lightly here. Allow me to start again.
This weekend, I endured the latest travesty based on toys/cartoons from my childhood, Transformers, named with the ironically foreboding subtitle "Revenge of the Fallen."
As many of you know, I was not a huge fan of the first live-action Transformers film because of its lack of continuity from beginning to end. It had a few moments of camp and comic relief to break up the stiff CG action and preachy Optimus Prime monologues. It was, by no means, a great film but it was not torture to watch.
The sequel, much to my dismay, was.
A sequel should build on its predecessor, improve its formulas and deepen its world. It should inform us more about the motivations of the characters and advance the overall story arc while encasing its own mini-arc. It should make us care more.
Revenge did none of these things. It was a pure camp-fest from beginning to end, switching around the formula from the first film by using bursts of action to break up its stiff campy sequences. The characters were flat, annoying, ridiculous (some of them to the point of being obvious plot devices with no relevance to the actual story), and utterly forgettable.
Take, for example, the multiple scenes where the Witwicky's dogs are humping each other. Far past mere offense, as that type of gratuitous physical exploitation of animals matters little to me, I was appalled at the purported necessity of those scenes. What purpose do they have, other than to flesh out Sam's parents further as bumbling morons (which the first film did quite well with considerably more subtlety)?
Or the "reliving The Matrix" moment where the words "I Love You" are conveniently utilized to bring a certain special someone back to life? I'm not kidding.
As I've surmised, the first Transformers film was no instant classic, but this sequel rates among the worst of action films. Compare it to Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer. Compare it to The Punisher (any of them).
As I was suffering through the film, I came to realize the purpose for all its camp and whimsicality: it is a kid's movie. Despite the numerous explosions, adult situations, drug interaction, and few-and-far-between swear words, this is a movie aimed directly at those still "young at heart" or, actually, young. Somewhat like the writers and director abandoned any hope of making a serious action movie based on a children's cartoon from over 20 years ago. As if our special effects have improved greatly, but our level of maturity has not.
This is the way I feel any time an action film aims for a PG-13 rating rather than R. It's purely a nudity and f-word based rating system, the complexity of the story and foibles of the characters make absolutely no difference to which age group watches it. Apparently, we just enjoy seeing explosions and couldn't care less about the rest. No doubt Revenge will rake inmillions billions and Paramount will excrete a third and final film to complete the epic tragedy trilogy.
Sometimes I feel like the only one who notices the film industry avoids treating people like adults as if that were the plague. Arbitrary standards build a wall to keep me from being entertained, yet seem to fuel everyone else. Entertainment has no true value, and is completely subjective, though.
I came to the conclusion, walking out of the theater, that the film was just supposed to entertain me. In this regard, Revenge completely and utterly failed in its intended purpose. So, I figured to respond in kind -- rather than reviewing it, I am just bashing it.
I can recommend no part of this movie to anyone, for any reason. This "franchise" has become commercialism at its best, attempting to appeal to any and every demographic it can get the attention of, and alienating people like me who once gave a shit about Transformers in the first place.
This weekend, I endured the latest travesty based on toys/cartoons from my childhood, Transformers, named with the ironically foreboding subtitle "Revenge of the Fallen."
As many of you know, I was not a huge fan of the first live-action Transformers film because of its lack of continuity from beginning to end. It had a few moments of camp and comic relief to break up the stiff CG action and preachy Optimus Prime monologues. It was, by no means, a great film but it was not torture to watch.
The sequel, much to my dismay, was.
A sequel should build on its predecessor, improve its formulas and deepen its world. It should inform us more about the motivations of the characters and advance the overall story arc while encasing its own mini-arc. It should make us care more.
Revenge did none of these things. It was a pure camp-fest from beginning to end, switching around the formula from the first film by using bursts of action to break up its stiff campy sequences. The characters were flat, annoying, ridiculous (some of them to the point of being obvious plot devices with no relevance to the actual story), and utterly forgettable.
Take, for example, the multiple scenes where the Witwicky's dogs are humping each other. Far past mere offense, as that type of gratuitous physical exploitation of animals matters little to me, I was appalled at the purported necessity of those scenes. What purpose do they have, other than to flesh out Sam's parents further as bumbling morons (which the first film did quite well with considerably more subtlety)?
Or the "reliving The Matrix" moment where the words "I Love You" are conveniently utilized to bring a certain special someone back to life? I'm not kidding.
As I've surmised, the first Transformers film was no instant classic, but this sequel rates among the worst of action films. Compare it to Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer. Compare it to The Punisher (any of them).
As I was suffering through the film, I came to realize the purpose for all its camp and whimsicality: it is a kid's movie. Despite the numerous explosions, adult situations, drug interaction, and few-and-far-between swear words, this is a movie aimed directly at those still "young at heart" or, actually, young. Somewhat like the writers and director abandoned any hope of making a serious action movie based on a children's cartoon from over 20 years ago. As if our special effects have improved greatly, but our level of maturity has not.
This is the way I feel any time an action film aims for a PG-13 rating rather than R. It's purely a nudity and f-word based rating system, the complexity of the story and foibles of the characters make absolutely no difference to which age group watches it. Apparently, we just enjoy seeing explosions and couldn't care less about the rest. No doubt Revenge will rake in
Sometimes I feel like the only one who notices the film industry avoids treating people like adults as if that were the plague. Arbitrary standards build a wall to keep me from being entertained, yet seem to fuel everyone else. Entertainment has no true value, and is completely subjective, though.
I came to the conclusion, walking out of the theater, that the film was just supposed to entertain me. In this regard, Revenge completely and utterly failed in its intended purpose. So, I figured to respond in kind -- rather than reviewing it, I am just bashing it.
I can recommend no part of this movie to anyone, for any reason. This "franchise" has become commercialism at its best, attempting to appeal to any and every demographic it can get the attention of, and alienating people like me who once gave a shit about Transformers in the first place.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Smashwords Promotion
Posted by
Todd Newton
Just a short one today.
Smashwords.com is doing a promotion on many of their books this month, and I've decided to offer electronic copies of The Ninth Avatar free for the entire month of July. All you need to do is enter the Coupon Code JFREE at the purchase prompt, and you will be allowed to download it in any electronic format you like (Kindle, Sony, other).
Purchase link here. Enjoy!
Smashwords.com is doing a promotion on many of their books this month, and I've decided to offer electronic copies of The Ninth Avatar free for the entire month of July. All you need to do is enter the Coupon Code JFREE at the purchase prompt, and you will be allowed to download it in any electronic format you like (Kindle, Sony, other).
Purchase link here. Enjoy!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
