Parenting Skills

I realize that many of you probably thought I was dead, and that this blog was extinct...but not so. Yeah, nearly two years have passed. (1 year, 11 months, 5 days (or 704 days), to be exact.)

A lot has happened since I last posted, and much that has kept me from posting. I will simply say this: Life happens.

Today, standing at the counter at the local bookseller, though, ignited me sufficiently to log right in and speak my mind.

I was reading before the age of two, thanks in part to the efforts of my school-teacher mother and father; due also to the prompting, support, and encouragement of my grandparents. And by reading, I mean "reading"--not just STOP signs, but the comics and articles in the newspaper aloud to my grandfather. I love to read. I take a book wherever I go. Reading, to me, is truly an essential. I have also been blessed that all my Horde love to read and read voraciously. I have not had to do much in the way of pushing them to read; they have done it largely on their own.

In addition to my parents, I have grandparents that were teachers, cousins that are teachers, aunts that are teachers. A long line of book lovers and intense readers.

This is my background. This is from whence I come. I am grateful for all of these people in my life and for what they have given me and shared with me.

As I walked into the store, I was practically knocked over by a 11- or 12-year-old trying to get into the store. Normally this would set me off in a "get off my lawn you whippersnapper"-type of internal temper tantrum. Seeing a young man this anxious to get into a bookstore, however, quells that anger.

I did my quick shopping and, as I said, was standing at the counter chatting with the clerk as she rang up my purchases (three of Terry Pratchett's books I'd been meaning to pick up for a long time and today seemed the time, may he R.I.P. But that's another discussion.).

And then I heard this:  A voice dripping with sarcasm and scorn. A mother, her face right in her son's face. Her son, the aforementioned young man, holding a book and looking like he had just had his earth shattered, his foundation broken, and the love of his life murdered in front of his eyes.

 Yeah, because you just loooooooove to read soooooooooooo much, don't you, now?!? 

It was loud enough that most of the front of the store turned to look at the pair. I watched as the boy turned, dejected, and slunk with his tail between his legs to set the book down and walk back to his mother's side. While she continued to peruse the glamor magazines, that is. (And believe me, no amount of printed glamor hints would have helped this woman. Neither externally nor, it seems, internally.)

I can understand not being able to afford buying a book, or a magazine, or some such. I can understand telling your child you cannot afford it and promising to get it from the library.

But mocking and deriding your child's desire to read and actually telling your child how much he should hate books?!?

Parenting skills? Hardly. I would call it close to parental tyranny.


I have heard it said before that, perhaps, people should be required to take classes and obtain a license before rearing children. I have typically laughed that off, or at least, dismissed it largely as histrionics.

Not after today. Certainly not after today.

In Memorium: Ray Bradbury (1920-2012)

.
"The great fun in my life has been getting up every morning and rushing to the typewriter because some new idea has hit me. The feeling I have every day is very much the same as it was when I was twelve. In any event, here I am, eighty years old, feeling no different, full of a great sense of joy, and glad for the long life that has been allowed me. I have good plans for the next ten or twenty years, and I hope you'll come along." --Ray Bradbury

Sam Weller, Bradbury's biographer, quoted Bradbury as saying he would sometimes open one of his books late at night and cry out thanks to God.

"I sit there and cry because I haven't done any of this," he told Weller. "It's a God-given thing, and I'm so grateful, so, so grateful. The best description of my career as a writer is, 'At play in the fields of the Lord.' "

Me again: What an amazing outlook. Can you imagine if we all had this kind of perspective on our work?

Farenheit 451, The Martian Chronicles, Something Wicked This Way Comes, Dandelion Wine, The Illustrated Man, "The Fog Horn": all works that have influenced my thinking and have stuck with me since I first read them. ("The Fog Horn" was adapted into the movie The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms.) He even penned the screenplay for John Huston's version of Moby Dick and wrote for The Twilight Zone.

I can still remember, for example, how I felt the first time I read The Martian Chronicles and came across the "twist" that threw the astronauts for a loop--if you've read it, you'll know what I mean. Only later did I read the book again and realize the deeper social issues that Bradbury was trying to convey. Obviously, as a book-lover, you can imagine what Farenheit 451 has always done for me.

His biographer was quoted today on the news that "a star has gone out of the Universe." The sky is certainly a bit darker today.

I would like to think that he's on Venus right now, riding his way across the face of the Sun (from our perspective).

Thank you, Mr. Bradbury, for everything.

It's NaNoWriMo Time Again!

Well, it is that time again, the time when my pencil sharpener earns its worth and I run through fountain pen ink like water. I have a stack of paper at my office desk and pocket notebooks proliferate my suit, jeans, and pajamas.

What time is it boys and girls? It's NaNoWriMo time again!

What is NaNoWriMo, you ask?

National Novel Writing Month is a fun, seat-of-your-pants approach to novel writing. Participants begin writing November 1. The goal is to write a 175-page (50,000-word) novel by midnight, November 30. ... The ONLY thing that matters in NaNoWriMo is output. It's all about quantity, not quality. The kamikaze approach forces you to lower your expectations, take risks, and write on the fly.

This will be my seventh year; I have won each of the last three years. And I have been dreading this day since December 1, 2010.

No, seriously. I dread November like the coming plague. But this year it is even worse than usual. I have no ideas for plot, character, or even genre. I am hoping some kind of inspiration strikes in the next 10 hours, because if not.... Well, let us just say that it will be an EXTREMELY long month.

Wish me luck. I will most likely be quite absent for a while, but then I suppose you are all quite used to that. I will try and keep you up to date on my progress, but I cannot guarantee anything at this point. After all, every ounce of writing, typing, or creative output has to be focused on THE NOVEL.

[SIGH]

Want to join me? Head on over to www.nanowrimo.org and register.

NPR's Top 100 Fantasy & Sci-Fi Books

I found this in a round-about way through the blogosphere as I think I would bleed out through the eyes if I were forced to listen to NPR for more than 35 seconds. You can find a printable version of the list here. Apparently 60,000+ voted on this list; it's an interesting list.
NPR's Top 100 Fantasy/SF books
1. The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy, by J.R.R. Tolkien - Read over and over.
2. The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, by Douglas Adams - Read over and over.s times; love it.
3. Ender's Game, by Orson Scott Card - Read over and over.
4. The Dune Chronicles, by Frank Herbert - I read Dune and simply could not go any further with the series.
5. A Song Of Ice And Fire Series, by George R. R. Martin - Reading now.
6. 1984, by George Orwell - Read over and over.
7. Fahrenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury - Read over and over.
8. The Foundation Trilogy, by Isaac Asimov - Read the series twice.
9. Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley - I have always intended to read this, but have never gotten around to it.
10. American Gods, by Neil Gaiman - Read, but did not enjoy overmuch.
11. The Princess Bride, by William Goldman - Read over and over.
12. The Wheel Of Time Series, by Robert Jordan - Read up to book 9 twice, but cannot seem to get any further.
13. Animal Farm, by George Orwell - Read it.
14. Neuromancer, by William Gibson - Read it.
15. Watchmen, by Alan Moore - Read it.
16. I, Robot, by Isaac Asimov - Read it.
17. Stranger In A Strange Land, by Robert Heinlein - Read several times.
18. The Kingkiller Chronicles, by Patrick Rothfuss - Read the first one twice; found it quite enjoyable.
19. Slaughterhouse-Five, by Kurt Vonnegut - No interest in reading it.
20. Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley - Read over and over.
21. Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?, by Philip K. Dick - Read it.
22. The Handmaid's Tale, by Margaret Atwood - No interest in reading it.
23. The Dark Tower Series, by Stephen King - Could not make it through book #3.
24. 2001: A Space Odyssey, by Arthur C. Clarke - Read it.
25. The Stand, by Stephen King - Read over and over.
26. Snow Crash, by Neal Stephenson - Never read it.
27. The Martian Chronicles, by Ray Bradbury - Read it several times.
28. Cat's Cradle, by Kurt Vonnegut - No interest in reading it.
29. The Sandman Series, by Neil Gaiman - Never read it.
30. A Clockwork Orange, by Anthony Burgess - Forced to watch the movie in college; no interest in reading it.
31. Starship Troopers, by Robert Heinlein - Read over and over.
32. Watership Down, by Richard Adams - Read it.
33. Dragonflight, by Anne McCaffrey - Read it.
34. The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, by Robert Heinlein - Read it several times.
35. A Canticle For Leibowitz, by Walter M. Miller - Never read it.
36. The Time Machine, by H.G. Wells - Read it several times.
37. 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea, by Jules Verne - Read it several times.
38. Flowers For Algernon, by Daniel Keys - Read it several times.
39. The War Of The Worlds, by H.G. Wells - Read it several times.
40. The Chronicles Of Amber, by Roger Zelazny - Never read it, but want to read it.
41. The Belgariad, by David Eddings - Read it; not his best work, in my opinion.
42. The Mists Of Avalon, by Marion Zimmer Bradley - Never read it.
43. The Mistborn Series, by Brandon Sanderson - Read it twice (so far).
44. Ringworld, by Larry Niven - Read it several times.
45. The Left Hand Of Darkness, by Ursula K. LeGuin - Never read it.
46. The Silmarillion, by J.R.R. Tolkien - Never read it. (If I want to read something that reads like the Scriptures, I will read the Scriptures.)
47. The Once And Future King, by T.H. White - Read it.
48. Neverwhere, by Neil Gaiman - Never read it.
49. Childhood's End, by Arthur C. Clarke - Never read it.
50. Contact, by Carl Sagan - Read it.
51. The Hyperion Cantos, by Dan Simmons - Read it.
52. Stardust, by Neil Gaiman - Never read it.
53. Cryptonomicon, by Neal Stephenson - Never read it.
54. World War Z, by Max Brooks - Never read it.
55. The Last Unicorn, by Peter S. Beagle - Read it.
56. The Forever War, by Joe Haldeman - Never read it.
57. Small Gods, by Terry Pratchett - Never read it.
58. The Chronicles Of Thomas Covenant, The Unbeliever, by Stephen R. Donaldson - No interest in reading it.
59. The Vorkosigan Saga, by Lois McMaster Bujold - Never read it.
60. Going Postal, by Terry Pratchett - Never read it.
61. The Mote In God's Eye, by Larry Niven & Jerry Pournelle - Read it.
62. The Sword Of Truth, by Terry Goodkind - Read several of the first books.
63. The Road, by Cormac McCarthy - No interest in reading it.
64. Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell, by Susanna Clarke - Never read it.
65. I Am Legend, by Richard Matheson - Never read it.
66. The Riftwar Saga, by Raymond E. Feist - Read the first one.
67. The Shannara Trilogy, by Terry Brooks - Read it.
68. The Conan The Barbarian Series, by R.E. Howard - Read several of the books.
69. The Farseer Trilogy, by Robin Hobb - Read once. Ugh. Never again.
70. The Time Traveler's Wife, by Audrey Niffenegger - Never read it.
71. The Way Of Kings, by Brandon Sanderson - Never read it, but plan to do so.
72. A Journey To The Center Of The Earth, by Jules Verne - Read it.
73. The Legend Of Drizzt Series, by R.A. Salvatore - Read the first dozen; that is enough for me.
74. Old Man's War, by John Scalzi - Read it.
75. The Diamond Age, by Neil Stephenson - Never read it.
76. Rendezvous With Rama, by Arthur C. Clarke - Read it several times.
77. The Kushiel's Legacy Series, by Jacqueline Carey - Never read it.
78. The Dispossessed, by Ursula K. LeGuin - Never read it.
79. Something Wicked This Way Comes, by Ray Bradbury - Read it several times.
80. Wicked, by Gregory Maguire - No interest in reading it.
81. The Malazan Book Of The Fallen Series, by Steven Erikson - Read Book #1; no interest in going further.
82. The Eyre Affair, by Jasper Fforde - Never read it.
83. The Culture Series, by Iain M. Banks - Never read it.
84. The Crystal Cave, by Mary Stewart - Read it several times.
85. Anathem, by Neal Stephenson - Never read it.
86. The Codex Alera Series, by Jim Butcher - Read Books #1 and #2.
87. The Book Of The New Sun, by Gene Wolfe - Never read it.
88. The Thrawn Trilogy, by Timothy Zahn - Read over and over.
89. The Outlander Series, by Diana Gabaldan - Never read it.
90. The Elric Saga, by Michael Moorcock - Read a couple of them.
91. The Illustrated Man, by Ray Bradbury - Read it.
92. Sunshine, by Robin McKinley - Never read it.
93. A Fire Upon The Deep, by Vernor Vinge - Never read it.
94. The Caves Of Steel, by Isaac Asimov - Read it.
95. The Mars Trilogy, by Kim Stanley Robinson - Read Books #1 and #2.
96. Lucifer's Hammer, by Larry Niven & Jerry Pournelle - Read it several times. Took this book with me on my honeymoon, in fact.
97. Doomsday Book, by Connie Willis - Never ead it.
98. Perdido Street Station, by China Mieville - Read it once. Barely. Never again.
99. The Xanth Series, by Piers Anthony - Read the first sixteen.
100. The Space Trilogy, by C.S. Lewis - Read it.

It looks like I am at about 65%, give or take. There are some titles on there that probably should not be there, and there are some titles/authors that I think they missed. All told, however, it is an intriguing list; maybe one of these days I will take a weekend, sit down, and make my own list.

Yeah, in all my spare time.

Road Signs: Detour

Over at The Spirit of the Law, there is a new post by yours truly. As you may remember, I am one of the moderators of the site, albeit a long-dormant moderator. I promised the guys over there I would not be too free with cross-posting. However, I feel strongly about this one, so I must beg their indulgence. I would also ask that you take a trip over there if you are so inclined to read the comments that I am sure this post will ignite.

The post itself is called Freedom is Refreshing. And it goes a little something like this:

Freedom.

It is like 7-Up for the soul.

Yeah... its lemon-lime (cannot say lymon, because that is Sprite, after all) effervesence that makes your nose tickle when you take that first drink? That is the feeling of freedom.

I am talking about all kinds of freedom.

The freedom to stand up on a soapbox in a park and proudly proclaim your beliefs without worrying about being arrested (so long as you are not inciting violence).

The freedom to carry your Beretta where- and whenever (nearly) you want to do so.
(Aside: For the record, that is "Beretta" not "Baretta": it is difficult to carry a private investigator wherever you go, let alone his cockatoo 'Fred.').

The freedom to vote for whomever you wish without fear of reprisal or intimidation.

The freedom to read, or write, the books you want without oppression or censorship.

The freedom to be able to worship how, where, and when you desire.

Except in the so-called Bloggernacle, apparently.

Unfortunately, it is an all-too-common practice among supposedly observant Latter-day Saint blog-hosts/-moderators to moderate, censor, and yes, even stifle debate. That is to say, debate against the ideas they believe and support. They willingly moderate and hold posts, preparing and scripting their responses. And then, when they feel they are losing or have lost the argument, shut down the comments altogether. Who knows why they do it: fear? hatred? shame? I do not claim to know. All I know is that, when faced with a little opposition, they inevitably suddenly up and walk away home, taking their baseball with them, bragging to everybody how they won the game.... Of course, it was their ball, and when they leave, how can you argue with them that they won the game?

That is one reason I am proud to be a member of this blog. The Spirit of The Law, regardless of how vitriolic some of us moderators become, it is in defense of our beliefs, beliefs that are under common and vile attacks elsewhere in the supposedly observant and routinely hypocritical LDS Bloggernacle. A place where the Brethren of the Church have urged members to bear our testimonies of the Living Christ and of the truthfulness of His Gospel, and the Restoration of the Gospel in the Latter-days. A place where, all too often, those testimonies are belittled and challenged by those who think that those Brethren--Brethren they supposedly sustain, by the way--are out-dated in their thinking, that they "just don't understand," or even worse, bigots and/or deranged.

Yes, this is the state of a large portion of the "Bloggernacle." It is a hostile place out there. Heck, sometimes it is a hostile place here, too. None of us is perfect, after all.

But for those of you who disagree with the moderators of this site, remember this: at least here, you -- a dissenter -- you get a hearing. I am not sure that I can remember an instance of any of the moderators shutting down argument or locking up a thread. Here, we understand Agency; we may not agree with your choice, or your perspective, or your comments, but you are free to make your argument.

For this, I say 'thank you' to my fellow moderators. I can feel my nose tickling.

And that is Freedom.

NaNoWriMo 2010

Yes.

It is that time of year again.

Just when I was starting to get in the blog-writing mode again, here comes NaNoWriMo. Like a Universal conspiracy, here comes NaNoWriMo to torpedo my blog again.

I am really starting to dread November and hate it when it is here.

And it is here.

"Why do it?" I hear you ask.

Because. Because of the feeling you get when you finish. I have heard it described as a massive bowel movement following a month of painful constipation. (Actually, I have only heard it described that way from my own two lips.)

You are welcome for that imagery. And at no extra charge, either.

As painful as it is, there is still a feeling of pride and accomplishment when 12:01 December 1 rolls around and you look and see a document with 50,000+ words that did not exist 30 days ago.

I think it may be as close as I come in this lifetime to actually going through labor and giving birth.

At least, I hope it is as close as I come.

We Did It!

At 10:30 p.m. Monday it was official!

Myself, my LW, and three of the Horde all reached our NaNoWriMo goals. Between us there were over 136,000 words of fiction written in our little home over the past 30 days. That's over 4,500 words per day.

That is a lot of writing, typing, and creative energy.

There was some real garbage put out (at least on my part) but there was some really brilliant writing put out too (that would be my LW and the Hordelings).

There were dwarves, elves, and dragons. There were some detectives, some spaceships, and a little time travel thrown in. There was teenage angst and middle-aged regret. There was even some introspection done. There was definitely pain: mental, emotional, and physical. If I am not mistaken, there was also a visit from Yoda and a few other Star Wars characters.

Congratulations to my family! I am so proud of all of you!

...and somewhat relieved that November is over for another 11 months.

Literary U-Turn

Well, it happened.

I hate my characters and my novel.

I hate them enough that I am dropping it like a hot potato.

That's right. I am now 16,000 words in. I have been stalled for several days because I just cannot stand the people in my head, and I woke up this morning with a new book flooding into my brain.

The characters in my first attempt are SO bad that I was better able to channel dialogue for one of my wife's characters than dialogue and actions for three characters who have been nurtured in my head for months. Oh, yeah... all I know about my wife's character is his name and approximate age.

So. I am going from a dark, gritty fantasy novel to what I picture as an urban fantasy, alternate-modern novel with a lighter comedic edge. And I have 10 days.

For those with a public-school education, that comes out to be 5,000 words per day.

Can I do it? I think so.

Will I? I hope so.

NaNoWriMo 2009

I'm scared of Hallowe'en this year.

Not because my office building may be haunted by two or more spirits.

Not because my neighborhood is populated by zombies, ghouls, and at least one vampire.

It's because on the day after Hallowe'en, or All Saints' Day, IT begins.

NaNoWriMo 2009.

National Novel Writing Month.

I did it last year.

It's taken me nearly a full year to recover my will and desire to really, REALLY write again.

And now this. Self-imposed slavish speculative scribbling.

I still have nightmares from last year.

But as I sit here, I'm again sharpening my pencils and filling my pens with fresh ink.

As I travel from home to the office, from the office to court, and back again, my mind races over plots, characters, dialogue, and, oh yeah.... "plot."

50,000 words staring me in the face and I do not yet have a story.

I have nine days.

And no story.

It is going to be painful. I know that.

And yet...bring it on.

Which Character, Part II

You Scored as Gimli

Gimli = 83%

Gandalf = 67%
Boromir = 60%
Merry = 60%
Sam = 60%
Eomer = 57%
Frodo = 53%
Legolas = 50%
Aragorn = 47%
Saruman = 43%
Pippin = 43%
Gollum = 40%
Elrond = 30%
Sauron = 30%

Unfortunately this quiz gives you neither a picture of the character nor a description of qualities/personality traits. (I had to go searching for my own picture.) I would sure like to know which qualities I share with Gimli (or what qualities the test's algorythimic creator believes that I share with Gimli).

Oddly enough, Gimli is my favorite character. I will always believe that Peter Jackson performed an injustice by making Gimli the comic relief in the last two films, but there you have it. No-one asked me for my input.

I, for one, am proud to be connected in some small, insignificant, ridiculous way with such a stalwart hero.

"Baruk Khazââd! Khazââd ai-mêênu!"
('Axes of the Dwarves! The Dwarves are upon you!')

Simply Harry Potter

OK. I know that in my last post I may have indirectly heaped trash on the name of J.K. Rowling.

I swear I heard gasping, because there are so many for whom reading Rowling is nigh-unto worship.

That's why I have been reluctant to admit to you all that in the past nine days I re-read all seven Harry Potter novels. Yep. The entire series. Started on June 7 and ended last night.

It was an enjoyable little jaunt.

I am not going to take back my scorn, however.

And I am going to offend some people.

Yeah, I hear you saying that at least she's published. That people know who she is and who am I to criticize her. I understand all that.

I will admit the books are a somewhat pleasant diversion. But they are just that. There is no deeper meaning to them, although I am sure that the typical liberal-arts loving English professor could deconstruct them and find hidden meaning galore, if not The True Meaning Of Life. (Yes, capitalized even.) I tried last night as I was finishing up The Deathly Hallows. Surely there's a message there about learning the truth about your heroes, some warning to children not to look up to or trust adults, because there's always some hidden evil in their background. That was as close as I got, and if I am right -- if that was intended -- well then, J.K. Rowling should be ashamed of herself.

But see, I am of the opinion -- the STRONG opinion that these books are not children's books. I do not care what kind of marketing strategy or philosophy involved, these are not children's books. In fact, I am ready to argue that allowing a child to read some of these books may be akin to child abuse, or at least indifference to the child's mental/emotional welfare and well-being.

We will not discuss the movies, because I gave up caring after the second one.

But I remember being in a grocery store years ago and watching in disgusted amazement as a three-year-old child pointed at a Harry Potter balloon and called out "Harry Potter! Harry Potter!"

A three-year-old child has NO business knowing who Harry Potter is.

And I am not sure that anyone under the age of mid-teens should know either. My teenager has not read them yet, and has not suffered any ill effects. She may in fact be able to live without reading them; the jury is still out on that one, though. Some sudden attack of fatal lackofpotteritis may yet prove to be her undoing.

Do not get me wrong: I am not going to make the argument of witchcraft and sorcery being peddled to our young. Others have made this argument, that is their prerogative. My thinking? They are fantasy novels. Not reality. Heck, outside of my spiritual endeavors, I spend most of my life in a fantasy world. [Aside: What? You think lawyers are sane individuals fully functioning in reality? I beg to differ.] I cannot take too much umbrage with this point. After all, Gandalf did magic. So did Willy Wonka.

No, I have different issues with Ms. Rowling's works. First and foremost, there is very little pure good represented in the books. Pure evil? Sure, it is everywhere; it saturates her little universe and it pours off the page. But pure good? I challenge you to point to ten major characters that are examples of pure, unadulterated, unquestioned goodness in the novels. No fair using animals: Hedwig and the owls do not count. Neither does Fawkes. I'll start the list, though these should probably be qualified as supporting cast:
1. Hagrid. Hagrid is an innocent and I am hardpressed to remember any specifically bad intentional act. The other characters treat Hagrid with pity, in part because he just doesn't seem as smart as they are.
2. Arthur and Molly Weasley. Again, innocents without any memorable bad intentional act. Again, well-meaning, but portrayed as slightly pitiable or less-intelligent. In fact, I could probably lump Bill and perhaps Charlie Weasley in here as well, but they are even more minor characters than their parents and, as such, perhaps do not warrant inclusion in the discussion at all.
3. Luna Lovejoy. Possibly. Her name just came to me; I will have to reserve judgment unless and until I can remember any specifics. But here again, an innocent that everyone considers to be slightly off-kilter or insane (or stupid).
4. Professor Minerva McGonagall. Again, she just came to me. I will have to think on her. She may be an exception to this list, as she is strong and intelligent.
5. Neville Longbottom. Another innocent. Another slightly off-kilter, slightly less-intelligent member of the cast.

See a trend? The only arguably purely good characters in the books are those that are innocent, naive, and possibly not intelligent. That's a nice portrayal; nice message to send to kids. "Hey, son! Why can't you act more like Neville Longbottom, eh?"

No, the main protaganists -- and by this I mean Harry, Ron, Hermione, and Dumbledore -- none of these are as unequivocally good as Voldemort is unequivocally evil. The Dark Lord has no direct counterpart. Dumbledore has a dark side and has done bad things. Harry and Ron waffle back and forth; they are not examples of pure good. Harry's soul is certainly not as lily-white as Voldemort's soul is midnight-black.

After the whole "peddling-these-books-to-kids" issue, this is my main beef with the books. There is pure good in this world. There is also pure evil. If you are going to acquaint readers with evil, especially if you are going to market to children and acquaint impressionable children with the concept of pure evil, then you better darn well be willing and prepared to acquaint them with the concept of pure good.

Plus, I simply cannot accept these as "great" literature. They are pleasant distractions. They cannot -- no matter how loud the groundlings scream -- compare to Shakespeare. Dickens. Twain. Rand. Do not try and argue; one hundred years from now, two hundred? Will Harry Potter be remembered? Will he be taught in AP English classes? Who's to say? Perhaps our standards are indeed that low. They're already suggested reading in elementary school. [Aside: We actually considered a private school for our oldest when she was ready to start school. The fact that the classrooms displayed posters of Harry Potter and Star Wars actually helped convince us to homeschool. Yes, even with a Star Wars-nerd father. There has to be a line in Education. That is a rant for another day, though.] I hope our standards -- not just as Americans, but as a civilization as a whole -- are not this low; I truly hope not. If she is our day's Shakespeare, we may as well simply throw in the towel.

I hear you saying that Shakespeare wrote to entertain, to satisfy the groundlings. Yes, but he did so with style, skill, and art. While Rowling uses magic as a subject, there is little or no magic in her words. Want to argue? Give me a passage with as much feeling and meaning as these:

What a piece of work is a man! How noble in reason! how infinite in faculty! in form, in moving, how express and admirable! in action how like an angel! in apprehension how like a god! the beauty of the world! the paragon of animals! And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust?

The Bard distills the essence of what makes up a man: the inherent goodness. And he does so with skill, art, and brevity. In the approximately 3,000 pages of the series, she cannot make Harry -- or, truly, any character -- fit this profile, let alone describe anything with this manner of magnificent prose.

I have actually read a review saying, "This [the fact that the characters, good and evil, are developed in such a way that they are, well, not simply good or evil] is perhaps Rowling's greatest achievement in the book. While the series can be described as an epic tale between good and evil, the individuals involved are not so easily defined." This is said as PRAISE of the books. [Aside: what adds a twist to this review was that it came from socialistworker.org. And yes, it was a random search; I just happened across it. In fact, now that I think about it, there's a whole host of blog entries on the fact that self-proclaimed socialists thrill over the blurring of the lines between good and evil. But I will leave that for another day. I do not want to discuss politics right now.] Sure... it may be an epic tale between good and evil, but it is one without a heck of a lot of real good shining out.

In these dark times, do we not deserve to treat ourselves to a little real good now and then?

And do not our children also deserve it? In fact, is it possible that they deserve it even more?

I know, it's a work of fiction. Why am I getting so riled up?

In part because it is a work of fiction. It is not literature.

Rowling's books surely cannot be part of the works of the Ages. If they are, well, I guess we deserve what we get.

Which Fantasy Author Am I?

Took this test: HERE.

Urg. Not pleased with the results. Too late to go into it tonight, though. More thoughts later....

Your result for Which fantasy writer are you?...

China Miéville (b. 1972)

7 High-Brow, 3 Violent, -3 Experimental and -31 Cynical!

Congratulations! You are High-Brow, Violent, Traditional and Romantic! These concepts are defined below.

China Miéville writes in the British fantasy tradition of authors like Mervyn Peake and Michael Moorcock, a tradition which is a little darker than the Tolkien kind, but Miéville is also a great renewer, as he has taken care to challenge, for example, race-related (or, to be exact, species-related) stereotypes in fantasy. His great breakthrough came with the award-winning novel Perdido Street Station (2000), which is set in the sprawling city of New Crobuzon in the secondary world Bas-Lag. Apart from its urban setting, Perdido Street Station also differ from Tolkien-style fantasy by taking place in an era reminiscent of the Victorian age rather than the typical quasi-medieval setting of so-called high fantasy. This means that Miéville has the opportunity to explore his socialist beliefs in a fantasy environment, even if both Perdido Street Station and its two sequels also feature monsters, adventures and such.

Setting his book in a rather dictatorical society and occasionally spinning his sories around resistance against an oppressive government means that Miéville's books sometimes contain rather horrible violence, made all the scarier because it's often conducted legally by a ruling government. This also makes the boks rather romantic; although the struggle is difficult, the struggle continues and whether you are a socialist like Miéville or not, it's easy to sympathize with the message that the world can be changed for the better. It should also be pointed out that although Miéville is often inventive and has a love for spicing up his prose with archaic words, his books are, narratively speaking, traditional adventure stories. Actually, Miéville has made a point of taking genres such as the pirate story and the Western story and retelling them in a fantasy environment.

Still, Miéville has brought fantasy to new literary heights and can be said to represent hope for the genre's future.

You are also a lot like Michael Moorcock.

If you want something more gentle, try Susan Cooper.

If you'd like a challenge, try your exact opposite, Orson Scott Card.

Your score

This is how to interpret your score: Your attitudes have been measured on four different scales, called 1) High-Brow vs. Low-Brow, 2) Violent vs. Peaceful, 3) Experimental vs. Traditional and 4) Cynical vs. Romantic. Imagine that when you were born, you were in a state of innocence, a tabula rasa who would have scored zero on each scale. Since then, a number of circumstances (including genetical, cultural and environmental factors) have pushed you towards either end of these scales. If you're at 45 or -45 you would be almost entirely cynical, low-brow or whatever. The closer to zero you are, the less extreme your attitude. However, you should always be more of either (eg more romantic than cynical). Please note that even though High-Brow, Violent, Experimental and Cynical have positive numbers (1 through 45) and their opposites negative numbers (-1 through -45), this doesn't mean that either quality is better. All attitudes have their positive and negative sides, as explained below.

High-Brow vs. Low-Brow

You received 7 points, making you more High-Brow than Low-Brow. Being high-browed in this context refers to being more fascinated with the sort of art that critics and scholars tend to favour, rather than the best-selling kind. At their best, high-brows are cultured, able to appreciate the finer nuances of literature and not content with simplifications. At their worst they are, well, snobs.

Violent vs. Peaceful

You received 3 points, making you more Violent than Peaceful. Please note that violent in this context does not mean that you, personally, are prone to violence. This scale is a measurement of a) if you are tolerant to violence in fiction and b) whether you see violence as a means that can be used to achieve a good end. If you are, and you do, then you are violent as defined here. At their best, violent people are the heroes who don't hesitate to stop the villain threatening innocents by means of a good kick. At their worst, they are the villains themselves.

Experimental vs. Traditional

You received -3 points, making you more Traditional than Experimental. Your position on this scale indicates if you're more likely to seek out the new and unexpected or if you are more comfortable with the familiar, especially in regards to culture. Note that traditional as defined here does not equal conservative, in the political sense. At their best, traditional people don't change winning concepts, favouring storytelling over empty poses. At their worst, they are somewhat narrow-minded.

Cynical vs. Romantic

You received -31 points, making you more Romantic than Cynical. Your position on this scale indicates if you are more likely to be wary, suspicious and skeptical to people around you and the world at large, or if you are more likely to believe in grand schemes, happy endings and the basic goodness of humankind. It is by far the most vaguely defined scale, which is why you'll find the sentence "you are also a lot like x" above. If you feel that your position on this scale is wrong, then you are probably more like author x. At their best, romantic people are optimistic, willing to work for a good cause and inspiring to their peers. At their worst, they are easily fooled and too easily lead.

Author picture by the talented artist "Molosovsky". Visit http://www.flickr.com/people/25360041@N06/ for more!

Take Which fantasy writer are you? at HelloQuizzy

Quote of the Day -- June 2, 2009

"The nation which had once held the creed that greatness is achieved by production, is now told that it is achieved by squalor." -- Ayn Rand

I am currently reading Atlas Shrugged for the first time. Glenn Beck first recommended it to his listeners, oh, about a year ago. It has taken me this long to work it through my reading list.

I would highly recommend it to anyone.

It will scare your socks off.

At times it is closer to reading the news than reading a novel, especially a novel written fifty years ago.

It will show you exactly where we, as a country and as a world, are headed.

I plan on blogging on this a bit later, once I have finished the book. [Aside: do not worry, it should not take too long; I pounded through over 400 pages Sunday night alone. Right now I stand about 220 pages from the end.] Let me simply state the assertion right now and I will revisit it later: Ayn Rand was either prescient or a genius regarding the human, governmental, and societal minds.

Quote of the Day -- Mar.25, 2009

“Get thee glass eyes; / And, like a scurvy politician, seem / To see the things thou dost not.”
--Lear, King Lear, Act IV, s. iv.

Ahhh... The Wisdom of the Bard. Take what you will from these words.

(Aside: And a strong tip of the hat to a certain High School teacher who wake'd my spirit and ope'd my eyes to the beauty that is the language of Shakespeare, and a deep bow to a wizened old elf at University who nursed those newborn feelings into a love of language. Alas, I believe both have now left us alone on the stage.)

The End of the Tunnel?

It has been awhile, gentle reader. But I think I'm back. or almost, at least.

I was going to entitle this post "Coming Out" but then I figured such a title would generate lots of the wrong sort of traffic.

But what does "The End of the Tunnel" mean? It means I think I can finally see that glimmer of light. The glorious dawn to the dark night of Blogpression.

You see, I was able to write this morning. I was able to write and it seemed to open the floodgates.

You see, ever since the end of NaNoWriMo--that is, ever since 11:30 p.m. on November 30, 2008--I have been unable to write anything of substance. No creative writing. No journal entries. I have even had difficulty completing essential client letters. I do not even want to THINK about the trials that the Sunday School lessons and other Church work have been.

But this morning as I stood in the shower, an entirely new scene for my NaNoWriMo novel presented itself, full-blown and complete, in my head. [Aside-- My LW and I have the same creative oddity: a hot shower in a steam-filled bathroom causes our creative juices to begin flowing. Are we alone in that? Maybe science could provide an answer.... But many was the time in November that I would reach a total impasse with a scene or a little piece of character development. I could be blocked all night long, but within minutes of stepping into a hot shower, BAM! There was the phrase or image I needed. I took to keeping a notepad in the bathroom so that I could write the words down as soon as possible. And yes, I do apologize for the image of me, in the shower, writing.]

It came fast and forceful, like a sledgehammer. I could actually SEE the characters interacting and hear their voices again. There were even smells in the scene. I quickly finished my ablutions and grabbed my notebook and started scribbling.

The mental floodgates were opening.

That scene led to another. Phrase by phrase, image by image, I quickly filled three pages of my notebook.

I did not want to stop.

Let me repeat that: I did not want to stop. After a month and a half, I actually wanted to write. On top of that, I was actually receiving words from my muse.

I am working on some other, future posts, delving a bit deeper into the reasons behind my blockage. I have been analyzing myself for the past few days and I think that is part of what helped thaw the icejam. Do not get me wrong: there are still some mighty big chunks of frozen imagery in my brain, and they're banging around with the randomly floating wooden words, crushing most of them and only occasionally letting a log through here and there. But it is breaking down.

And it feels good.

I think I may be back.

NaNoWriMo 2008 - Update 2

Well, never let it be said that life cannot or will not intervene. I knew that November was going to be bad: busy bad, hectic bad, crazed bad. Here I am not even one-half way through and life has intervened whenever possible.

And my NaNoWriMo work is suffering for it.

As of bedtime last night (12:45 a.m. to be exact) I now find myself 7,716 words off-pace.

That's right. Just over four-and-one-half days behind (4.63--again, to be exact).

Life conspires to intervene. I thought I had planned well enough this year, even considering everything else going on in my life.

This is called, so I am told, "Adulthood."

Somehow, though, sitting at a desk wrangling legal issues through my brain all day makes me sufficiently tired and brain-deadened that when I arrive home I want nothing to do with the evil laptop sitting before me.

That's right. Evil.

EEEEEEE-vil. As in the froo-its of the Devil. (Thank you, Mike Myers.)

The blinking cursor mocks me.

The television goes on; I surf through ten channels of broadcast television. Nothing on. I surf through them again. And again. And again.

That's when my LW, who is also WriMo-ing, screams in frustration and tells me to turn off the television and write. She wants to inspire me, you know.

Of course, she's also 4,417 words ahead of me.

I try to read. Nothing satisfies; neither the sci-fi nor the fantasy novels on my nightstand interest me. The same with the biography. Ditto the history book. I even try the Scriptures...and find myself wondering how I could use some of the things I am reading and translate them into my novel.

That's not the best way to read the Scriptures, by the way. It is also not the best way or most conducive way to get anything out of them, learn from them, or feel the Spirit, necessarily.

That's when I start drinking: Soda, cola, water, lemonade, milk. Things of that nature. A few potato chips or peanuts to keep awake. Ultimately, I drag myself off to bed having written nothing.

Then there's the self-imposed guilt the next day. I think, "Where in my day could I steal an hour to pound out 1,000 words or so?" I feel guilty doing any work, thinking about how I could put that time to use on my NaNoWriMo word count.

Heck. I feel guilty even while writing this blog.

But life happens. Unfortunately, and despite our best laid plans. (Again, see "adulthood".)

(Now.... If I postponed two client meetings today until tomorrow, that's two hours I could have, all to myself....) Ahem. [cough cough]

UPDATE:
By the way, am I the only one that remembers the movie from which I borrowed the above picture? If anyone else can come up with the name of the movie, I would sincerely love to know about it, especially if you have actually seen the movie in question.

I think I am the only one of my friends that ever saw it, let alone enjoyed it. Talk about a movie geek. Sheesh.

Anyway, let me know if you know.

--Now back to working on my novel pleading.

UPDATE #2:

This is, by the way, 560 words that could have gone toward my NaNoWriMo. NOW who feels guilty, Hmmm?

Yep. Exactly.That's what I thought.

No one but me.

NaNoWriMo 2008

Well, it's that time of year again.

I'm starting to sharpen pencils like a madman. I'm ordering my bottles of fountain pen ink. I'm stacking up ream after ream of collegiate ruled paper.

It's NaNoWriMo time again!

What is NaNoWriMo, you ask?

National Novel Writing Month is a fun, seat-of-your-pants approach to novel writing. Participants begin writing November 1. The goal is to write a 175-page (50,000-word) novel by midnight, November 30.

Valuing enthusiasm and perseverance over painstaking craft, NaNoWriMo is a novel-writing program for everyone who has thought fleetingly about writing a novel but has been scared away by the time and effort involved.

Because of the limited writing window, the ONLY thing that matters in NaNoWriMo is output. It's all about quantity, not quality. The kamikaze approach forces you to lower your expectations, take risks, and write on the fly.

I've tried it twice, and both times been thwarted by either illness or real life. I'm bound and determined to do it this year.

Of course, I say that every year, and then peter out sometime around Thanksgiving, telling myself that I'll devote every waking minute over Thanksgiving break to writing and getting caught up on my word totals.

How well does that work out, do you think?

Yeah, you'd be right....

But this year, I'm gonna do it.

Want to join me? Head on over to www.nanowrimo.org and register.

Book Review: Shaman's Crossing

Shaman's Crossing by Robin Hobb.

I tried to like it. Really I did. I wanted to enjoy it, immerse myself into the world.

Instead, every page felt like a chore, every paragraph took great effort to work through.

Robin Hobb captivated me with her Farseer Trilogy. Assassin’s Apprentice, Royal Assassin, Assassin’s Quest--I loved them. I liked the characters, I felt as if I knew the world, had walked the streets, smelled the smells, heard the sounds.

The world of the Soldier Son Trilogy felt completely alien. It felt false to me.

It’s not that she cannot write; she can, and does it well. It was the alien nature of the world and the pacing. I could not see where she was going with the characters. I did not like the characters and I certainly was not vested in them.

I did not care about them one whit.

Jerky.

That’s the feeling for which I’ve been searching: jerky. It felt jerky. Not disjointed--well, maybe a bit--but just plain jerky. Like a 15-year-old boy trying to drive a car with a racing clutch. The story jerked and halted in fits and starts until I just could not take it any longer.

I finally rescued my bookmark from the middle of the book and the book went back on the “library book” shelves in the front room. If I run out of reading material before it is due back to the library, who knows? I may pick it up again and plow through to the end. I may even find something entirely surprising and enjoyable in the process.

But saying that I ran out of reading material? That’s like saying the Rocky Mountains ran out of rocks.

Don’t get me wrong; I’ll try Ms. Hobb again. I can’t wait to start the Tawny Man Trilogy. Plus, the Farseer Trilogy has made it onto the “I liked it when I read it from the public library so I’m willing to spend money on buying the book and adding it to my own shelves” list.

Maybe I'll try again in a year or so to pick up Shaman's Crossing again. Maybe I just read myself out of the mood.

Maybe.

But it'll be a while.

What have I got in my pocket?

The news is all over the 'net today--I got the word from E! Online

The acclaimed British thespian, [Sir Ian McKellen,] who, as the wizard Gandalf the Grey, helped shepherd Frodo Baggins through a perilous journey in Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings trilogy, has announced he will reprise his Academy Award-nominated role for the hugely anticipated Hobbit prequels.

I can breathe a sigh of relief now. NO-ONE could play Gandalf other than Sir Ian.

Word is, Andy Serkis has also signed up to reprise his role as Gollum.

Now...they just have to make sure and get Sir Ian Holm to once again don his waistcoat and come back as Bilbo Baggins. Like Sir Ian M. and Gandalf, I'm not convinced that any one else could pull off Bilbo.

While I'm glad that Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh will once again be involved, I certainly wish they were directing, rather than simply Executive Producers. I have heard rumors that they have negotiated EXTENSIVE control over script, etc., but until I see it, I won't believe it. It would take a special director to relinquish that kind of control to a producer, I think. Without that control--in fact, without Jackson at the helm--I'm not at all convinced that the Lord of the Rings magic can be repeated.

Now, Guillermo del Toro has agreed to direct. I haven't seen enough of his work to know whether or not I approve. I enjoyed Hellboy, but that's the only thing I've seen. I don't like subtitles, so I haven't seen Pan's Labyrinth and I do not think I've seen any of the other projects listed on his IMDB page. I WILL say that it couldn't be worse than the previously-rumored "Sam Raimi as director" potential.

Gaaak. Wouldn't that have been horrible?

I'll hold my breath and hope that del Toro and the Jackson/Walsh team can work some literary/cinematic magic. It would help to get the same visual effects and supporting crew from the Lord of the Rings movies. That's doubtful, however, because of the sour taste they're sure to have from prior dealings with New Line Cinema.

Which brings me to the riddle:
This thing all things devours:
Birds, beasts, trees, flowers:
Gnaws iron, bites steel:
Grinds hard stones to meal:
Slays king, ruins town,
And beats high mountains down!

[The answer: New Line Cinema's accounting department!]

Thank you, thank you...I'll be here all week. Try the veal and remember to tip the waitress.

There are all sorts of other jokes and one-liners sure to crop up now... "The marketing roads go ever ever on...."

We're also sure to see (another) re-issuing of the Rankin-Bass cartoons from the 1970s.

I didn't really enjoy those movies, but I KNOW for a fact that I'm not the only one humming the "Goblin Town" tune right now....

Admit it....

It could be worse.

You're welcome. THAT ear-worm will be with you for a while.

Bilbo... Bilbo Baggins... Bravest little Hobbit of them all...."

But if I could make two suggestions to the Producers and Director.

First, in re: casting:

There is one man out there that could fill Thorin Oakenshield's sky-blue hood with its long silver tassel:

Brian Blessed.

Yes, he of Blackadder fame. Yes, the same Brian Blessed that was in Branagh's Much Ado About Nothing.

He was also the voice of Boss Nass from Star Wars: Episode 1--The Phantom Menace.

And yes, also Prince Vultan from Flash Gordon.

Ahem.

We'll just ignore that last one, shall we?

Why Brian Blessed, you ask? Well... Mr. Blessed has a nice, booming voice, a morbidly-wicked sense of humor (at least, on screen), and I believe just the right temperament for the King Under the Mountain. I have long been a fan of Mr. Blessed's. His filmography (courtesy of IMDB.com) is quite impressive and varied: Dr. Who; Blake 7; The Avengers; I, Claudius; Henry V; MacGyver; Macbeth; King Lear; Waiting for Godot.

Wow.

So why not add Tolkien to that list?

His IMDB.com bio says: "Boisterous Brit Brian Blessed is known for his hearty, king-sized portrayals on film and TV. A giant of a man accompanied by an eloquent wit and booming, operatic voice[.]" There you have it: Hearty; king-sized; eloquent wit; booming operatic voice. (We'll ignore the "giant" part, as that can be addressed through visual effects.)

One last argument in favor: he's 4 inches shorter than John Rhys-Davies (a.k.a. Gimli).

My second recommendation: you simply MUST begin the movie with an introductory narrative as Jackson did in The Fellowship of the Ring. The Hobbit just would not be The Hobbit without

In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit.
Not a nasty, dirty, wet hole, filled with the ends of worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry, bare sandy hole with nothing in it to sit down on or to eat: it was a hobbit-hole, and that means comfort.
It had a perfectly round door like a porthole, painted green, with a shiny yellow brass knob in the exact middle. The door opened on to a tube-shaped hall like a tunnel: a very comfortable tunnel without smoke, with panelled walls, and floors tiled and carpeted, provided with polished chairs.

This narrative could easily be matched with a visual tour of the hobbit-hole, as well as Hobbiton and various hobbits, much like Fellowship.

O.K. I'm getting too excited.

I'm going to stop here and go back to work.

Just as soon as I finish this next chapter of The Hobbit. Let's see...where was I?

Ah yes...

Bilbo had sniffed more than once at what he called 'all this dwarvish racket,' as they went along, though I don't suppose you or I would have noticed anything at all on a windy night, not if the whole cavalcade had passed two feet off.

Ahhhh...My precioussss....

R.I.P.

Daisy, Daisy.... Give me your answer do....

A Grandmaster of Science Fiction died last week.

I thought about noting the passing of Sir Arthur C. Clarke at the time, but it's taken me this long to formulate my thoughts about him sufficiently to put into words.

I didn't really like his work.

Don't get me wrong, 2001: A Space Odyssey was an important movie in many ways. Who knows if we'd have Star Wars or Battlestar Galactica, or any of a dozen-plus other movies/series without it. I suppose it's also an important book, but I have to admit to two things: First, the movie--to me--is nearly unwatchable. I think I may have accomplished the feat twice (?). And second--again IMHO--the book is even more unreadable. I've heard that you have to read the book to understand the movied; maybe therein lies my problem with the movie.

I will agree, however, that the effects and editing in the movie are fantastic. The transition from a falling, rotating bone (humanity's supposed "first tool") to a (technically) falling, rotating space vehicle (humanity's supposed "latest tool") is still riveting. The rotating wheels, exercising in space, the velcro-shod stewardesses: all amazing and classic imagery.

And no-one can call themselves a sci-fi afficionado without professing a fascination with the HAL 9000. (Did you know that HAL's name was a play on "IBM," did you know that? One of the original Trivial Pursuit questions, I believe.) I have a 386 computer in the basement, the hard drive of which is loaded with HAL 9000 quotes and sounds.

And I have to admit to having carried a copy of The Hammer of God on my honeymoon. Loving books like I do, I go NOWHERE without one. My LW tolerates that habit of mine. (Even driving the Horde to the library, I will often have a book in the car, just in case I get stuck in the car waiting for them at the store, etc.)
That being said, The Hammer of God wasn't even cracked open until we returned home from the honeymoon. So there.

I found his Rama books somewhat entertaining, too.

That's about it.

However, I'm still a little upset by his death. I hate to see the Old Guard go. There's a LOT of bad modern science fiction out there now; much of it is even more unreadable than I consider 2001, and for different reasons. There's a lot of crap. Even some of the "big names" have fallen into the trap. A lot of the "hard" science fiction novels become a vehicle for the technology at the expense of a story. There is nothing wrong with intelligent science fiction, so long as there is a story as well.

The storytellers are leaving us and we're stuck with the merchandisers and the (pseudo-)intelligentsia.

Alas.

Sir Clarke did leave us with the satellite and the idea of the space elevator. And I believe he was, truly, a storyteller. I may not have liked a lot of what he did, but I have a lot of respect for what he did...and for his mind.

I doff my hat, bow my head, and wish he could tell us: is it, in fact, full of stars?

Goodbye, Sir.

We'll see you again on the other side.