Pirates, arghhhh

I recently finished the penultimate Crichton novel, Pirate Latitudes. His last novel is still in editing and is rumored to be a techno-thriller, for which he is best known. But Dr. Crichton could write a mean historical tale of adventure as well (Eaters of the Dead being the other one I'm thinking of).

As I understand it, an assistant found a copy of this manuscript buried in one of his computers, finished but forgotten. The publishing industry being what it is, they grabbed it up and printed a million copies! I'm not sure why this would have been locked away, but I suspect he wasn't done with it. It was a rougher read. Crichton tells a good story, Jurassic Park, Andromeda Strain. Science gone awry with a small group of people trying to survive. In PL, Crichton tells of a 17th century pirate. Affected voice, more exposition than usual, jumpy narrative. That sort of thing. It was Fine. No Treasure Island or anything, but I enjoyed it alright.

Immediately after, I started in on my next read, the Last Raider by Douglas Reeman, also a tale of Naval Hijinks. Not to take anything from an obviously great man and writer, but there is sure a notable difference between someone writing about something they have experienced (Reeman was a sailor in WW2) and someone writing about something who hasn't.

Ch,Ch,Ch. Changes...

I read my first Jim Butcher book recently. 'Changes' is the most recent installment of the Harry Dresden Files series. You may have heard of this from the show on the scifi channel a few years ago. Dresden is one of the leading Urban Fantasy series out there written with a male voice. (a large preponderance of Urban Fantasy slips easily into the 'paranormal romance' or 'chicklit')

For the unenlightened among you, Urban Fantasy is a subgenre of fantasy where mythic elements are found in an urban setting. It could be any time period, just set in an urban environment. You usually find elves, dwarves, fairies, magic mixed with the modern world. The second hellboy slipped into an urban fantasy.

I think I should have started at the beginning with Harry though. As with most series the author needs to up the ante as the character goes along, right? Changes is #12, so the events, rather than being the story of a wizard in a modern setting (which sounds clever), turn pretty quickly into epic battles between a vampire army, along with every mythic figure, from norse, to celtic to aztec, that I have ever heard of. Butcher is a competent writer, his first person narrative is believable and he has an interesting premise. I can see why he has a following. I wasn't a fan of the all-in and kitchen sink approach to fantasy though. It felt like a long mixed metaphor, but understandable if all of the characters had been introduced over the past few years.

Dead Bird is still great

Was it, 'I Want Candy' by the Bow Wow Wow's, or "Video Killed the Radio Star" by the Buggles? How about 'Ride Captain Ride on Your Mystery Ship' by the Blue Images or 'In A Big Country' by who else, Big Country?

Nope, it wasn't.

Of all the one hit wonders to ever hit big, To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee was clearly the biggest of big. Since it's publication in the 1960's Ms. Lee's book has sold well over 30 million copies. 30 Million. Can you imagine? And if you check Amazon it's in the top 2000 books right now. (If my book spikes at 2000 for an instant I'll fall over, apoplectic.)

I finished it for the second time in several years (the first time being in middle school which was... like I said several years) and really appreciated it more now than I did then. I can see why I was made to read it. It's elegant, understated, and emensly powerful. I don't need to run through a critique, there are 50 years worth of those. If you haven't read it since you were made to do so as a kid, then you should revisit. In spite of the blantant racism, the adult content that I didn't catch when I wasn't an adult (for instance, the accusation of incest that Tom R obliquely makes against the little terd Ewell- do you remember it? If not that's what I mean) it's still great both in spite of and because of, for different reasons.

As far as a one-hit wonder (Ms Lee never published another book) I am reminded of a quote from Joe Heller I once read. Paraphrasing: An interviewer noted that in his subsequent writing Heller had never written anything as good as Catch-22. He replied that the interviewer (nor most people that write) had never written ANYTHING as good ever.

Here Here.

hardball

If you look up lists of noir, or hardboiled fiction (and I do), you often run across Sara Paretsky's name. Dr. Paretsky writes a crime series featuring a private invesitgator named V.I Warshawski (Vic); Chicagoan, whiskey drinking, mustang driving, butt-kicking lady.

In all I find her writing certainly competent and entertaining, and recommend it. But I do have an observation for you to take and do with as you will. In previous posts I have mentioned differences in writing audiences. Manly-not manly. Much of the hard-boiled or noir fiction, the really edgy stuff, is geared toward men. Then there are the 'cozies', Agatha Christy type 'crime' books that you can cozy up with that I usually see women reading. There is a large body of crime fiction that is pretty gender neutral (to me). Paretsky's work is that body of noir that I don't see as appealing to the strictly knuckle-dragging crowd. To me, the thing that keeps me from really engaging in Paretsky's work to the degree that I do with others, say Robert Parker for instance, is in the details that I will gender-biasedly call manly details.

Compare and contrast a Sunny Randall book with a VI Warshawski tale. Different.

It's in the details.

When Vic pulls a weapon out, it's her 'colt'. The gun she keeps in a tuck holster. But what kind? Colt has made 100s of guns in the last century....

When a noir (anti) hero slides his (or her) weapon from the leather (or nylon) shoulder holster, it's a 9mm Glock 17 with pacmyer grips, laser sight. Heavier in his (or her) hand than the Glock 19 and redolent with the smell of cleaning fluid and old gunpowder, or better yet, cordite.

Accessory or life partner? This isn't to say crime fiction written from a manly viewpoint wouldn't also assume that a gun is just a prop...it's just not the manly crime fiction I read.

Rest for the wicked

I polished off two very different books this past week; Paul Tremblay's "No Sleep till Wonderland"and Joe Hill's "Horns". Both held my attention until the end but neither really did it for me, even though they are both 'dark fiction' writers (which I also aspire to be).

First, Tremblay. He's a high school teacher and published a number of short stories in anthologies and magazines. This story falls into a "flawed Private Investigator, duped by girl, crime" sort of story. He did a good job of writing and I usually like these, but Tremblay has made the character so irredeemably flawed that I couldn't really embrace him. The protagonist is Mark Genevich, a narcoleptic attending group therapy or his mother will kick out of his rent-free apartment. It reminded me a lot of a cleaned-up Chuck Paluniuk. I think the part that kept me from embracing it was that the first person account was very internal. The protag editorializes everything, all the time, in a wisen-himer manner. I expect this is needed as Mark is facing some serious internal issues and we get a real sense of what it is like to live with the disease. But still...
The constant use of tough-guy talk and overly involved metaphors was sometimes entertaining and sometimes distracting. The other thing that threw me off was the use of present tense.
So, in short, a clever take on the detective novel, competently written, but I didn't love it- but then there is no accounting for taste.

The second book was Joe Hill's "Horns". I was really looking forward to this one as I enjoyed his debut novel, "Heart-Shaped Box" very much. It was an updated, edgier, and faster-paced Steven King. Ummm... if you didn't know, Joe Hill is the pen name of Steven King's son. And in that first book you could see the lineage. This one too, but not in a good way.

You see, I like King. He writes these genre-busting novels. But the thing I don't like about his writing, especially in his later work, is that he seems to meander through the story. Think Lisey's story... Dooma Key was an awesome book, but for me it was 30% too big for the story it told. I think his work certainly matured and progressed, but I haven't liked anything he's written as much I liked the shining. But this isn't about Steve, but rather Joseph Hillstrom King. Hard not to do though, isn't it?

Anyway, I didn't really like Horns as much as I had hoped I would. First, the theme, a guy turns into a demon. This didn't overly offend my Christian sensibilities, but the author's several rants about the Devil being the first superhero and God generally being a no fun blowhard didn't sit well. The characters are devoutly Catholic, but Hill really trivialized the mechanics of being religious, and being Catholic in particular, which made me feel it a bit unrealistic. The other part I didn't really like (and I confess, I actually skipped over text- which I try never to do) was that the flashbacks and the 'present' of the book seemed really unbalanced. If that makes sense. Time is moving along in the book, big flashback to explain something, short present, long long long flashback, repeat. Otherwise, he can certainly tell a story. Writing advisors tell you to not be easy on your protagonist, and the poor protagonist in this story went through hell. Which in the end seemed to be the place he wanted to go after all.

More Manly books

I finished in rapid order (thanks to a transatlantic round-trip plane flight for work) two books. Robert Parker's Appaloosa and Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe's Siege.

Very different books, but certainly the type to appeal to guys. I've mentioned Parker before, a writer of contemporary crime fiction who decided to try his hand at a Western. I think it came off well. Tight, hard-boiled-ish, gun fights and cool no-nonsense heroes.

Sharpe's Seige on the other hand is much like the Alexander Kent book I described earlier. Rather linear, manly. Cornwell is one of the best writers of historical fiction out there, writing of the exploits of Major Richard Sharpe in the Napoleonic Wars. As Kent and others write of the British Navy, Cornwell writes of the British Army. Infantry in fact. While the majority of British Infantry was armed with the venerable 'Brown Bess', .75 caliber, smooth bore musket, Sharpe is a rifleman armed with the 'Baker Rifle', a .625 caliber rifle. (Note: a rifle is a long arm where there is 'rifling' or spiral grooves inside the barrel that cause the bullet to spin- makes them more accurate at greater ranges, but also takes longer to load).

The average sailor in the 19th century British Navy probably wasn't the most reputable person, but the Infantry soldier was down-right disreputable. Sharpe is an officer that was raised up from the ranks (prior enlisted). So he comes across as a bit of a hard-case. I like spending time with him.

A visit with a futzy uncle

Imagine spending the afternoon with a slightly eccentric foreign uncle. He's amusing in a doty, understated, dry-British-humor sort of way. His puns and set ups are deliberate. Not a rock-concert, or a frat party, but you enjoy yourself all the same. This is what reading an Alexander McCall Smith book is like for me.

The Unbearable Lightness of Scones, as the second Smith book that I've read (the first being Portugese Irregular Verbs). He's much better known for his #1 ladies detective club books, and I keep meaning to pick one of those up... AMS is an academic, born in Africa but Sottish.

tULoS is an episodic novel that revolves around the lives of a small cadre of characters that live in and around #44 Scotland street in Edinburgh. The characters are all for the most part well drawn and it seems a bit like a Seinfeld episode if reimagined with a larger cast and more elaborate problems by a BBC writer with a slight 'comedy of manners' bent and a desire to make social commentary. I think it's the fourth or fifth in the series and there may be merit to starting at the beginning, but I think it stands by itself as well. (But to be honest I enjoyed Portugese Verbs more).

Manly Books

It's pretty well accepted in the publishing industry that women read much more fiction than men. Go to any book store or stop by the rack of books by the magazines at the grocery store and you can clearly see this in the available selections. Honestly, how many guys do you know that belong to reading clubs? A bunch of manly men sitting around discussing enduring themes and how a novel made them 'feel', while balancing a plate of finger sandwiches and sipping green tea. Seriously. I can't even conjure an image.

My coworkers in the office have a monthly book club, and when I asked if I could join, I was scoffed at. Openly. "Your a 'manly-man', why would you join?" one Lady asked. And this after they had chosen Neil Gaimon's Graveyard Book as their selection. "Did you at least note the structure of said novel (short story-like), or the parallels to Kiplings works?" I asked. Nope. But they did invite me to sit with them on their next selection, Reading Lolita in Tehran...

Pa-shaw. Not manly enough.

Honour This Day by Alexander Kent is a manly book. Douglas Reeman (the real name for the author) is a World War II British Navy veteran. As Kent, he writes the story of Richard Bolitho, a British Navy Officer set from the end of the US revolutionary war through the Napoleonic Wars. Great stuff, but alas, never to be seen in a women's reading circle...

And why exactly? I think there is action, certainly (and Reeman does an excellent job of making you feel like you are there, with a host of details you would only think to include if you had actually served in the Navy and been to sea in war- think Horatio Hornblower only better). But the plots are also fairly linear. There aren't a lot of twists and turns, they're there, but not so much so that they detract from telling a great story. Or maybe those twists make it more suitable for the reading circles?

Most of his books are out of print, and he is one of the first authors I look for when I hit a used book store. (I know you can find these on amazon, but I like the thrill of the hunt). The aspect of the writing that I really don't much like is his shifting POV. Most authors use 3rd person, where you describe a person (as opposed to first person where the writer uses 'I'), but Reeman will liberally shift POV through 3 or 4 people in one short scene. A little hard to follow at times.

HTD was my most recent Kent novel, and I loved it. When Reeman is detailing the seamanship, the battle sequences, how leaders and men in war interact, he does so flawlessly. (And I can say this with some authority as I was a leader of men in war). The romantic aspects (there is a love interest, a point of honour, an affair) not so well played. But then, this is not meant to be filed in the stacks with the Romance novels, this is high adventure. No lace doilies and finger sandwiches here!

True blood

When people find out that you like to write short stories (and novels) about monsters, they often give a puzzled half smile. And then they search through their experiences to try to make a connection; "Oh, like (insert name)" or "You must like (insert name)".

With the increased popularity of monsters in a certain cross-over genre...we'll call it...I don't know, horror romance...no how about paranormal romance.. well with the increased popularity of tortured vampire love interests (from Anne Rice's Lestadt to Stephanie Meyer's Edward) the 'insert name' name is less likely to be Steven King or Dean Koontz and more likely to be someone writing about tortured vampire lovers.

Well, one I've been asked about more frequently (especially after the HBO show True Blood came out) is Charlaine Harris. So, I finally knuckled under and gave one of her books a read. Or, in this case a listen (audio book). I picked up her collection of short stories A Touch of Dead.

Clearly not my cup of tea. But it wasn't bad. Paranormal, southern romance with a chick-litty chatiness. The character, Sookie Stackhouse, was believably likable, there was a chatty understated quality to her dialogue. It certainly didn't take itself too seriously and was fun. But she did disconcertingly dump every trope of supernatural horror and urban fantasy and swirl them around. And I just went through the 5 short stories. Vampires, elves, trolls, were creatures...telepaths, witches..even catahoula hunting dogs! My head hurt.

I would recommend with a qualified 'if you like that sort of thing'. And many many people do, as she spends a lot of time on the NY Times lists. Certainly smarter than...egads, Twighlight...but a bit of stretch otherwise. I wouldn't turn my nose up, but I'm not running out to buy the next book either.

Hard Boiled Crime/Mystery

I finished Split Image by Robert B Parker, the ninth and last Jesse Stone novel. It's also the last novel that features his other successful series character, Sunny Randall.

Last I'll see either character because Dr. Parker passed away last January. A terrible loss for his family to be sure, but to the genre and his large fan base as well. I know I was sad when I heard.

I recommend all Parker's novels as a matter of course. I love them for their crisp elegance. My favorite Parker books are, I must admit, his Virgil Cole westerns, but his most famous character is of course Spenser (39 novels from 1973 to 2010- a pretty good run). Like in the Spenser books, here there is humor, there is an adept insight into psychiatry, there is competent writing with mostly complete characters and snappy dialogue. Unlike the Spenser books, Jess Stone is very much a flawed character (so is Sunny Randall which I suppose makes them a good match). But Jesse struggles with obsessive behaviors and alcohol.

Well, the novel. Again a novel very much like the other Jesse Stone Novels (Oh and Tom Selleck comes off as a much older and grittier version than I imagine the book version of Jesse to be in the TV specials) without being overly repetitive. Or worse yet, being derivative! The novel follows Jesse, and to a lesser extent Sunny, as they try to solve crimes. Jesse struggles with his inner demons and goes on a bender, spending much of the rest of the novel trying to understand what set him off. A quick read. Dr. Parker left the ends rather well tied for me to believe these two characters may have a future.

The only real criticism I have, and it's really something I've seen in many of the books, is that the characters all get each other. What I mean is that there is a sort of ironic-self depricating-sarcasm to the humor one character will express to another. And for the most part all of the other characters 'get it' and have the same sort of snappy comebacks. Except for the criminals who all seem to exhibit the banality one would expect of a thug.

("It looks like it was hard to get into those pants' says Jesse; 'For who' retorts Sunny. That sort of stuff).

Something to keep in mind, most people come at conversations from different angles and don't always see irony or sarcasm as funny. Being an ironic-self depricating and sarcastic person myself, I feel that I can say with authority that not everyone 'gets it'. And even if they do get it, that doesn't mean everyone thinks it's funny. Well, me anyway. But then, I don't have such a skilled and experienced writer putting my material together.

Thrillers

(And I don't mean of the Michael Jackson variety.)

I finished Eric Van Lustbader's 'Last Snow', a thriller.

EVL is known for his fantasy and thriller series, but also for reviving the Jason Bourne, (of the Bourne identity movies) series on contract from the estate of Ludlum, the creator.

An aside:
Generally literati talk about Plot driven novels, versus character-driven novels.
In the plot driven novel, what happens in the story is of primary importance. The characters seem to be pawns driven around through the novel like chess pieces on a board. In the character-driven novel on the other hand, it seems as if the characters are the masters of their own fate, and the story told unfolds because of the choices they make. I prefer novels that combine the two. The best examples of character driven stories are 'literary fiction'. I've been known to criticize this 'genre' as often the stories are so beautiful and they employ such incredibly powerful imagery, the prose is so lush, but I finish one and say.... so what was the point?

Plot driven stories are quite the opposite. There is a story. But sometimes the plot can be so contrived as to force me to the other side of the 'criterati' and scream at the pages; "That would never happen. Protagonist would never act that way!" (Most genre fiction has conventions. If a story didn't follow some of the conventions of the genre for instance, it wouldn't be labeled, right?) Of all the contemporary genre fiction, Thrillers are far and away the most plot-driven of them all. And this was very evident in Lustbader's novel.

Okay, back to my post.
In short it was a story of Jack McClure, ATF agent, hero, Presidents friend on special assignment where he breaks a 27 year marriage off with his wife, sleeps with an FSB (old soviet KGB) agent, foils high crimes, saves people, has shoot outs, survives arsenic poisoning...okay, get the picture? The political thriller is always an over the top plot-driven romp. It was well plotted, carried the story along and sold millions of copies. It will probably be a movie. But, I really didn't enjoy it and had to resist skimming to the finish. (I try never to do that. Elmore Leonard said his novels move along well because he never writes the parts people skip. So when I am tempted to skim, I ask myself why exactly I have that impulse.)

I think the biggest problem is that the author doesn't have a firm enough grasp of current Russian/Eurasian geopolitics and energy policy. News paper level, but there were too many instances where he tried to make the Russia of today be the Soviet Union of the 80's (the peak of coldwarspynovelthrillerdom). Then there were the instances where an event would happen but it wouldn't impact the rest of the flow of the novel. For instance, main character kills two assassins sitting in the car on the street below his apartment. Main character goes off to bordelo for top level meeting with bad guy. Main character returns to apartment and has dinner with hot widow next door. Okay. So why was the front of his apartment, where presumably there is a car full of dead guys, gone? No crime scene? I don't know, call me crazy, but I would expect such an event to have repercussions. And yes, I know it's a story. And it never really happened. And yes, I know that such a criticism from someone who writes stories about monsters seems a tad ironic. But still, help me suspend my disbelief a little bit longer.

Jaw Bones

I recently finished two books in rapid order, first 206 Bones by Kathy Reichs and second, Jaws by Peter Benchley. It was an osteologically-themed reading week.

Kathy Reichs holds a PhD in forensic anthropology and writes genre mystery fiction with a bit of a police procedural feel. Her character, Temperance Brennan, is the inspiration for the TV show 'Bones'. I picked this up thinking this was the book that the series was based upon, not realizing that it was in fact the twelfth book in the series...

It was pretty good. I'm a science geek, so the preachey asides which bordered on direct address of the reader, weren't so bad.
A common technique in old-fashioned literature, is referred to by contemporary literati as 'Breaking the fourth wall', but I assure you dear reader, this is much frowned upon in contemporary writing circles. Unless of course you are going for a pastiche of some sort, which Kathy Reichs was not doing. Anyway, her asides took time to explain very technical aspects of anthropology, forensics, etc and worked pretty well. The preachy references to the need for a 'board-certified-forensic-anthropologist' was a thinly disguised professional rant against the unprofessional use of 'mere pathologist who lack forensic anthropological training or board certification' at the end though.

Anyway, you can read the wikipedia review for the plot; different than the tv show, not bad on its own, better than some I've read, realistic, but not as terribly gritty as I expected from a crime novel about someone dealing with bodies.

The second book I devoured was Jaws. Ha!

Like most children of the 70's, my first summer blockbuster was the movie Jaws. I had the Jaws poster. I had Jaws T-shirts. I saw all of the sequels over the next 10 years. But I never read the book.

I picked it up from the library a few weeks ago....
... da-dum
With that same scantily clad swimmer..
... da-dum
With a torpedo-like shark with a grinning mouth-full of teeth beneath...
... da-dum

...And I was expecting pure camp.

(Don't get me wrong, I love camp. I love pulp. I like old Dr Who -The Tom Baker version, Dr #4, for max camp and minimum special effects budget.
Conan the Barbarian is one of my top ten favorite films of all time for crying out loud.)

But you know what? Jaws was actually a great read. I not only enjoyed it, I thought it was pretty good. The characters seemed extremely dated, but real. A little over the top with the frustrated housewife and the 'old mystery man of the sea' Quint. The children were props. But still I was pleasantly surprised. The tension held up well even though I knew what was going to happen, but I could see how the screen writers took scenes that were slower, more drawn-out but real and jazzed them up a bit to increase the tension and give the scenes more 'pop'.

It was a classic, but was much quicker at getting to the point than Ayn Rand...

Oh Lazarus

I recently finished,and enjoyed, the Lazarus Project by Aleksandar Hemon.

Friends know that my tastes are eclectic, reading is no different. Even though I am a wide-ranging reader, I don't think I would have picked up this book had it not been a finalist for the 2008 National Book Award. I mentioned previously that the center of a writer's life is reading. So I read, a lot. I read pulp, I read Pulitzer winners, I read Newberry award winners, I read genre fiction by the box full(except romance- I tried...I just couldn't do it). I try to read things I enjoy, and things that will instruct (both in general terms and with regards to the craft of writing)and LP hit both marks.

The book is a story of a modern day Bosnian immigrant like the author who is conducting research for a book (about a Jewish immigrant killed in Chicago in 1908) and while tracing the path of the Jewish immigrant his companion (also a Bosnian, but one who had lived through the siege of Sarajevo) relays his story of the war. So really 3 stories in one.

Overall I thought it was well done and worth a read. But there were many instances where I experienced problems with the text that some of my critiquers have pointed out from time to time in my work.

First, the novice writer is told that the writer should be invisible to the reader. By that I mean that when you notice the writing you are knocked out of the story. Hemon's prose was overall very good, but he often used descriptive language (in particular adjectives) that seemed a bit incongruously and awkwardly wedged into the text. Maybe it's just me, but these instances brought me out of the story to wonder if these were really the right words to use.

Next problem for me was the reuse of vivid imagery. In particular 'vines of hair up the back of his neck'. First time you use it it's cool. Second time it is not only not cool it's awkward. Didn't happen often, but enough that I said to myself, 'Self, that's what that critter was talking about'.

Recycling is great, but not if it's really obvious in your story. The author recycled the same names, the same descriptions of people etc. I think the point was that there are echoes in history, but when it's really apparent that the author is doing it I think of it as 'cutesy' and I didn't really like it.

The last thing that tripped me up was not giving me enough information up front to have a clear image of the characters. If your character wears glasses and these will be important later then you need to tell me about them up front, otherwise I'll ask the blank pages 'where did those glasses come from?'.

It may sound as if I'm nitpicking, and I am. But I did enjoy the book, and would recommend it, even though it was a tad too literary (and postmodernist even) and just sort of...

-ended-

Atlas shrugged and so did I

This is meant to be a blog about my writing life. Almost every 'how to write' book, article or interview by an author advises that the novice author read voraciously. For this reason (voracious reading is part of my writing life) it seems appropriate to include those experiences here.

My inaugural post-reading post is Ayn Rand's Atlas shrugged.

It's been long in coming.
It was a long time in the reading.
And I'm left with an "..eh.."

As with most famous works, I was familiar with it before I read it. In fact, before reading the book I had read more about Ayn Rand's objectivism than I had ever read of Rand directly. I think as a work meant to pontificate a world view, in it's time it was probably great. But for me...yawn...it just took long to do it. The characters were either one of three people; 'looter', 'noble industrial egoist' or one of the masses with his/her hand out. No middle ground, they all sounded the same. They all gave one or the other monologue. For a long time. Didn't really care for the characters, couldn't buy into the dystopian world. I tried, honest.

The parts I really did enjoy were the datedness. The hunt for a long-distance phone connection (as I flick open my black berry), the obsession with cigarettes, the very 1950's ish-ness. That for me was fun (though I don't suspect this was the author's intent).

Glad I read it, because I have felt like a phoney all these years for reading about it, but not reading it. It will be a while before I dig into the vault of great tomes, I paid my dues for the near-term.