The Greatest Compliment.

Any positive review of my work is appreciated, of course. When you're a relative unknown, most of the comments you receive come from readers as opposed to critics. It's rare that a reader will take the time to review something they read, especially when it isn't a famous work. And while many of the reactions I've received have been favorable, I don't think there is a greater compliment than this.

"Insightful

Raving Review.

I may have posted this before but it was nice to run across this reader review of my short story in the "Shadow Masters" anthology from a few years ago. Scroll down to the bottom for mention of yours truly.

Quote of the Week.

(Cocaine) Makes you think you're smarter than everyone else. Makes you talk too much. Makes you think you're incredibly attractive even when you're fat and old. Makes you think you're on top of the world even when everything is falling apart.

Does that make you think of anyone?

-Tad Williams

  

Oops, I done it again!

Clearly the rumors of my semi-retirement from fiction writing were greatly exaggerated. At least for the moment. The apparently controversial Dark Regions Press has a contest and the concept grabbed hold of me like a lecherous wino at an outdoor cover band concert. The maximum length of 1000 words seemed a good starting point, although short lengths can often be rather intimidating for a writer like me.

I went through three basic ideas for my deserted island story before I was satisfied. Interestingly, each rejected idea strengthened the overall finished product because there were elements of each I really liked. Just not enough for the conclusion and overall raison de'tere.

The result was a short story that clocked in at just under 1000 words titled "Day 38." Having taken a lesson from "Lost," the concept of someone remaining on a desert island for months and years seemed a tad difficult to believe.

I'm not a newbie. I don't automatically expect that because I wrote it somebody should publish it but I'd be lying if I denied this got my creative juices flowing again. I'm pretty sure my sub-conscious knew that would happen.

Bastard~

Stranger Things as Written By Yours Truly.

I swore I had my final word on this undeservedly popular Netflix series, but some expressed interest in how I would have taken the same concept and written it my way. Since I had such harsh words for the show, what would I have done to make it supposedly better? Well, here goes. I know many won't agree or might even find my changes equal to what was done. So be it. Art is subjective.

A few things I won't include in this piece are things I would have no control over, such as quality of acting, direction and casting. This will only be my suggested fix-its from a writing perspective. I'll begin with the most obvious one:

STORY STRUCTURE- The organizational setup of "Stranger Things" is rather lacking. For one thing, it opens in the wrong place to serve the needs of the plot. Starting with the abduction of a character the audience has not grown to care about at all is a huge misstep. One would think that given eight episodes to develop characters, the Duffer Brothers could have at least given us fifteen minutes of the kid before he disappeared. Even "It," that terrible adaptation of a brilliant novel, was able to let us get to know Georgie before he was killed. And that was within the confines of a two and a half hour movie. Whether or not it was done effectively is irrelevant. The effort was made.

Frankly, the series starts in the wrong place regardless of that little dramatic misfire. I'm no fan of "Something went wrong in the secret laboratory" stories, but the lab is undeniably where all of this starts thematically and should also be where it starts structure-wise. If the Duffers really wanted to create an homage to Eighties horror and science fiction, they should have known to start their show in that laboratory. Actually witnessing Eleven's escape would have made here a more interesting character and would have set the tone for the weirdness to come. She could have run into the character of Will, they could have had a brief interaction, then he could have disappeared. Early on both of them would have been established as people the audience should care about instead of two separate incidents with a nary an emotional investment between them.

Also, the plot should have been expanded to justify the amount of episodes. At a mere eight episode run, this show should have been so chockful of story that them Duffer Boys could barely tell it in the time allotted. Instead, what we got was a show so thinly plotted it contained not one by two episodes of filler featuring characters sitting around discussing the plot and their motivations. I don't believe this was an intentional stylistic choice either, considering the overall thinness of the plot.

One way to expand the plot would have been to expand the involvement of the lab workers. Instead of trying to mimic Spielberg's approach to the government agents and scientists in "E.T.," where they were mainly faceless entities as seen through the eyes of children, the Duffers missed a real opportunity to go from archetypes to genuine human characters. It doesn't work here because there are too many non-kid characters.

FOCUS- This rivals story structure in its wrong-headedness. Let me begin by saying I know what the Duffer Boys were trying to do. It's rather obvious, so the kids make sense when considering the influences the creators are attempting to channel. Without criticizing their acting, it's difficult to fault their presence, but here's a story-centric reason for saying they should not have been the focus of the story. If you remove Eleven's interactions with them from the story, the kids literally serve no purpose except to remind us of older, better movies in the same genre. They do nothing except hide her from the Big Bad Lab Folks until the inevitable showdown scenes. They're not particularly interesting or likable and their entire sub-plot could be removed without scarcely a minor inconvenience to the overall plot-line.

Fans of Eighties B-movies know that teens were usually the main characters. Not old enough to have total freedom but definitely old enough to figure things out and handle themselves physically, they're the perfect protagonists to face the unknown. The teens in "Stranger Things" are among the show's few strengths and they should have been, if not front and center, certainly more prominent. Instead of having the kids hide Eleven, the story would have been better served having the teens do it. There could still have been a kid or two present, but the story would have been tighter with this simple change.

No character on this show was better than Sheriff Hopper. Perhaps because he's the only character with more than two notes to his personality, he feels authentic and we want to follow him on his quest to find out just what the hell is going on. Clearly he should have been the focal point of the series (I hear his part is horribly diminished in season two) and all the rest should have grown outward from that.

The greatest misfire involves the people at the laboratory. As I mentioned above, they needed to be better developed. This would have shifted some of the focus to them and their admittedly laughable experiment. Perhaps Matthew Modine's character had a real story to tell, one that would have juxtaposed nicely with Hopper's. I don't care if it turns out we learn more about him in the second season. It's lazy writing to not develop your characters to at least the point of not making them background noise.

PLOT- Once we find out what's really going on beginning with episode three, the entire concept is revealed to be quite terrible. First, the trite idea that this evil laboratory opened a doorway into another dimension that's really just an ugly, unimaginative mirror of our own is absurd. It's also home to the dullest monster since the one in "The Relic." It's little more than a mindless, hungry animal. There's simply no way to develop something that lackluster into a compelling antagonist. Also, having it come from a place that's really just our world's reflection makes little sense within the context of the Duffers' own established rules. Why is there no equivalent here? And while some may say the scientist and his cronies served as the real bad guy, they're far too underdeveloped to mean anything except a stumbling block for the heroes to overcome and redshirts for the monster to kill and eat. Also, a less predictable ending that didn't involve Eleven killing the creature and disappearing would have been nice. How about instead, the creature and Eleven are connected or maybe Will was the creature's counterpart in our universe and a true moral quandary resulted as everyone had to decide it killing one meant killing both?

That's it. I'm done with this show now. I've exhausted my fingers on discussing it enough. I won't get into dialogue because I'd need specific examples beyond that ridiculous Stephen King reference. I also won't go into how three teenagers can inflict major VanDamage on the monster but highly trained paramilitary guys are swatted down like flies. Some of these things are just a given in a B  movie after all. But the Duffers had the opportunity to elevate the medium to something much better than its perceived limitations. Instead, they went lower.

Feel free to eviscerate me now!

A Review of "Stranger Things: Season One"

Recently, the only person on the planet who could have talked me into watching the entire "Stranger Things" Season One did so. I had already forced my way through the first two episodes and decided the show wasn't for me, but this individual seemed to find it important that I complete the season and then decide. So, I did.

To say I was unimpressed would be redundant, but I also was able to spot a meager handful of gems hiding among the manure. And while I have mostly chosen to refrain from opining on these popular shows and films I find so severely overrated (Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, etc.), I feel justified this time because I was asked to watch six more episodes of something I really did not want to see.

Rather than write a lengthy diatribe on the series which, frankly, this writer already did so well, I have broken my critique down to a small list of technical aspects that (mostly) didn't work and some that actually did.


Lazy (Possibly Incompetent Writing)- The Duffer Bros. are the creators, writers and directors of this show, so everything that works and doesn't work falls squarely on their four shoulders. Sadly, they aren't very good at any of the three tasks they've assigned themselves. Like so many writers in Hollywood these days, they seem incapable of distinguishing between homage and flat-out copying. It's one thing to write a story that is in part a tribute to another writers's work; I'm talking about Stephen King here, in case it isn't obvious. The creators of "Lost" did it while creating something entirely new. It's quite another matter to blatantly steal from those works and pass it off as something new and exciting. And King isn't the only one they do this to. Spielberg is heavily "borrowed" from as well as John Carpenter, Dean Koontz and a host of other lesser known filmmakers and authors.
Yet the Duffers lack the necessary skill set to do anything more than copy better artists and nowhere does it show more than when they have a character literally ask, "Have you ever read Stephen King?" I guess that was for those who have no idea they're watching theft repackaged as originality.


Journeyman Direction- Speaking of their lack of skill, I would be remiss if I overlooked the basic, trite direction the Duffers indulge in. The imagery is often flat and uninteresting, the performances rarely rise above the needs of the thin plot and the artifice is thicker than a London fog.

Really Bad Acting (The Kids)- Give them points for earnestness. The kids on this show really try. Unfortunately, the effort is visible and often grimace-inducing. I won't single anybody out on the negative side, but it is interesting that the one kid who can actually act is the one that only shows up in the last half of the season finale. The lack of credible performances from the kids in the cast is a real detriment early on, but the Duffers wisely incorporate the little tykes into the overall action in the the last few episodes, which helps.

Uneven Performances (The Adults)- I have never been a Winona Ryder fan. Much like the kids on the show, her "acting" has always felt obvious and artificial to me. Maybe it's her voice or her verbal delivery, but she tends to diminish the work of other actors in the films she's in. In this case, there aren't many adult actors that are all that great except the always dependable Matthew Modine and a surprisingly good performance from David Harbour as Sheriff Hopper. In Ryder's defense, however, the Duffers provide her with a two-note character for most of the show's run, only toward the end giving her more to do than act hysterical or angry.

Surprisingly Good Acting (The Teens)- At first, I was on the fence about the teen characters. They reeked of cliches when they were introduced, but there was a surprising depth and compelling aspect to their characters as the show went on. In fact, there wasn't a bad teen performance.

Lack of A Diversified Approach- Simply put, the Duffers aren't talented enough to do it all on their own. That's why their work on "Wayward Pines" was so much better. There were other writers involved and it had a quality source material. Much like the two former "Lost" writers who created the gods-awful "Once Upon a Time," these guys need help and they need it yesterday. They need good writers who can say, "Wait. That scene in the hallway where they coat the entire area in gasoline should not be extinguished with two pumps from a fire extinguisher!" Or, "Maybe mentioning Stephen King is too on the nose. Could we consider assuming our audience is reasonably intelligent enough to know what we're doing and let those who don't find out through different means?" And maybe, just maybe, somebody might have said, "The monster is boring and a terrible antagonist."
Maybe somebody would have had an issue with  the fact that a mere eight-episode run was so thinly plotted it resulted in two filler episodes that literally consisted of characters discussing the plot and their motivation for forty-five minutes. Hire more writers!

Pointless Setting- Why does this show take place in the Eighties? Let me explain why I'm asking. As someone who has not only written for publication but studied it as well, there were many times when I was asked similar questions.
"Does this story need to be written in first person?"
"Is this scene necessary to the plot or just here because you enjoyed writing it?"
In a similar vein, I ask again: Why does this show take place in the Eighties?  What purpose does it serve? As much as I hated the recent version of "It," the Eighties settings makes perfect sense because the followup takes place thirty years later. What is it about the Eighties that makes the setting so important in "Stranger Things," though? Is there a certain limit on technology that wouldn't work now? Were there social attitudes of the time that lent themselves towards a story about a laboratory experiment getting out of hand?
I can't speak for the Duffer Bros. but I am inclined to say they have no idea beyond the fact that they wanted to reference Eighties horror and science fiction. Newsflash: You can still do that in modern-day storytelling.

Lack of Authenticity- Springboarding off the previous point, the Duffers are clearly too young to remember the Eighties. (They are. I looked them up.) While they get the clothing and cars right, the decade itself feels less real. This was one of my many issues with "It" as well. And while being too young isn't in and of itself a reason to avoid writing about prior periods, it does bring me back to the need for more writers on the show. Writers who, I don't know, might actually be able to say, "People didn't use the word 'awesome' like that in 1983!"

So, you might be getting the idea that I hated the show based on the above points. I didn't. I just found it trite, bland and derivative. It angers me that I worked so hard to make something of quality and guys like this can just wander out with half-baked rip-off material and have people hail it as a masterpiece. At least if the other elements, namely the acting, direction, etc. were better, I might be more forgiving. Also, if the season finale had been stretched to another twenty minutes and just turned into a movie, the story would have been much more effective.

All in all, it isn't a terrible show by any stretch. But it's mediocre and sometimes that's almost as bad~

What to to with this Blog.

With my recent decision/announcement to stop writing for publication, this blog has become a big question mark. What do I do with it? Do I keep it up for for others to read if they happen across it? Do I delete it? Do I continue to update it with my random and oh-so-witty and incisive observations about life and the storytelling arts?

More to the point, does anybody really care? I know people look at these posts. The one about me not writing much anymore ironically received the most views I'd had in a while. But views don't necessarily equate to reading, do theory?

More to the point, do people even care? I know my posts are viewed quite a bit. Perhaps ironically, the one announcing my decision to all but quit writing was viewed more than most have been. But views don't necessarily equate to actually reading, do they? They can, of course, but there's no way to know. I'm okay with that. If even a small percentage of those viewing these posts actually read them, I feel as if I've accomplished something.

So, maybe I should leave it up to the assumed readers.

What should I do with this blog? And please don't answer, "Whatever you want to do!"

Possibly Reconsidering but Not Really But Maybe.

A little over a week ago, I announced on this very blog that I was ceasing writing for publication. I hope I made it clear that I was going to attempt to finish works-in-progress but the act of seeking publishers interested in my work had come to an unfortunate end. I haven’t exactly changed my mind about that decision, but a recent experience has forced me to reconsider.

Joe Hill’s latest release titled “Strange Weather,” a collection of four short novels, is the cause of that experience. Let me start by saying I am a huge fan of Hill’s work. For those of you who don’t know, Joe Hill is the pseudonym of Stephen King’s son, Joseph Hillstrom King. This might sound blasphemous to King readers, but I think his son’s work is vastly superior these days. Maybe it’s because we’re both Gen-X’ers and I can relate better to his approach and perspective, or maybe it’s because King’s recent work, with notable exceptions, hasn’t gripped me the way it once did. So, a new Hill book is an event for me in much the same way as a Palahniuk or Mitchell novel. And I’m really enjoying this one. However, I couldn’t shake a certain feeling of déjà vu when I read “Snapshot,” the first story in the collection. While I found the writing engaging and the narrator compelling, I couldn’t shake the feeling that the plot was familiar territory. I don’t mean that in the “Stranger Things” blatant, sub-standard rip-off masquerading as homage way; But I had definitely experienced the plot before somewhere. 

Before I go any further, here is a basic description of “Snapshot’s” plot courtesy of a review in USA Today: 

Snapshot opens the salvo with a creepy exploration of memory that doubles as an Alzheimer’s metaphor. The 1980s-set narrative centers on an inventive teenage boy visited by an old housekeeper who finds that pieces of her past have gone missing, leaving a sense of increasing loss. The culprit: a mysterious man armed with a Polaroid-style camera that sucks a piece of one’s history every time it points and shoots. If the key concept doesn’t unnerve you, the abundance of dead sparrows will.

Sounds sufficiently creepy, right? And while it was a solid entry into the book with an admittedly meandering conclusion, I kept wondering where the hell I’d seen the basic
premise before. It took me a few days to place it. Another author published a short story
called, “The Memory Thief” four years ago with a similar idea behind it. Below are the
first few paragraphs of that story:

The Memory Thief had a stand inside my local grocery store where he pretended to sell photo packages to gullible idiots. He was a smooth one, in his mid to late twenties, handsome but not intimidatingly so, presenting the appearance of the good-looking, non-threatening African American friend on a sit-com or drama about up and coming young people.

He read people like they were walking flat screens with all of their pertinent data on display in size 48 font. He was especially good at charming women, being handsome and smooth and all, but there was more to it than that: The Memory Thief understood a woman’s brain and how it related to memories.

He didn’t call himself the Memory Thief, by the way. That’s what I named him. I gave it to him when he took something from me and refused to give it back. I don’t remember the name he went under.

In case you’re wondering, the author of the second story was me. Originally titled, “My
Greatest Forget,” it was published by Voluted Tales Magazine in December of 2013. My
story was different, of course. Instead of a genius child narrator, mine was a woman
with a forgotten past. But the concept of a mysterious man with what appeared to be a
magical camera that stole memories was strikingly similar. No offense to Hill, but I think
my antagonist was creepier because he seemed to have foreknowledge of the main
character’s missing memories. My story is also much shorter than Hill’s.

Before you start accusing me of accusing Joe Hill of stealing from me. That would be
absurd. Is it possible? Sure. My story has been viewable online for a few years and
anyone willing to spend the money on a subscription can read it. The idea that Joe Hill
had the time to look up a relatively obscure online zine is rather difficult to swallow.
Besides, writers get ideas from other writers all the time. I once wrote a short story
about an abused child fantasizing that he has super powers after reading a similar story
by Horror Zine editor Jeani Rector.

So, no. I’m not making a case for plagiarism against one of my favorite authors. I firmly
believe ideas exist in a realm that can only be touched by those of us who are open to
them. Content dictates plagiarism. Hill’s content and mine differ markedly.

So what’s my point?

Simple: The basic idea behind both stories is similar. The executions are different. I am
me and Joe Hill is…well, Joe Freakin’ Hill. The man has earned the right to have his
work published through hard work, quality writing, proven sales and name recognition.
Would “Snapshot” have been published if I’d written it? It’s far from perfect but it’s a
compelling read, for sure. I struggled to find a receptive editor for “The Memory Thief,”
one close-minded individual actually criticizing the fact that the customer service rep
protagonist received several job offers when she decided to quit her job. Do you think
Joe Hill’s budding young engineer with the bizarre inventions faced similar scrutiny? It’s
doubtful. Again…Joe. Freakin’. Hill.

But what this tells me is my ideas are worth something. I have been published, after all.
All writers experience dry spells from time to time. Instead of being discouraged by Hill’s
story’s similarities to my own, I am cautiously encouraged.
That doesn’t mean I’ve changed my mind, but it does mean I might. I suppose that’s as
good as it gets right now~

Farewell Ursula K. LeGuin

Proof that I Tried.

If nothing else, I can take some comfort in the fact that I wasn't one of those bullshitters who stood back and talked a good game about someday somehow maybe considering sitting down and writing those stories or that book one day possibly in the not-too-distant future. I did that and more. My "legacy" is out there for others to see, at least those works that aren't out of print.

So, no matter what else happens or doesn't happen, I know I was present and I did the work. Whether or not I succeeded is a subject open for debate, but at least on a minor, personal level, I guess I did.

I assume my "author page" will remain up for some time to come~

ANNOUNCEMENT FOR 2018: It's Been...Something...

All roads end, especially when they lead to nowhere. That realization has woken me up to a great many things lately, and sadly it includes writing. Not that many people care, but I've reached a point where it no longer feels worth it or even fulfilling. This isn't me being dramatic; take a look at the last time I had something published and it should be obvious I've been wrestling with this decision for a while.

As I've been told on several occasions, I attained my dream many times over. I'm not sure what that means but it's what I was told. Writers dream of writing and having people read what they write and of dying at their keyboards or notepads, still writing. At least, that's the stereotypical image of the writer. It probably applied to me at one time, too, but here's what my real dream was:

I was hoping to find those fans of the various genres I enjoy and give them what they were really hoping to see. Anyone who bothered to read my dark literary magazine The Darkness Internal and, more specifically, this editorial should know what that was. And while the magazine did all right for the few issues it ran, I doubt I reached anyone with what I was trying to do on any significant level. That's fine. Literary history is replete with glorious failures and near-misses. Sometimes all one can hope for is to leave a footprint on the surface for those who come next and accomplish a whole lot more.

Unfortunately, the Information Age has turned out to be a big fat turd. Where once I was optimistic that interests and ideas long suppressed and ignored would finally have a platform, now I am convinced that the human race is naught but a herd of grazing livestock desperately searching for someone to herd them off the nearest cliff. Okay, maybe I always suspected as much, but I allowed myself to hope and that was my mistake and no one else's. Perhaps my greatest mistake lies in expecting fandom to be anything except the dying beehive it's been revealed as thanks to social networking and content "writers."

In short, fandom is a cesspool of epic proportions, a pathetic pile of feces populated with self-righteous, provincial imbeciles who have no interest in seeing or reading anything that disrupts their comfort zones. Not everybody is like that, of course, but so many are that it no longer makes a difference. The latest "Star Wars" movie was a revelation because, by daring to invert expectations and drain sacred cows of their life-giving fluid, it exposed so many idiots at once it made the truth undeniable. What is that truth?

Simple: I am wasting my fucking time.

I thought fans of science fiction and fantasy and horror would want to be challenged intellectually, to embrace the various sources of their favorite mythologies rather than simply wallowing in the familiar retold ad infinitum. This is a time when genre is bigger and more popular than ever and, in many ways, it's worse than ever as well. In the mad rush to create the next pop culture water cooler phenomenon, absolute garbage and mediocre silliness is being passed off as quality. Meanwhile, those of us toiling to come up with something unique and genuinely different are deemed un-marketable.

I get it. Nobody wants to read my stuff anymore. I had my brief moment a few years ago but TV and movies, those monolithic crap-creators, have spoken and I am no longer welcome even in the margins. And if that's the case, I'm no longer interested in trying to find a way in. I thought I'd already done that.

So, am I "retiring" completely from writing? It remains to be seen. There are a few unfinished works I should complete before I walk completely away. However, for all intents and purposes, I no longer consider myself a writer. It's been a ride but all rides end, especially when they stop being fun.

Thanks to those of you who read what I put out over the years and to those who published it.