Heather:
I was, repeat, WAS going to lay into you regarding this whole "Why are men so hung up over the absence of fathers/male role-models in their lives?" thread; it seemed to me that you were affecting a kind of deliberate obtuseness which, quite frankly, was driving me totally batshit. I thought you were asking a perfectly obvious question, like "Is water wet?", or "Is sugar sweet?", or "Are the films of Harmony Korine pretentious crap?" (What's a word that describes situations where obviously intelligent people act UTTERLY clueless about certain topics in order to provoke a response? I'm sure there's a foreign word out there that fits--Hell, the Germans came up with 'schadenfreude', after all.) Although I STILL think you're being a little too twee about this for my tastes, it is entirely possible, as you've indicated, that this father-quest can seem mystifying to someone who hasn't experienced it--I shouldn't always assume that what is obvious to me is crystal to everyone else. So, as someone whose father essentially crossed me out of his life twentyplus years ago, I can only say that the absence of a male parent/guardian in the formative years of a man's life can wound in the deepest, most furtive ways. The wounds aren't always visible at the time, but they're there, and it can take many, many years to realize that you've been walking around with a long trail of blood behind you.
And you often want to inflict your pain on others, too. That, in my never-humble opinion, is the worst result of having this vacuum in your soul. You want to stuff this hole with love, but you're like the Frankenstein monster who, in his attempts at tenderness, crushes the life out of everything he touches--And who howls in dismay when the local villagers swarm after him with pitchforks and torches.
It can take a long time to work this shit out, believe me. I'm in my thirties, and I STILL don't know when I'll grow up to be a man. I keep hoping that I'll experience some kind of life-shattering epiphany about the whole business, but I ain't bettin' the nestegg on it. In the meantime, I try to glean as many small nuggets of wisdom as I can, though many are lost through the holes in my sack. It always seems to be a process of "two steps forward, one step back", though I guess I should be glad that I'm making ANY forward motion at all. Many male role-models, including Harlan, have helped me in my journey, so I can't complain too much.
(I know, I know, you don't want to hear that, Harlan, but it's true. Let me assure that I'm not some starry-eyed acolyte who thinks you shit frankincense and myrrh. You, as you have pointed out innumerable times, are as flawed as anyone else, maybe more so. That's besides the point, though--I don't admire people, and find things in them worthy of emulation, because they're perfect, but because they strive, as mightily as they can, towards those ideals of honor and bravery that everyone else says are defunct. And you, in my possibly myopic eyes, are one of those people. So, deal with it, all right?)
(OK? Sheeeesh, you can't compliment the guy on ANYTHING...)
Onward:
Harlan, your story of the interview in Salt Lake City reminded me of one of MY reactions to the death of my mother, and how hard it was/is for people to understand it. I recall picking up my mother's ashes from the crematorium, and how I felt a strange elation as I drove home. I know, how could I POSSIBLY feel elated? What kind of a sick bastard would feel ANYTHING but sadness then? But I did, and it was one of the purest feelings of simple joy at being alive that I've ever experienced. I think I had lived with death for so long, had made space for that fucker in my home for too many months, that the life force within me needed to assert itself in the most direct way possible. I still remember the drive home, and how the world looked as if it fairly GLOWED with possibility. And how happy I was to be alive in it. Grief later damped that feeling, of course, but I can still recall my rapture with complete vividness, even four years later.
I know, as much as I know anything this side of the grave, that my mother would have understood my strange joy, and she wouldn't have wanted me to feel guilty about it. But I know that few people understand how joy or relief can coexist with the more 'normal' feelings of sadness that accompany the death of a parent (as I learned from the dismayed looks on the few friends I shared this with). All I know is that the process of grief is stranger and more byzantine than I ever could have guessed. And it doesn't always play out according to Hoyle.
So, believe me when I say, I understand, Harlan.
God, what the hell is it about this board that makes me go on like this?
Joseph: I have to say that I'm in sympathy with 7 seas' rant, myself. Although I suspect that, even if all the world's religions disappeared tomorrow, humanity would still find another way to divide itself against itself, I believe that organized religion needs to be junked. Its insistence that infinite rewards and punishments await those on a finite plane of existence will ALWAYS result in the kind of crazed behavior we saw on Sept. 11th. You tell someone that life is just a delusion and a snare, and the only source of morality and responsibility lies in the sky, and you're giving him a license to kill. It may be a cliche in some circles that organized religion is intrinsically bad, but that doesn't make it any less true.
Of course, as I'm sure SOMEONE will point out, I admitted in an earlier post that I prayed in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks. But it was a prayer more bitter and angry than pleading in nature, and I was never convinced that anyone was receiving it. But maybe I'm a hypocrite just the same; what do they say about atheists (or agnostics, in my case) in foxholes...?
Mitch/Joseph/Heather: Gene Hackman rules. His performance in THE CONVERSATION is just sterling, as fine as screen acting gets.
Harlan (again): If you're gonna disembowel Lynn, then at least give her a shot of Novacaine first, ok? And maybe a shot of whiskey from your liquor cab...oh, fergit it.
Resolving to write about light, happy topics like international terrorism and biological warfare next time,
Jim
I'm glad I wasn't the only one to have been put off by 7 Seas' er, well, uh, REMORSELESS MUTILATION OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. I also know people whose "style" has nothing to do with their considerable brainpower, but just the same, I wish, oh, do I ever wish, that the Internet didn't mean the end of decent spelling and basic grammar for no reason aside from the elimination of a keystroke or two. It's grating, it implies laziness, and I'm whining.
Re: Investing in web companies - They reek of fad. I'll probably be proven wrong once we get ourselves back on solid ground economically, but they're just electrons: I'd feel safer putting my money in a toilet plunger manufacturer than a business that operates solely from the web.
(As a side note, do others feel the way I do? I would think a lack of a physical "presence" would scare off a lot of potential investors, but back in the day, all that money may've outweighed those kinds of objections.)
~Jeff
Joseph:
Personally I am looking forward to Guillermo del Toro's new ghost-story, "The Devil's Backbone" ("El espinazo del diablo", it takes place during the Spanish Civil War at an orphanage); "Amelie" by one of the co-directors of "Delicatessen" and "The Island of Lost Children" (his name escapes me now); Alfonso Cuarón's "Y tu mamá también" the movie that beat "Amores perros" at the Mexican box office (Cuarón directed a wonderful adaptation of "A Little Princess" a couple of years ago); Cedric Kahn's "Roberto Succo"; Dominique Cabrera's "The Milk of Human Kindness" and so much more. I feel like a kid in the proverbial candy store. This year's program plus the fact that the fest will be held in Chicago's two best screens (The Music Box, and the Century Centre cinemas) makes the festival the equivalent of an oasis in this desert island of Hollywood inanities and tomfoolery. Oct.4-18. Saw "Waking Life" and intend to see it again. Too much goodness in that movie to be appreciated in just one sitting.
Neil Gaiman Chicago alert: Neil has been invited by the Chicago Humanities Festival to speak in three panels. He will be doing a solo lecture on his most recent works on Thursday November 8; then he will be interviewing Will Eisner at the Harold Washington Public Library on Friday November 9; and on November 10, he will participate in a Forum on Graphic Literature to hich, if I am not mistaken, the author of The Adventures of Cavalier and Klay, Michael Chambon (did I get his name right?) has also been invited. The Humanities Fest. has a website, but I don't have the URL at hand. Feel free to post it here.
Mark your calendar folks. Make it Chicago this next two months (wanna take a stab at explaining that reference, oh my fellow Chicago webderlanders?)
Lotsa replies, even one to Harlan;
To Harlan, re father figures. You're right, and I guess I can admit that your writing were kinda sorta that way for me when I was a teenager. But, I guess I was either smart or lucky enough to know that I shouldn't put _immense_ emotional investments in such things. Sure, there were people whose work I admired, but I always kept a kind of emotional distance, too. I think it's because I was aware that, like a lot of people, I was taking bits and pieces of others' examples to build _myself_ into something that I could respect. (It's also probably why I never sought a writing mentor-- good ol' emotional defensiveness.)
To Heather: Birthdate is February 21, 1963. You remember, when the rivers ran blood and the clouds sang the laments of the ages?
Re Harlan's comments on 7 Seas Jim: I have to admit that my first reaction was that the guy was a nut-bag. But this judgement was based solely on the _style_ of presentation, and had nothing to do with the substance of his arguments.
Lemme explain. Back when I was at _The Humanist_, I ran into a lot of people who could be termed "rationalist cranks." It wasn't that they disliked religion-- it was that their dislike of religion amounted to one mammoth bug up their ass, in that they were _driven_ to attack it. Every conversation with them eventually wound around to the topic of how bad religion was. They would _live_ for moments when evangelists would try to witness to them, so they'd have the opportunity to use all of the arguments and gambits and scatological jokes about Jesus that they'd spent their waking hours developing. It was as though their minds were bicycle tires that had suddenly slipped into a trolley track, and were unable to get out of the rut.
In other words, this has nothing to do with the actual content of Jim's note, nor with Harlan's perfectly reasonable attitudes about religion. It's an evaluation based on Jim's style and some distasteful encounters I've had in the past. Their _arguments_ might have been perfectly valid and historically accurate, their _style_ was an indicator of something, well, Less than Wholesome in their outlook.
Now, there's a _very_ good chance that I'm wrong about Jim. I've had some friends send me their first Email, and the style is so crabbed and inept that I can't _imagine_ it coming from the sane and reasonable human beings I know. So writing style and one's personality aren't exactly related, and Jim might be utterly unlike the image I got when I read his note.
Harlan:
WTF? Am I in trouble for recounting a publicly shared anecdote in the presence of BBQ attending, pork-suit wearing, previously described want-to-be Torquemadas? If I am, then my entrails are your entrails. Any time you need 'em, just come and get 'em. You have my address.
Gonna run out and see if they have any extra sunday papers. Might need to sop up all the evidence.
L.
Mitch and Heather,
Lucky me! "Heist" premieres here in Chicago at the Chicago International Film Festival. All I have to do is score a ticket for opening night this weekend.
Joseph (not gloating, 'cause god knows if I'll get a ticket, and I'm really looking forward to Linklater's "Waking Life" at the festival anyway).
Heather - Gene Hackman is starring in David Mamet's latest movie, "Heist", which should be out in the next few weeks, IIRC. Can't wait for this one. Hackman's solid performance meets Mamet's salty goodness. Woot!
Mitch
A small P.S.:
I have written a longish review-essay on Ray Bradbury's just-released FROM THE DUST RETURNED. It will be the front page review of next Sunday's Los Angeles Times Book Review section.
It's a first publication, Tim.
For those who enjoy my essays, you'll probably like this one. For those who admire Bradbury, you'll find it a celebration of his talent.
Ray was recently back in the hospital, a smallish stroke that somehow escalated into a problem with his leg. But after four days in the St. John's Medical Center, he's out; and back home.
In time to read his review on page one of the October 7th LA Times. Not a bad Halloween gift from one friend to another.
If any of you are in LA and have access to extra copies of this Sunday's paper--Susan and I will be in Boston, of course--I would appreciate your not tossing them, but saving them for me, as extras for my files.
Thank you. Harlan.
Harlan,
Methinks my response to 7 Seas might have been a bit terse, and perhaps I did not get my full point across (sue me - it was early). I do venhemently disagree with the equating of religion, in the large sense, with terrorism. On the otehr hand, there are certainly a lot of dickheads out there who would have been much better off (and the world would have been better off) if they had never been exposed to their particular killing-advocating brand of religion (or religion at all). Believe me, I'm not saying religion is right or wrong for everybody. That would be horribly foolish, since it's unprovable. I just disagree with your position on religion, and I thought 7 Sea's elucidation of his thoughts rather insulting, as it made broad statements that affected me directly.
Basically, I shot my mouth off. Sorry 'bout that. But not about my opinions.
Regards,
Joseph
Very much persiflage and replying to 1 & Awl:
Joseph Finn: Yes, I understood full well that Michael wasn't
suggesting MY father had "run out on us" as Stephen King's father apparently did. What I was hinting at--and I really don't want to make a big Who-Struck-John of this--was the
perception to an adolescent mind that one's parent dying is
transliterable as "leaving" or "running out on." It produces an
irrational anger, born out of loss and emptiness and just plain frustration, that can be utterly unidentifiable, lying dormant but malignant like a carcinoma. Until, at some later time, if one is lucky, one gets the epiphany that the reason one has been anti-social, or violent, or an alcoholic, or cranky, or a druggie or whatever...is the endless unresolved fury at one's parent "deserting" you by dying. It is sad, sophomoric and
looney; but when confronted it is easily reconciled as mere the manifestation of love/loss/rejection when analyzed by a mature insightful mind; thereby freeing you. But as a kid, it is an invisible, powerful impetus to anti-social behavior. Emotional shackles, easily broken out of...when one is ready to do so.
One other thing, Joseph. And I fear it may dismay you. But the guy who posted in as "7 Seas Jim" is not, in my world-view, a nut-bag. I express a great many of his sentiments about religion--organized and otherwise--all the time. It gets me in
deep shit with my audiences, such as the one at Claremont-McKenna just last week, where I proclaimed several positions that match 7 Seas Jim's. I see him not as a nut-bag, as you viewed him, but as a pragmatist. I know there are a great many people who need faith and religion and even structured life-rules
as promulgated by organized religions, and I gainsay them naught. I believe everyone should find succor where best it is available to them, as long as it does not oppress or corrupt others. But as much as the right-wing religiosos bleat about the imagined assaults on "Freedom of Religion" (which usually turn out to be attempts to limit the rapacious overreaching of certain Churches), we still are inundated night and day with narrow religious viewpoints and entire god-channels filled with irrational and hateful elitism, promising death and perdition to those who will not succumb to the hellfire blandishments of self-styled little Religious Emperors. Bill Maher (not one of my favorite people, despite the number of times I've been on his show) suffers phony patriot's castigation and the opprobrium of the Politically Timorous for saying something fairly rational--i.e., you can call the bastards who flew those planes into the Towers a lot of things--nut-jobs, zealots, fanatics, monsters, self-deluded martyrs, evil muthahfuggahs who should burn forever in the worst hell they can imagine in their mythology--but they were definitely NOT cowards. Demented beyond understanding, zealous beyond comprehension, but crashing yourself into a building at high speed, riding a torch of the most exuberantly explosive jet fuel in the world, is not the act of a coward. An idiot, maybe; a terrorist, for certain; a blasphemer of his own god, fer shure. But not cowardly, no matter how smoothly the word rolls off the forked tongues of politicians and moron flag-wavers. But Maher can catch a tsunami of shit-scorn for saying something just that simple and sane and obvious, because it does not buy into the line of sunshine Bush and Ashcroft have been blowing up all our asses with wind-machines since the September
massacre, all that puffed-up macho braggadocio about how we won't take this and we won't take that and how powerful we are when aroused and how we will track them to their lairs and ferret them out and blahblahblahblah, as if we weren't aware of how determined and insane this enemy has been for a decade and more...Maher can be treated like a Fifth Columnist, but no one has very much beaten the crap out of Falwell and Robertsdon for their monstrous remarks blaming the bombings on homosexuals, liberals, those who believe abortion is an acceptable choice for women if they so desire, artists who produce "degenerate" art,
members of the ACLU, atheists, the Women's Movement and, oh yeah,probably anyone who plays Dungeons & Dragons.
In my view, those two scumsucking Pimps of Hosannah, with their unclean hands in the pockets of the frail and gullible, are as evil and destructive as the bombers. They spread their poison without let or diminution, they produce bigotry and racism and anti-Semitism and homophobia wherever they touch their dusty wings, and they do it most egregiously, shamefully, by bastardizing the wisest teachings of prophets who meant the world well. They are one and the same as the Islamic zealots who kill and poison in the name of THEIR god. Falwell and Robertson, with their smarmy, well-tailored, silver-coiffed con-man demeanors, should be thrown into the same jails as the fundamentalists the FBI says aided and abetted the bombers.
No, Joseph, 7 Seas Jim ain't a nut-bag. He just isn't going for the okeydoke that ALL organized religions have been serving up since the days of the golden calf. They all bleat about the "threat to Freedom of Religion" but The 700 Club is on 24 hours a day, and our money says "In God we Trust" and they make you swear on a bible in court, so help you Gawd, and we take no paid legal holiday for Rosh Hashonah or Yom Kippur or Ramadan, yet the malls sure as hell know when it's Xmas, and the NYSE closes down along with the Post Office. And the one thing we CANNOT HAVE in this country, as much freedom OF religion as there is . . . is freedom FROM religion!
Many of you were wondering if my anger is real. Some of you think it's affect. Bite me.
Amy: I don't mind talking about such matters as the death of my father. Or anything else. I have no secrets. Well, I have one, but no one even suspects what it is; and the one person who knows of it...doesn't know s/he knows. I can talk of these things freely, as I have in endless introductions and essays. Not because I feel the need to reveal such things to you or you or even you, but because talking about these aspects of the human condition is what I do. I write about people. I am a people. Ergo. Res ipsa loquitor. (Likely misspelled.)
And one more reason I don't mind dealing with such troubling, traditionally "private" topics. The reason illustrated in an
anecdote. As follows. I was on one of the many speaking tours for the ERA I did some years ago, trying to get the last few states needed to ratify, and I was in Salt Lake City, of all places (not a salutary venue for convincing women they ought not to be in thrall to their menfolk), and during an interview on tv or radio, can't remember which, I mentioned that I had been relieved when my mother finally, after years of ill health and
a lingering demise, finally passed away. I was fairly emotional about it, and said how horribly guilty I felt at being relieved that no only was SHE free of pain, but that I, ME, I, was also free of pain. The interviewer was horrified. Said it was a
damnable, that was her word, "damnable," sin on my part. Well, I didn't care to argue the point with her, I thought it was a damnably HUMAN reaction, if such there can be; and I left the show. Perhaps two weeks later a letter reached me via one of my publishers, and it was from a Mormon woman in Salt Lake City who had heard the broadcast. Her letter was one of the most heartfelt I've ever received, and one would've had to have been made of anthracite not to have been touched by it. She said she had been harboring the same, very same, sense of shame and guilt at the death of HER mother; and it had been her solitary punishment to suffer this torment alone and unsuccored, because she thought she was surely the only person who had ever felt that way. But that when I spoke, it opened for her the floodgates of memory and tears and pent-up shame, and she thanked me for sharing my insight, that it was a light to her.
Well... I have trouble accepting the compliments, because as I've said here before, that means I have to accept the horrors that someone might commit in my name or because of something they read that I had written. But insofar as Amy asks if I mind discussing, or having duscussed, these personal topics as if I weren't "here," well, no, I don't. Because it doesn't bother me, and if it helps someone else who is less verbose and unfettered, well, hell, that's a Good Thing. I guess.
So, no need to be trepidatious, Amy. As opposed to Lynn, whom I'm going to disembowel next time I see her.
Barney: hello, old friend. Glad you're back in the Land of the Living.
Heather: I didn't say all this father business was MAINLY a guy thing--as you misquoted me. I was only speaking about the epiphany for ME of the Faulkner quotation. You're a very nice lady--if a touch too omnipresent with every last thought that passes through your clever head--and you clearly have a kind spirit and a good heart. But...
I would take it as a favor if you didn't quote me quite so loosely. I hate being responsible, or guillotined, for an approximation of what I said. Peaches knows, I say enough shit on my own to get me beheaded. I ask for specificity from all of you. Just till I reach puberty.
And last, Brian Siano. This thing of seeking father (or in my case, big brother) surrogates in others, is a chancey, dangerous business. As I've told everyone for years, I am no one's hero. I fuck up worse than most of you at your dimbulbest fumblethumb flounderingess. See in me El Cid at your peril. Same goes for those you and I starstalk with demands of "father greatness" and heroic perfection. Poor devils, they're at worst only as human and frail as you and I, kiddo.
That brings me up to date with all of you. I'm looking forward, not to the inconveniences of flying LAX to Logan next Friday, but to the melding with Neil Gaiman and Peter David for a madcap evening at MIT. And to eating my way up one side and down the other of the Food Court at Faneuil Hall.
Yours in arterial cloggage and obscene gourmondage,
Mr. Creosote.
Barney -- I'm so pleased to see you! I actually hoped to meet you at Dragon*Con this year (there was some unpleasantness the last time between us in email, amicably resolved, 'nuff said) and take you out for dinner or something. I'm sorry to hear about your computer troubles...that's the worst thing about working on computers--sometimes they just up and eat your work.
PayPal vs. Billpoint -- PayPal is my method of choice, too, though I have accepted Billpoint from time to time. PayPal was a completely free service when I started using it--Billpoint either did not exist or was for full-time business-type clients. I believe PayPal's fees are still lower than Billpoint. PayPal's only disadvantage was that it was US only, and that has since changed. It'll be interesting to see how member services are affected by the competition.
Amy
Okay, I've put my nineteen cents in. That otta hold ya for a while. I want to work on some of these stories I've been scribbling so I'll talk to ya in a while. K?
Play nice, people. As you are.. nice.
Heather disparuing.
Heather,
A lot of people prefer PayPal over Billpoint for the flexibility, though I'm sure that you'll find plenty of advocates to say otherwise. eBay does indeed own Billpoint, but I actually use PayPal, as it just seems to work better for payments when I sell stuff on eBay. PayPal does also seem to have critical mass going for it, as well as being set up to work with a range of auctions (Amazon, Yahoo, etc), not just eBay.
PayPal IPO? Should work. It's not a bubble company as far as I can tell, and seems to have some solid business practices behind them. There's apparently some questions about the viability of internet-only banking companies, but we'll see.
Regards,
Joseph
Billpoint versus PayPal. Uh oh...
Who are the big money backers of these two? I can see Ebay's just bought Billpoint, yet I also see associations on Billpoint's part with Wells Fargo and VISA. Richard, you up on what's happening with all this?
Ebay, with one 'operating/tranaction' app (Billpoint) versus Paypal with another. Are the technologies the same? Or is one in a better position to sweep the market than the other?
Heather
Maybe not new news to you, but, PayPal files for an IPO, eh..
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1007-200-7340170.html
Feed Harlan's Kitty
Help Harlan KICK Internet Piracy
http://www.harlanellison.com
Perhaps, a non-sequitor, but I know we have techies here.
IBM supports Linux?
http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=01/09/28/0024216
What? Really? Cool!
Heather
Tony Rabig:
Oh, no; you've got THAT one right. I almost can't remember the movie but for some reason, I have this REALLY strong..hmm..visual?..on the Melvyn Douglas/Gene Hackman, "I never sang.." character connection in that movie. Melvyn Douglas was GREAT, wasn't he? Good movie.
DE-FIN-IT-ELY.
Hey, what's Gene Hackman up to these days? And hey, who impressed you as a male actor.. in the realm of THIS convo--I gotta admit I _liked_ Hackman; McQueen too--as an actor.. as you were..say... growing up.. or during your "I will watch lots and lots of movies" phase? That second phase, for me, at least, was in the early eighties. Man, funny what not watching television and movies the way one used to does to one's memories of said things.
Lynn..did you ever watch a series -- we had it on "TV Ontario"; a public t.v. channel -- called.. lemma think.."Between the Lines".
This was a Brit cop show/series with .. some guy.. Pearson, was his last name, as the cop. There was a sadsack-faced happy guy other cop and a lesbian female cop (first time I'd ever seen lesbians portrayed as normal people with normal relationship problems) in it. They 'cooked' as a trio on the show.
Further into the series -- it ended, I won't give it away --- WHAT A CHILLER! -- they were faced with an storyline where there was a kind of..(forgive me, I DO NOT KNOW POLITICS) group uprising that the main cop came across. It had a "Nazi-like, we are the pure, we are the chosen" quality to the group (and to be honest with you, I'm PRETTY sure this is based on a real political group that may have started to gather in Britain/Ireland at the time) and this cop had to go sorta undercover with them. There were some scenes in one episode to do with that ideology -- two people talking about the coming uprising -- that chilled me in a way that television isn't USUALLY bound to do.
People, with any kind of feeling that "they" are the chosen and can do so/dispose of others as their ideology chooses for them to do.. frightens me to the core.
Brrrrr...
Heather
Brian:
Mine's Sept. 20th. What day in Feb. is yours?
Heather
Re: the Dad thing
I commend to your attention Robert Anderson's 1967 play I NEVER SANG FOR MY FATHER, either the stage script or the filmed version with Gene Hackman and Melvyn Douglas. While there may be a few out there who'll think I'm outta my f-ing mind for saying so, for my money this play is the great American tragedy, and it's got a lot to say about the Dad thing.
Bests,
--- TR
Joseph:
Glad to hear you see the Internet and the companies on it as being as viable as any other solid business. That speaks volumes to me. I'm sure there are more people like you out there.
I was researching book and music site ideas in Brandon. Had some weird ideas. This was two years ago now. I'm sure the nature of the 'net has changed a hundredfold since then. I'll have more time now to do some research in those areas.
I had this one idea once, at one point (pre-Napster foofaw and legal issues, mind you):
--One musician puts the complete body of his work on a web site for free music download. He makes his 'money' in other ways.
_Or_ have a website with a _group_ of musicians that are plugged EQUALLY; and, unlike, a site with strictly established musicians, have a mix of new and established musicians -- each, used in various ways to draw to the other. (I saw THAT being done on a few music sites. People had 'associations' already with the established musician and were offered similar associations with the new musician. A few flaws there but..)
--The 'turn' or twist in the thinking here is this: The music ITSELF, is used.. as a kind of business card, for the musician. You come to his site, you HEAR all his music, you go 'neat' or 'bleh'. How does he make his money?
----Hmm...Sponsors, for one, possibly. The site is sponsored by associated companies or industries or whatever to help this guy get a decent wage for creating music. (Hell, in a sense, BOOK PUBLISHING companies are 'sponsoring' the less profitable authors by paying them from the money they reap from the superstar name-brand authors like ole Stevo.)
And a "sponsor" could be you or me or anybody, Joseph. It doesn't have to _stay_ in the hands of the flipping music/book/corporate dinosaur/behemoth--he'd be a "stockholder"..to twist that word to a new use (I would WISH..., as the word stockholder has its problems too).
Non-sequitor: I am a 'sponsor' for Harlan Ellison. He 'bakes' good word cakes. I have a hunkerin' for Harlan.
[Scott created a fanbase at a "millions and billions and trillions" of people/author site; he could do that on a writer's site like the one I describe for musicians..TOO I imagine. (Just throwing that in, to keep the thinking personal, here.)]
I remember a Sarah Brightman site with a load of devotees/forum posters. I laughed -- at first -- at their "our Sarah" mentality; they acted like they OWNED her; like it was THEIR job to tell her/admonish her on how she acted (no, she wasn't present at this site; which made it all the more eery, I think). I don't mean I'd want 'sponsors' doing that but it made me realize that people DO want to get involved -- in some way -- with the artists/musicians, that interest them.
----That's ONE of the reasons I thought (a while ago, it's being used in the net now) of the downloadable poster idea. A devotee could help the musician/artist cause in a very PALPABLE way.
People _like_ being/feeling palpable, don't you think? This air crash aid effort is yet another example of that. (Course, I'd LIKE to think that it doesn't have to come to a CRISIS or implied crisis for people to support/help one another. Hmm...let me wave my KICK banner again right here, shall I?)
----How else does the musician make money? On CDs. You people keep telling me how booklovers love their 'hardcopy' books; I've seen the walls of music CDS, records, tapes of music lovers; I'm gonna stretch that thinking to possibly (perhaps wrongly) include the Beatle lovers who want that CD FROM the artist (autographed "bookplates", with a poster, with outtakes, with conversations on making music, I DUNNO WHAT ELSE) that he can put on his music shelf.
You say the world is filled with eBay "stuff" buyers? I'm gonna guess they still like music STUFF. It may just be packaged a little differently from a current CD (hey, maybe this website could include a tiered/product/specialty channel/pay for THIS on your CD, but get THIS for free kinda deal.)
----What else could he make money on? Concerts, posters, musician-favoured items (jellybeans? cheese crackers? *smile*) teeshirts.. all the USUAL associated paraphernalia. And with a smaller overhead of using the web site for marketing, perhaps he need not go so into debt to cut a CD or go on tour (Did I mention the music network to help touring artists cut costs on either travel or accomodation? A kind of Club Med for musicians *laugh*)
----What else could he make money on? Well, perhaps a 'premium' subscription element on the site -- vis a vis an author and his monthy web column -- that the user could buy on a micropayment, pay as you download the microconcert in Justin's livingroom or five times a month, when David feels like explaining the background of the musician or on a six-month health club-like membership -- subject to renewable, you're on our email list and we'll send you a six-month autoresponder notice.
I'll stop here as your brains are hitting cookie-like overload.
But you get the idea.
Heather, brief, as usual. NOT *laugh*
Took a break from cleaning my house (and coughing up clots of Comet cleanser) to check in.
Barney, I'd like to mention that I'm really at the _very_ tail end of the baby boom: born February 1963, matter'o'fact.
What I liked most about Bly was that, unlike such figures as George Gilder, he wasn't using the neglect of men's issues as a means of bashing on the feminist movement. For a while, he seemed to be the lone exception to the hordes of resentful, wounded men who'd pinned their troubles on some horror-movie image derived from equal parts of Andrea Dworkin and Hillary Clinton.
And sadly, the pain of men's lives was something that had been more or less dismissed by most people, even men. After all, men aren't supposed to complain, or wail about missed paths and lost youth; we're supposed to lump it, keep the carapace on, and take our problems to the grave where there _might_ be a sympathetic audience. But when one tried to apply the insights of the feminist movement to men-- say, developing support groups, ultivating a distinctly male outlook, social and economic analyses specific to men-- there was no end to the scorn. Many feminists felt the men's movement was some kind of fraud, to try to seize women's issues for men. Others felt that men didn't _need_ a movement, since we ostensibly had the better salaries, no glass ceilings, and less fear of domestic abuse, so what right did we have to complain? (Which sounded, to me, an exact analogy to anti-feminists askign why housewives should complain because they didn't have to have _jobs_. No end to the idiocy, eh?)
(Also, unlike the aforementioned clown, Bly was clearly on the good side in terms of politics: on NPR, after they'd interviewed him, they announced new updates from Riyadh during the Gulf War, and Bly in the background shouted out "Yeah, more lies!" Nice moment, that.)
As for mentorship, there's an area where I really missed out. I've done some pro-level writing, not much, but I can't say I've ever had a _mentor_ in any real sense. There were courses I'd taken, and one or two editors who'd suggest changes. But I'm not sure whether I can take credit for being self-taught, or feel like I've missed out on something because I haven't had anyone take an interest in shaping me in some way.
To Heather, re impressing our fathers. It really depends; I'd have to say that my generation does seem to have father issues, but there are always those who lucked out. I've read all kinds of analyses that attempt to "explain" why one generation or another made for better or worse parenting. It may be that certain kinds of parent anxiety turn up through social pressure to conform to what your gender's supposed to be like.
Barney:
Hi, I'm Heather. I've seen you around but that was a while ago; and in dribs and drabs recently. Glad to see you droppin' in.
Working backwards from perhaps greater to lesser importance...here's a thought:
When I left my job in Brandon, I took three zip disks and two CDs of the stuff I'd made, created or shot. Not having my own 'puter puts me very much in mind of how you must be feeling right now. Sorry to hear of the 'loss'--that musta been devastating.
And NOT to sound like a .. I dunno...but try putting stuff on a CD -- that means EVEN archived email -- cos.. you just never know.. if you may have to leave.. or it may have to leave you, if you catch my drift.
Now, to Robert Bly.
He sounds interesting--particularly the use of clear prose. I think by the time he arrived in the bookstores, I'd gotten my head pretty straight on the whole "male lore".. as it happens. (or maybe, at the time, I was just psychology-booked OUT and didn't read that one. I'll see if I can find it now, though, thanks). Funny..your use of the phrase:
"..simply having to defend myself for being male."
When I read that, it made me think of replacing the last word with its counterpart. Weird, eh? Maybe I was right, in early days, when I said men and women think alike (only the dialects are different..hm.)
As for Ellisonite females, I can't say if my view is a standard one, but I bet, in some ways, it is. My 'take' on Ellison comes from more a 'feelings' area than any subject/genre specific elements of his writing. (Sorry, that's not clear.)
Personally, I was looking for something MORE...than just Stephen King (though good) when I found Ellison. My first view of him (that sticks deeply, I mean) was the stuff in "Slippage." I thought, "my GOD, there's more one can put into one's writing than some of what _I've_ encountered throughout my life.
I was looking for a "point" to coming a writer. I had some good ones PRIOR to finding Ellison, but, in brief, he 'supercharged' the purpose of becoming one, for me.
The small, perfect truths I recall from things I've read by Ellison, do not take on a male/female 'quality'.. they take on a "human being" quality.
Just now, I'm reminded of his walk across a jailyard where the inmates were hooting at him like one does to a female.
THOSE are the kinds of hooks Harlan put into me.
Nuf said.
Heather
Heather,
I've never made the artificial distinction between Internet and non-Internet companies. I wouldn't invest in a business in either area that didn't have a solid business plan for making money. The Internet is a useful tool, but it's silly to think that means it can extend the time an IPO has to succeed before it burns through all it's money. Amazon has a chance, but it's a little overextended. MP3.com is a good start, but has to deal with running up against the nitwits who expect to get music for free. The other problem is that the recording industry, artists and corporations alike, has yet to come up with a comprehensive profit sharing model for internet distribution. Until that happens, many people (wrongly) are going to feel justified in downloading illegal MP3s to make up for being robbed of $17 for crappy CDs with one decent song.
God, I miss the Beatles - they had albums filled with good songs. And every six months in the early days. Sigh.
Regards,
Joseph
Brian:
I was looking at your post again and thought about this phrase:
"our desire to please and impress our fathers"
Stephen King was the first, Harlan, the most recent..I kept reading about this "dad" thang...(stay with me, I'm being brief on this)
What _I_ realize is I never felt the urge/need/otherwise to IMPRESS my mother. In fact, for the most part, I wasn't really IMPRESSED by her..so why would I? (Oh, we do fine these days but I think you get what I'm sayin' here.)
I guess, this is partly where this "is it only a _guy_ thing?" starts.
I was close to my Dad; he was the stronger influence of my parents. My mom's a good person, but she didn't exactly inspire me much. So when Stephen, Harlan and you suggest the child-father connection is MAINLY a guy thing, it made me wonder. I don't feel I lacked for anything--as I HAD my dad. Though, as I mentioned in EARLY days, there WAS that aspect of realizing that the male/my dad was being a bit of a "head-patter."
Are you still with me? *laugh*
Heather
Joseph:
Ow!Ow!Ow! Racoon eye sunburns, that's gotta HURT. Feel better. Or, put a case of beer on it (or in it. You pick.) *grin*
You're an eBay stockholder? How does that work? You bought stock in the company, is all? What do you think of places like MP3.com or Amazon.com? (take that WHEREVER you want -- but I must admit, I'd appreciate "business model" convos, as well.)
Question: Does the Internet feel REAL to you? In the sense that there are businesses on it that you'd buy stock on or make purchases at, just like an offline business? Have we REACHED that.. hmm..visceral..threshold yet with our view of the Internet?
Heather, still not sure where this convo's going, so the thinkings a mite convoluted...
Since it would be impossible [or at least Sysyphean] to attempt to catch up on the last 2 months I'll just jump in.
*Brian* - I think you're dead on about Robert Bly and Susan Faludi's "Stiffed". I read a lot of feminist rhetoric in the 1980's but pretty much lost interest in the issues after awhile. Part of it was disinterest in semantics, part of it was my lack of outrage at what most people were calling "pornography", but most of it was simply that, like a dutiful salmon, I had swum up-stream and spawned and now my scales were coming off and I felt it was somebody elses fight. Then I started reading Robert Campbell and Bly's "Iron John" at about the same time and realized that what I was "tired" about wasn't my imminent demise [hardly], but rather, simply having to defend myself for being male.
Like our "new war", the notion that being male needed to be justified or defended a priori was, and is, an unwinnable one. So Bly's stuff came along at about the right time. Actually, I'm at the very tail-end of the "boomer" generation at age 42. Guys 5-10 years older must have been feeling MUCH more hammered than me by 1990.
What is it about Bly for me? I really liked the way it addresses things like wounds, journeys, absent mentors, and rites of passage as being essential or intergral parts of male experiance. Campbell hits on all the same stuff, but the prose was so dense that the simple power of some of these things was lost on me. Bly's poetry, on the other hand, you can keep.
I've often thought that one thing that made Harlan *not* a SciFi writer, not even a speculative fiction writer, but simply a Writer was that his audience is a fairly good split between men and women. The demographic gets skewed way toward the male at a comic shop signing but college audiences and even the lines at science fiction conventions seem to demonstrate this. What I don't know is, are the women responding to something in the fiction, the non-fiction, or the charisma of the writer. I know now that it was the non-fiction voice for me [when I was 16] but what the difference may be [if any] between a male or female Ellison reader is something that just now bubbled to the surface of my consciousness. Since I'm not driving toward a point with this and since the high verbalness on the board is about an even split between men and women I'll just throw it out there.
Backtracking - As far as the events of September 11th, I think "heartsick" pretty much sums it up. I can honestly say I have never been able to take much comfort in being an atheist until this week. It isn't that I want to disengage from the issue but a little distance has been nice. Of course the "loose lips sink ships" informational hammer has come down and you have to dial further up the cable dial than ever to find content but that's nothing new. Our collective geo-politics of the last 50 years have us "reaping the whirwind" and I curse the Chinese curse of living in interesting times.
On a more personal note - About a week and a half or so back I had a virus get over my cyber-transom. I lost 11,000 files including 4 years of e-mail. I also lost 1,500 images which were earmarked for Tim Richmond's Ellison bibliography "Fingerprints On the Sky", but I was able to salvage abot 700 of those. If you ever received an e-mail from me or you think we have outstanding business [Shane, Walter, Sue, Bueller...] those records are GONE and I am starting over. While many of you post your addresses on the bulletin board, if you need me to get or stay in touch, please assume that information is not at my immediate disposal and feel free to bounce one off me. Thanks.
** Harlan ** yeah, if it matters I'm all better now, or at least done with my little petit mal seizure.
It's great to be back. I've missed you all. Hi Tim!
Brian:
Thanks for the comments--I knew I might count on an effective responsive from y'all. *grin*
I've read a lot of psychology in my life--perhaps I have a higher threshold of the issues one discusses and the ones one doesn't--I've learned how UNDISCUSSED issues sometimes lead to problems.
Some of the subjects I read about pertained to me, some of them pertained to people I was dealing with, some of them pertained to people I was trying to understand.
You might also note, when I converse about something--or in this case someone, such as Stephen King who's a child of divorce and Harlan Ellison, who's dad died when he was a teen, I also mentioned myself. I also mentioned that I was using Stephen and Harlan as EXAMPLES of people I know or have read of who had a period in their lives -- literary or otherwise -- where the ABSENCE of a parent -- real or imagined (ie. a workaholic father who was home long enough to pat a kid on the head and nothing deeper -- I imagine there are a lot more kids out there like that and I think that's sad) placed a stong urge in them to seek..seek..some kind of self-completion, perhaps? (I'm answering my own question, it appears).
But what I ALSO wondered was, "is this merely a guy thing?"
I remember Stephen King seemed to have a very close relationship with his mom; yet, he still felt like he was missing something. It got me to wondering (here I am answering my own question again) if it was the lack of a "male" role model or the lack of a model, during a period in his life, that he needed feedback from.
Hmm..."lack of feedback". I can understand THAT one. *grin*
Per usual, when the guys talk and when the girls talk, there is this implied male and female-centric way of thinking behind it. Not the case here. I'm wondering if it was less to do with the gender of the person, then simply having SOMEONE there, they could 'relate' to.
Thanks, Brian, I thought there was something to that and the inevitable "surrogate" parent/role model search. I think I did THAT to some extent--course, that might also just have been what one does, when one is trying to learn/understand something.
One goes to the source. Ah...is dat what I'm doing here? Hmmm..THERE'S a thought.
Heather
I want to throw my weight (average, admittedly) with Harlan on the "you can't explain it" business. I'd thought about replying to Heather's earlier questions in detail-- explaining that most children grow up identifying with the parent of the same gender, that there are some things that fathers and mothers give that can't be given by the other, and that there are some needs that men and women have that aren't shared by the other as well.
I guess that, with enough time and brainwork, I could explain what it is about men, and our desire to please and impress our fathers, and to have that sense that we've Grown Up Good. Men who've had good relationships with their fathers can feel it. Harlan lost his father just when he was a teenager, so he had to travel to maturity without that particular Pole Star. Me, my dad was away a lot, and while he and I talk occasionally, I get the sense that he regarded the family as a loss, and moved on when he got the chance. (So I privately adopted a lot of surrogate "fathers," people who seemed like good influences.)
The men's movement derived a lot from this. I wasn't too keen on the drum-beating New Agey crap, but there were certain truths that Robert Bly was addressing. (I was always amazed that women I knew who were "exploring the Goddess" would regard Bly's analogous rituals as empty, silly, and politically aligned with the Michigan Militia.) I don't know if I'd recommend any of his books on the subject, since they seem to be written for men to read-- directed at people who'll respond in certain ways. Susan Faludi's _Stiffed_ addresses the same themes, and does it very well, but she fails to give Bly the credit he deserves.
Well, at least the last sentence of that previous post made sense - sadly, as a description for the poster.
your wrong lynn...there is such a thing as religious terrorism. Not all terrorism is religious in nature but all organized religion is terrorist in nature. Sound harsh? Not as harsh as some 65 year old pedophiliac telling you that if you don't do exactly as god says(actually ,its more like as the preacher interpreting god says) that you will burn in an everlasting pit of molten lava. ALL organized religion should be banned! Its the festering seed of evil that invades the brains of simpletons and perverts. People are guarenteed the right to worship as they want, but there is no constitutional guarentee for the power that organized religion is allowed to wield in this country. If there's one thing that people of different religions can agree on, it's that terrorism in the name of god is good. Look at jerry falwells comments after the WTC bombing. All fundamentalists should be considered outlaws by intelligent and free-thinking people. Only by wiping this egotistical under-sexed scum from the face of the earth shall we have true peace on earth. BTW...for the few of you on this board who think jesus was such a great guy, why did he feel the need to take a bullwhip to the people in the temple selling their goods? Couldent he reason with them? I guess not. One more right-wing nutbag for the books.
No one in particular:
Two points I feel must be made at this juncture.
Point the First: There is NO SUCH THING as *Islamic* terrorism. The suitcase bombs and car bombs used in the Northern Ireland dispute are not left by *Catholic* or *Protestant* terrorists. Jerusalem doesn't have *Jewish* terrorists. Timothy McVeigh was not a *Christian* terrorist. It is TERRORISM, pure and simple. It knows no religion. And I'm fucking sick of hearing it.
Point the Second: Racial profiling is lazy policing. So all of you folks that are thinking that the Arabs (or Arab-Americans) out there should just get used to be harassed for belonging to a certain culture are whinging about the wrong thing. If I were you, I'd get a whole lot more pissed off that your SECURITY people can't get off their asses and do their job the right way and pick the THREAT out of a crowd of people getting on an airplane. 'Cause while Mr. Powdered-Donuts-Look-At-Me-I-Gotta-Gun-Security-Guard is hassling Mohammed, Mr. I-Swore-An-Oath-To-Uphold-The-Constitution-McVeigh (or his twin brother) is using his Southern Charm to walk right past you. Profiling is a *tool* that should be a piece of a well-defined skill set. It is not a miracle cure.
I'm done.
L.
Justin -- yes indeedy. That's Mark Twain. "There is no sadder sight than a young pessimist, except an old optimist."
amy
Does anyone know who said (and this may not be an exact quote), "The only thing sadder than a young pessimist is an old optimist." Thanks in advance.
J
Dear Harlan,
Is it annoying when people discuss you and your life as if you're not "here," or do you prefer things that way? It always seems odd to me when people bring up topics online that they would probably NEVER touch in direct conversation. I'm a fairly blunt person by nature (wow, there's a shocker), which is why I'm asking the above question, but even I try to avoid topics that are likely to hurt someone else while gaining me nothing.
curious, and a bit concerned,
Amy, the rugalah chick
Harlan,
To be fair, Michael mentioned Stephen King's father walking out on his family, and not your father. Personally, I've avoided weighing in on this whole discussion because I find it a bit - distasteful, to tell the truth. It's a personal subject that I find myself horribly unqualified to speak on, and so exeunt.
Regards,
Joseph
My father didn't walk out on my mother and me. He had a coronary thrombosis in front of us, on a Sunday morning, May 1st, 1949; and he died as I watched and could do nothing to stop it. The quotation from Faulkner, that I ran across twenty years later, was this: "No matter what it is a writer is writing about, if it's a man, he's writing about the Search for His Father."
And if she doesn't understand that, well, there's no way of explaining it. The concept is pure epiphany; and the concept transcends explanation. So move on.
Harlan
Heather: As far as the "nobody" thing goes, I'm addressing the concerns of people who think that, if they ain't heard of ya, you're a nobody. S'okay with me.
Actually, you're right about the banner ad thing (I think I misinterpreted what you wrote). Not enough people were clicking the ads (possibly because of the homogenization of users? Just wondering). I got "favored column" status because half or more of my readers were outsiders, many of whom apparently DID click on the ads--I don't have any numbers on that, though, just what I was told by my editor. (The only concrete numbers I had were the number of page views per article.) Maybe the writer-users ignored the ads out of familiarity? Just throwing out some other possibilities.
I mentioned eBay as a working business model mostly because they make money. (Didn't mean to imply anything negative; I've just never used it as a buyer, seller, or stockholder.) People LIKE using eBay. Some suggestions I can make is that, while a webpage needs to be attractive and well-thought-out, it has to be relatively simple (so that all of us with prehistoric connection speeds can view the page) and easy to navigate. (And avoid pop-ups; people HATE pop-ups.) I don't know what sort of incentives would work, though.
Scott
All,
In terms of eBay's successful business model (and as full disclosure, I both use and am a stockholder of eBay), it's a fairly simple model that has been well-marketed. What you have is a fairly simple way for people who have something to sell to get in contact with people who are looking to buy that particular thing. Sounds simplistic, but it was founded for Pez dispenser collectors to sell among themselves. They've managed to form strong and non-constricting business partnerships, and keep growing through making as few restrictions as possible on their membership (no guns, body parts, etc & adult verification on viewing and selling adult items). Hell, I was surprised to see that they're actually making the Motors section of their website work: it's 18% of last year's revenues. The model worked because they charge an appropriate commission, and don't have that much overhead.
Regards,
Joseph (who realizes the above is rambling, but has a nasty raccoon eye sunburn from the White Sox game on Thursday, hasn't been able to land a copy of Mac OS X 10.1, and is too irritable to revise)
Scott, you also said:
"A business model that might work... eBay seems to be doing all right, maybe because it's addictive--a lot of people shop on it compulsively. (I've never used it either way, so I can't speak from experience.) I'm sure that someone will come up with something that works obscenely well someday--I'm also sure that it won't have much reference to existing business models."
I've never used Ebay either, though it looks like fun. I'm just not into much materialist stuff, I guess. (I read a quote recently, attributed to ee cummings.. something about "people who aren't into the 'made things'.. but the act of 'making'.. I can dig that.)
I'll go look at Ebay though. I'll bet there's SOMETHING to be learned by this business model, thanks.
---asshole mode on -- the faint of mind need read no further
I was looking at Bob's article the other day -- he knows which Bob, he's busy, he ain't here, it doesn't matter -- and I marvelled at an observation he made about the air crash scene and the plethora of product -- all in the aid of 'aid' -- that crowded the WTC scene at one point. My brain made a slight turn at the phrase, "throwing money (materialism) at a problem" when I read of the Gatorade (was it?) and other products that where offered by helpful people who wanted to "help" the victims or whoever.
I've only, in recent days, begun to do any reading on the air crash--I limited myself to photos for the first few days only, nothing more--a picture being worth.. and all that--as (unconsciously, though consciously enough) I realized I'd be inundated with the usual crap of 'good-hearted' souls running to the aid of their party or victims or New Yorkers, or whatever.. waving their product logos behind them.
Sigh.
Oh, it's out there, like many mindsets in this world and I realize it isn't going to go away -- I always wondered if the reason why they haven't found a cure for things like cancer is because they can't FIND one or there are too many people's jobs riding on that industry. Nasty thought, you say?
So is making people suffer, no?
Heather
child of myself and glad of it
--------asshole mode off
Scott, you said:
"I'm pretty much an obscure nobody. That's not insecurity; it's the honest truth. I've never been published in a big enough venue (for lack of a better word) to get any attention, good or bad."
I know what you are getting at (and so do you) but I still wanna comment here. Being published, making money at writing...or the lack thereof, does not make you an obscure nobody. (I KNOW what you meant; you already commented on leaving your "I'm nobodyisms" at the forum door)
Cos, think about it: If I'm not a writer/actor/pick one with millions drooling over my toenail clippings -- that makes me a NOBODY?
I think not.
I could be a plumber (one of HE's favorite alternatives) and be a lot of things--but I ain't obscure and I ain't a nobody.
Merely la nourriture pour a pensé, okay? I think that's why I feel this writer gig will work for me -- and I don't say that to sound arrogant -- I just know what I've been and what I am and what I'm becoming.
And this gig "fits". I wish the same for you, Scott.
Heather
I could be wrong, but I thought I read somewhere that Harlan's early attempt at catching the big ring in the world of screenwriting was thwarted. What was this all about? I seem to recall something about a screenplay/movie that came out and due to how it was 'handled,' it rather snubbed Harlan's further inroads to this field (at the time, that is. Again, my knowledge of Harlan's background is still rather sketchy. Fill me in, if you can).
I sometimes get the sense that there are/were areas that Harlan wanted to get INTO that he wasn't ABLE to get into, due to little bits of crap like this probably, VERY old situation. (Star Trek? Let's not even mention that one, okay? He wrote a book about it. I read it. There's not much more to tell on THAT subject--by the way, that was one REALLY good example of that "suggested/angry" style I was alluding to. Some people feel he went on too much in that book. _I_ don't. I KNOW what it feels like to have been in some situation were you weren't being listened to or believed and felt the need to talk about it/explain it and it seemed (to the uninvolved, that is) like you were going ON AND ON about it--but if it's never happened to YOU, you have no idea what that sensation feels like.
I'm surprised Ellison managed to contain himself as much as he DID on that subject.
What is the nature of the screenwriting world these days? Does one have to sleep with Mickey Mouse, Stephen Speilberg or the latest one-minute wunderkind to get INTO this field?
All thoughts accepted at face value. Pennies are most appreciated too. (Try being a cashier sometime; you'll understand the importance of pennies.)
Heather
Scott:
I proffered the possibility to you that not enough banner ads were being clicked at Themestream as I figured this was, most likely, part of the problem. I've been reading how some people feel banner advertising isn't as effective as first hoped and are in search of a better method of financing these dot.com trial balloons.
But you're right. I'm sure the overspending and hypermarketing by head office led to Themestream's demise.
I also realize -- for the short time I was there -- that there were a lot of authors posting but maybe not so many non-authors reading.
But then, wouldn't that be similar to MOST writer-like communities? (Note the distinction between a writer-like community and a lurker community, like the ones you find on a lot of forums--hint, hint *grin*)
Sorry, I'm trying to wrap my head around some possible new views here. A short field study, of some kind, on this process, prior to setting UP this site would have/should have revealed the possibility of this happening.
Or is this just the point? No one really thought much about it before they created the site?
Why does television work, for example? Or a print magazine? Is it the 'narrow chute' of entry (dictated by "let's use last season's success" or "let's not rock the boat" people; that may, perhaps, contribute to the death knell of these two forms of media, if, in fact, it hasn't already) to these kinds of media that guarantees a better chance at its survival? I understand Lynn's monkey and the typewriter analogy but are we stuck between a rock and a hard place with the thinking that it's an all or nothing media where either 'the kids' are slapdashing their stuff -- crap or not; all over the web -- maybe by way of a sugar-daddy-for-the-moment-til-the-money-runs-out escapade like Themestream or the corporations are simply moving their mile-high tents online?
I'll keep looking. I think there's a better way...somewhere.
Heather on the RAM(as in computer memory)page
Just from memory, I think King's father simply walked out on them one day and didn't come back. That might be an out-of-date story, don't know.
And at least in Harlan's case, it would seem that he was quite unconscious of the desire...as he said, until he realized it twenty years later. I don't know how direct the influence was...maybe it was a subtle push towards creating more quest-type stories.
Stephen King seemed to mention a similar 'search' for the male parent. Could you tell -- from whatever point of view you want -- what that's all about?
Are you suggesting that guys look for their fathers, and that gals look for their mothers, if the parent is "missing" in some sense? Wouldn't the sister (if there was one) miss the male parent in a similar way?
And again, why? Does Harlan or Stephen or someone else who missed a male parent feel they lost OUT on something by not having that parent around to.. what..to learn or absorb or get feedback from? Is it the similar _gender_ model we're talking about here or a familial role model, in general?
If the mother was able to, wouldn't she have "filled in the blanks" for either person mentioned? (I'm using them merely as example. Use your own, if you wish.)
How is that any different from having a parent..or parents who ARE there but are not "available" in some sense? I could start a list of all the possible angles to that: parents that differ from the child, parents that are workaholics so the child is left to his peers for support or learning experiences..etc., etc.
Not being male, (obviously) I'm not clear on what goes "missing" when a parent is not there--in Harlan's case, the parent died when he was a teen, in Stephen's case, there was a divorce. I've experienced neither. Though perhaps I've experienced OTHER elements that made me feel "unbalanced"/"incomplete"/"not like the others" or something.
Thoughts? Other experiences? I know you're out there, sucking all this down like a blue raspberry Slurpy. *grin*
Heather
Lawrence Block mentioned, in one of his columns, that at one point in time, the market for western pulps sagged and writers moved from magazine pieces and short stories to paperback novels--mysteries, I think. Some writers couldn't make the jump from short pieces to longer ones, such as novels.
Another one of those "obvious" questions: Why would that be? What's the difference between writing short stories and writing novels?
Harlan shines at the short story and the essay. I've yet to read a book of his, only because I can't find one--old story; I told you that before.
I imagine Harlan could write a novel just as easily but why is that not the case for someone else?
Thoughts? What makes it 'different' or harder for someone to write short stories and magazine pieces versus a novel?
Thanks.
Heather
HARLAN---
I was about to call you, but I've misplaced my phone and address book. It's a victim of the Bat Mitzvah addressing marathon for my daughter's 13th. Please call whenever it's convenient (and if I find the furshlugginer thing, I'll call you immediately). I'm at 216 561 8078.
Best,
Alex
Heather: Themestream didn't fail because they had ad banners, or because nobody clicks on ad banners (enough people do on enough websites to keep net advertising a viable proposition, if not a hugely enriching one), but because most of the readers were also the writers, and because they spent heavily on frivolous things, as I understand it. They didn't have enough of an outside readership, so the money they were putting out never quite exceeded the money that was coming in. That's the interpretation I came up with after talking with a few of the other contributors.
And not everything I ever wrote was on Themestream; that was just everything I had on the 'Net (which was 90% of everything I've had published, and about 1/100th of everything I've ever written in my life--that stuff is what we rightly call "juvenilia"). What I have done outside is mostly small-beans stuff (read: I got paid in contributor's copies). Op-ed columns (fee: nothing, obviously), student newspaper stuff way back when, a few tiny 'zines. (A very few.) I'm pretty much an obscure nobody. That's not insecurity; it's the honest truth. I've never been published in a big enough venue (for lack of a better word) to get any attention, good or bad.
A business model that might work... eBay seems to be doing all right, maybe because it's addictive--a lot of people shop on it compulsively. (I've never used it either way, so I can't speak from experience.) I'm sure that someone will come up with something that works obscenely well someday--I'm also sure that it won't have much reference to existing business models.
Matthew Davis: The James Joyce reference was me being cute and facetious in referring to a remark of mine from an earlier post (in discussing how I've often overdone things in my past, I noted that I read as much Joyce as I could in high school simply because the local school board considered his work morally bad). As far as that goes, you're absolutely right that he didn't "invent" symbolism. I suppose that I was just asking to get nailed, and I did.
Incidentally, I think what Harlan actually said was more along the lines of it took him 20 years to figure out that many of his stories were about the search FOR his father, not literally about his father (that's the Faulkner quote that goes with it, I think--I'm going to quote and will probably get it wrong myself--"I don't care what a writer says; if he's a man, he's writing about his father").
Heather: thanks for the nice words.
Lynn: I don't disagree with anything you wrote. I just think people tend to remember Harlan's vitriol sometimes more than his humor.
G'night, Heather!
Heather
*smile*
Oh, and y'all..
Though we had a nice little 'semantic' go-round, ya didn't answer my kuesteyon. 'Member me, and my "obvious" questions about writing mode?
It ain't about dictionary definitions, here, y'all. What I was wondering--though John Thompson touched on it when he said:
"I say articulating your anger in a creative way tempers it."
--was that I still have a sense that there is this "quality".. this whatever you wish to call it..that is an element of Harlan's toolkit.
Yesss.. I know.. if we asked him, he'd say, "I dunno" as he did once before about how the Ellison Word Toaster works.
And I'm not going to dwell on this point if it ends in more debate team handball, semantic udderances or conflagration.
I've seen little to few people write in this "style" of "suggested/..anger" and Ellison does it, to good effect, as I mentioned earlier.
I could sit here dumbly, like a toad on a marshallow, and not worry about it -- hmm.. maybe this is one reason why I don't learn the 'proper words' to use; I end up in Little Prince conversations with big people who deviate into their OWN agendas -- be they correct, or not; tis not the point.
But the li'l prince here says, it looks like a snake that swallowed a house and the dictionary queen is saying "OFF WITH HIS HEAD! The ingrate.
Me go back to sandbox. Play by myself. SAFER there..
*laugh*
Heather
science fiction book cover collection
http://swezlex.com/sfcovers
some are great books, some are great covers
more coming tommorrow.
Frank, baby, you said:
"Heather, I notice you seem to have a thing with imitating Ellison's writing style. hehe."
Which part, the "angry" part? hehe...
*laugh*
Frank, forgive the mindbend but, as I just finished referring to my city of abode as "Weinerpeg" (versus Winnipeg) and my brain turned to "hotdog" mode (hotdog, haha..two meanings THERE too)...
May I ask.. what is your middle name? I was wondering if it was kinda maybe could be "inna"
which made me think of Beans 'n' Franks and Pigs in a blanket and
Franks inna Church?
Just wondered.. (as in the kind that doesn't mix with marble rye).
Heather Name that tune
John:
True. __Passion__ is a better word than anger--agreed. ("Intense" would be another.)
And I offer THAT point to the Harlanites--particularly, the naysayers; who are ignoring him and his issues--the KICK one being a rilly, rilly, good example--because they just figure he's some crackpot. (I've seen this word being associated with Ellison a wee bit too much, just lately.)
Which is the beside the point of my original question but, still, you are co-wrecked, John. Thanks.
And that would ALSO give a little more credence to what Harlan says, when he says he AIN'T pissed all the time--the way some people seem to want to see him.
The even-tempered person --- Michael Hurley; I looked it up, finally -- could write with as much "anger/passion/enthusiasm/vitrol".. whatever word he wished to use.. as Harlan.
Okay, Michael?
Heather
ALEX KRISLOV: I need to talk to you. You know my phone number. Call at your earliest convenience, please.
HE
Inspiration..lol
Saw a hilarious quote by singer, David Lee Roth, that I bet Harlan would agree with: "Some people drink deeply from the waters of imspiration, while others just gargle".
Heather, I notice you seem to have a thing with imitating Ellison's writing style. hehe.
Someone mentioned Clive Barker. Frankly the man writes long, winded tomes that bore me to tears. Wish he would delve back into the "Books Of Blood" genre. His prose style is really overwrought also.
pas·sion n 1: strong feeling or emotion 2: intense passion or emotion Usage: When any feeling or emotion completely masters the mind, we call it a passion; as, a passion for music, dress, etc.; especially is anger (when thus extreme) called passion.
an·ger n. 1. A strong passion or emotion of displeasure or antagonism, excited by a real or supposed injury or insult to one's self or others, or by the intent to do such injury. Usage: Anger is a feeling of keen displeasure (usually with a desire to punish) for what we regard as wrong toward ourselves or others.
John, respectfully, I'm pretty sure what I saw was anger. HE was talking about the lawsuit with AOL/RemarQ (she noted, waving to the lawyers). And to these eyes, it was genuine, unadulterated and righteous anger. Something about thumbscrews? [Wondering just how a court reporter would document such a gesture and how it would be read back from the record.]
se·man·tics n. 3. The meaning or the interpretation of a word, sentence, or other language form: We're basically agreed; let's not quibble over semantics.
I believe that passion is the umbrella under which all of HE's emotions shelter. Anger is certainly one of those emotions.
Warmest regards,
L.
Heather and Lynn: I would suggest replacing the word "anger" with "passion." Harlan writes passionately about the things that thrill and annoy him. Someone else mentioned that it would be impossible to write in a state of sustained rage. I say articulating your anger in a creative way tempers it. (Have you ever noticed that people that can't express themselves are the first ones to start throwing punches?) Maybe this is why creators who delve in the dark side--people like David Cronenberg and Clive Barker--tend to be really nice people.
---Amy:
Auh, DUH..I GOT it from this site. I read it, came back, posted the URL to give reference to what I was saying 'wow' about and that was that...Hmmm? *laugh*
---Scott:
Themestream..yeah, I arrived five minutes before they cut back the author rate. All that you wrote?.. I figured that might be the case. Clicking on ads doesn't seem to be quite the business model, does it? So the question is: What business model MIGHT work?
+++
Original reason for post:
Hmm...
Harlan has Hutzpah
Want some?
Harlan has Chutzpah
Get Hooked on Harlan
Hooked on Harlan
Harlan Hooks ya Hard
...
H
Scott Miller:
Symbolism: Blame the 19th century. Actually, Joyce and T.S.Eliot are the _last_ in the line of Symbolist writers. Writers like Shelley, Blake and Coleridge first picked up on the power of using private symbols to reintroduce a an intensely felt spiritual (not merely rigidly religious) element into their writings – read Blake’s “O Rose Thou Art Sick” to see how much interpretation one small poem can take and survive. Curiously, the writer who may have had most influence on the development of symbolism is A.E.Poe. Despite having a native symbolist precursor in Gerald de Nerval (“I like lobsters because they know the secrets of the deep and they don’t bark”), it was Poe’s poetry and somewhat self-exculpatory/exultory theorising that was picked up and developed by the 19th century French poets like Baudelaire, Rambaud, and Mallarme, commonly known as the “Symbolist Movement”, and who were such an influence on US and UK writers in the early 20th century.
And yes, writers can find themselves using symbolism unconsciously. Ellison himself wrote somewhere in the mid-70s that he hadn’t realised until then how many of his stories for the last 20 years were about the search for his father.
Amy:
Last Thoughts On Symbolism: I blame the whole thing on James Joyce. As you said, Harlan's method of just smiling and looking modest is the only way to deal with it. I bullshitted through every paper I ever wrote in high school and got A's for all of them (highest grades I ever got for doing anything). An excellent example of negative reinforcement. I wish I'd thought of that CUJO paper, though. Nice touch.
Writers do use symbolism; it's just that it tends to be obvious and upfront (i.e. Stephen King giving his convict the initials J.C. in "The Green Mile") rather than clever-clever background stuff that only academics have the time to find (hello, James, what was "Finnegans Wake" about again? History tends to go in circles? Writing so many puns that not all of them will ever be figured out is one helluva lot of evil fun? Something like that).
On Critiquing, Classes, And Other Writerly Stuff: Yes! Yes, the participants are almost always afraid of hurting the feelings of their fellow students, so everything is kept on a nice even keel, so that us fragile writers don't go home and emulate Sylvia Plath upon having our fragile egos crushed. I can be a sensitive person, certainly, but after having stuff turned down by half the fiction magazines on the planet, one develops a certain resistance to these things.
I think that the specificity you mentioned wanting (and that I know I'm always looking to get) is what you NEED from a critique. You shouldn't take it too seriously (after all, an opinion is only an opinion), but it can be a great tool. I don't think that's masochistic. (A masochistic act would be to hammer your head into the nearest brick wall, or to listen to the Billy Ray Cyrus song "Achy Breaky Heart" of your own free will.) Also, consider the source of the criticism: I consider myself a reliable judge of writing, but then I also eat squid and have been known to wear a shirt inside-out without noticing for hours at a time. That may not be the level of wit and acumen you want the person responsible for critiquing your work to have. Try to sound him/her out first. And don't accept anyone's word as final, because even reliable judges of writing can be wrong. And there are always people who don't know their asses from their elbows, and couldn't find same with a map, a flashlight, and the help of ten very concerned people.
Old Technology: I sold my typewriter just before I moved out here (and regret it every day), so I've simply reverted to writing most of my first drafts by hand. The improvement in quality wasn't huge, but it was noticeable all the same. Computers ARE great for revisions (no more having to shred paper and having to tape it back together again when you want to move something); I just don't find them to be very good tools for the basic writing. Too easy to babble. (I know that danger VERY well, and succumb to it often, as some of you MAY have noticed, ho-ho....)
Heather: No offense, but I believe that someone already posted the Faulkner link today. Synchronicity strikes again. It's a wonderfully inspiring speech (and now I know where Harlan got his quote from viz "the human heart in conflict with itself"). Hopefully it's not pirated, or is in the public domain, or something *sweat sweat sweat*. I'm hanging a copy where I can see it when I work.
Contest: No useful comments at this time. Unit in need of repairs.
heading for maintenance,
Scott
Joseph: You're right. I should have made the distinction, as so many people seem to consider vanity presses and pure self-publishing as one and the same thing. They're not. Thanks to posting that link; it was a fascinating article (even if overwrought at times; chalk it up to passion, I guess).
The Themestream Story (offered in brief): A Cautionary Fable For The Unwary
Themestream was (at base) another one of those unworkable Internet business models. It attracted would-be authors with the lure of filthy lucre and exposure. The idea was that each writer would post articles within circumscribed topic areas (kind of like a grouping of hobby journals) and be given a micropayment for each page view. The writers would then build up a circle of outside readers. Then, the Themestream people would buy outside advertising. The entire economic model was built on the supposition that a large percentage of the readers would click on the ads, buy something, and give the advertisers a reason to keep buying space (or to buy more space).
Now, this works in theory, but in practice, it was a miserable failure. At first, most of the contributors were a mixture of competent neophytes, competent hacks, a few good writers, and the rest were somewhere inbetween. As time went on, and as no restrictions were made as to quality (at least for normal articles), the standards dipped considerably. As more people posted two or three paragraph articles hoping to get rich or to get attention, and as few people ever really bothered to click on the ads, and as most of the readers were already contributors, the whole thing fell in on itself. Their spending habits didn't help; they contributed money towards their CEO's desire to race his yacht in the America's Cup (an event which was duly written up by the editors), they were constantly trying to gain readers with giveaways, their offices were full of brand-new unused equipment, and so on and so on. Eventually they made a diminished royalty rate retroactive and shrunk earnings caps and fired editors left and right. In April, they joined the list of dead 'Net start-ups. I was cheerfully told that, due to existing bankruptcy laws in the state of California, contributors were considered the least important of their creditors "and so we will probably never have the opportunity to pay any unpaid earnings to you. Even should we be able to do so, it might be at least eight years(!) until you received any monies owed."
Some writers never even received their royalties (you had to earn at least twenty-five bucks to get even one check); others didn't see more than one check. I don't know how I made any money out of it, but I did. And I'm never going to be foolish enough to go near such a place ever again. And I would advise anyone else out there to do the same.
Note: This was one of those "obvious" questions I talked about asking.
Lynn...
Nu-nu-nu-nu-nu...
You don't get what I'm saying.
And man, do you go up a wall and take the rest of us with you, huh?
I'll overlook that point and return to my original comment.
Someone said, that they seemed to think that writing in an angry tone--full of 'vitriol' as they put it--required being in an angry, seething, venomous.. yadda, yadda, yadda, 24/7, every-time-one-sits-at-the-typewriter mode.
Consider that, for starters, how coherent could one be if one was ANGRYANGRYANGRYANGRYANGRY.. when one was writing, ALL the time, ALL THE TIME!
I even draw your attention to Ellison's comments himself, in "Love ain't nothing but.." and his response to people who think he barely has time in his day for a happy thought.
His comment was '"Fuck you," I say politely.'
There is the obvious element of passion and truth in what Ellison writes--I'm not discussing or debating (me? debating? Pshaw..) that right now.
What I'm saying is--particularly to that even-tempered individual who felt he'd need to be anger to WRITE at the temperature at which Ellison sometimes does--that I really don't think this is what Ellison is doing. Sure, he can be angry, _I_ know that. But hey, _I_ can be angry too. I get the SENSE that Ellison is USING this "style," this "signature," if you wish, of sounding angry -- on paper -- about something.. as a part of his toolkit.
I can't speak for Ellison -- Hell, that's why I asked the bloody question *smile* -- but I sense, that in a certain way, he is DISTILLING his anger and putting it to work in the form of a column, opinion, or other piece of prose.
I think that would be an interesting thing to be able to do, as his writing SHOWS how effective this can be in entertaining, educating, sending a wake-up call, titilating.. or WHAT HAVE YOU!
WHY AM I YELLING?
Ahem. As I was saying...
I could get up a head of steam over a number of things that I feel passionate about. In fact, that's ONE reason why I stayed OUT of this war and love of country conversation--I don't even want to get INTO that topic again--at least, and most particularly, in debate mode.
A story? Perhaps. But not a word debate.
My days of explaining myself, in a certain sorta way, are over. *smile* -- "I've got some flying to do." Remember?
With respect, as always.
Heather
Lorin...
Per poetry.com:
Hmm...interesting. I guess I'll truly have to go grill this kid (how apt, he works at the grill sometimes) about this website.
Lorin, he says, (hmmm...) He SAYS, he won ten thousand dollars in a contest for his poem. This is just some dumb 18-year-old, okay? He's a rather friendly, talkative sort. I DON'T think he's bullshitting me. (.....!?)
Hmm.............
Heather
http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/faulkner/faulkner.html
Just read this. Never read it before.
.....wow.
H
Matthew Davis:
"apothegms"
Okay, I had to get up, cross the library floor and look that one up in the lovely big dictionary set on the podium.
Apothegms -- short, pithy sayings, usually instructive.
I've been standing and hauling and carting and jogging too much the last few days. I'm getting stiff. Give me another word to look up so I don't turn into a Frankenstein monster when I walk--my RIGHT leg, oh bey!
*laugh*
Help Heather Walk
Feed her big words.
Do it now. Before she gets stiff.
copyright 2001 Trademark whatevers, as well.
Oh? Did I mention there'll be an entrant's fee. *laugh*
But it all goes to Harlan, dig?
I'll do all the damn legwork -- started jogging today, my right leg is stiff -- and will wipe all the damn noses and keep calling the stupid printer, okay?
Ah, yes, all this background of mine, it all starts falling into place, doesn't it? Ahhh...Buddha-like smile..
*LAUGH* Did I mention I'm a charter member of "Assholes-R-Us?"
Heather
Oops.. sorry for the second post, so soon after the first, but you caught my eye here.
Ah yes.. THEMESTREAM. What the HELL happened there? I showed up and not too long after that they shut down.
Wha happen? Thoughts?
---Scott Miller:
You said:
"but it awakened a serious lust, not for more money, but to climb to the top of the heap (so to speak). Not in a competitive sense; I just don't want to be merely competent. I want to be GOOD. I want the words to bleed fire. I want to provoke people, to make them think, to shock them and move them. I don't know if I'll ever make it, but it beats working the night shift at Target, stocking toilet paper and dog food and light bulbs."
Sigh...yes..YES! EXACTLY!!!
Oh, and I was thinking something (got paid yesterday. You know those things. Two full weeks? Forty odd hours a week? Forgot what that FEELS like. Don't ask. *laugh*)
And easily, EASILY, by say, oh, how does December or Christmas or January sound, I could have a chunk of money in hand. I plan to pad Harlan's pad a bit, doing other things as well, but that's more a "make money" situation.. but I was thinking..
Hey, let's have a writing contest on this site. You decide what sorta THANG you wanna do.. and I'll supply the prize money--how does that sound?
Am I serious? The same way I'm serious about being a writer, me boyos (and girlos).
Give me feedback, give me some categories. I'll whip up web pages, or scripts, or talk to Rick about scripts and such, I'll supply the prize money (or, in my searching for Harlan/KICK related stuff, I'll find something you might want--we'll get THAT, instead or as well) How does that sound, hmm, kiddles?
Heather
Cookie,
You’re undeniably a worthy successor as the great thespian ham of the interplanetary spaceways; immortality is yours.
Lynn,
I hope the not-too-distant future frees me up a bit in both time and economics to intercept more of Harlan's appearances; this last gig sounded mighty interesting, if not a bit cryptic. My Pinks outing was my first and only thus far. Once I can shift certain priorities I'm going to try and show up more. It'd still be nice for some of us local yokels to get together some time.
Joseph,
I'd like to borrow one of those hamsters of yours; my car is starting a bad case of the conks.
Amy (and anyone else interested), my local writer's group here in Salt Lake has disbanded after many years, and I've been thinking of trying to start a small online critique group for lazy hacks just like thee and me, with the aim of unlazifying us. Anybody interested?
Billy D.
It is good that someone mentioned the comment about the "Bin Ladin Left". I am not surprised that a new form of McCarthyism has reared it's ugly head. If you criticize the government in any way now, then you are automatically in the terrorists greeting card circle. Free speech is a lie. You are free only when you have the right story to tell.
COOKIE AS KIRK: [clutching her head and staggering across the set]
Brain---reaching maximum containment! (pause)
Need (beat) threaded discussion! (agonized pause)
Attention span----overloaded. [cookie collapses in a heap]
OK, so a scriptwriter I'm not!
Will try to catch up as catch can. Am especially interested in the pro-pornography feminist stuff Loftus et al are mentioning. Those sound like classic texts. Think a library would have them? We have pretty good libraries here (Thank Ye Gods). At any rate, I'll tuck away the titles and authors in my wallet and see what I can find next time I'm at the library.
You guys are waay smart and cool. And yes, so is Harlan (I haven't looked for his stuff at the library lately. HIS stuff I'll buy sight-unseen assuming I have the bread to do it).
Lynn, re: Harlan -- Thank you! I agree with you completely. The short time I spent with Harlan just confirmed what I already believed--there is no pretense. He is what he is. He writes what he is. No bullshit, no pulling punches nor adding emotions that are not truly felt. He's the genuine article, as are his stories. He radiates feeling and energy. Being with him is like hiking up a mountain on a day that has both sunshine and chilly breezes. When you finally reach your destination, you just lie back on the cool, moss-slick rocks, watch the sky and realize how tiny you are.
Fanboyish enough? I'm blushing. Sorry, Harlan--you're just COOL.
embarrassed,
amy
Lynn -- You're not alone in your return to the typewriter. Recently, I've started to believe that my writing is REALLY suffering as a result of using a notebook computer. Funny, I've been using a computer for years, but didn't see a problem. I believe that the degeneration is a slow process. I think my writing skill mirrors my typing skill. When I first learned to type (on a TYPEWRITER, not a "keyboard"), I was positively flawless as well as speedy. Never needed to reach for the white-out. Since switching to the computer, I've gotten pretty sloppy. After all, it's simple to backspace and correct (or cut & paste the whole damned thing). Same thing with my stories. I NEVER used to do rewrites. I put down what I wanted the FIRST time. Where before, I chose words carefully, I now slap down something that's "close enough" and figure I'll fix it up later. What the hell is that? That's just plain LAZY!
I wanted to be a published writer by now. But now I find that I'm a lazy typist, a lazy writer, and--you guessed it--lazy with submissions. Guess what that makes me? Another freaking hack with a trunkful of mediocre stories that will never see the light of day. Will changing my methods change the big picture? I don't know. Maybe. I've read my old handwritten stories and decided that it's worth a shot.
It's sorta like going to the gym--sure, it's a pain at first. It cuts into your time, you get sore, and sometimes it feels like you'll never reach your goal, but one thing's for sure--if you don't suck it up and START, your fat ass is just gonna get bigger.
Heather: Why yes, I AM a redhead with hazel eyes and baggy jeans and a chewy t-shirt! How'd you know?
Jim: You are a peach, and very much appreciated. Thank you.
Off to the fingertip gym,
Amy
Scott -- I got a huge kick out of your description of writing group participants. I've attended quite a few of these groups, and you described my experiences perfectly.
The symbolism people always reminded me of my high school English teachers. I liked to treat them to essays about "crime and punishment as demonstrated in Stephen King's CUJO". The fact that Stephen King doesn't even REMEMBER writing Cujo gives me an even bigger giggle. The symbolism people I encountered in writers' groups tended to TELL me what my imagery symbolized rather than ask. I think that's where I developed my habit of smiling to myself and looking at the table (which I still tend to do--Harlan can verify).
Unfortunately, I never got the quality feedback that you did. I think a lot of these groups are just too squeamish about seeming negative--crushing the artist's fragile spirit and all that. When I present work, while I do like hearing how people liked it, what I REALLY want to know is: what DIDN'T work? I'm a masochist. Tell me how I suck. I can pat myself on the back all day. I want USEFUL information. I've gotten better info out of two personalized rejection letters than all the writers' groups I've ever attended.
But I STILL wish I could've gone to that writers' retreat with Harlan...*sigh*.
Amy
Lorin O.~
Please drop me a note. I want to talk to you about this writing marathon and your experiences. I'm sorely tempted...
L.
Heather~ I've been a reader of Harlan's work since I was fourteen. What drew me to his words then and now is that they are genuine. Now that I've had the pleasure of seeing him speak in person, I can tell you, I've seen that anger is genuine. So is the passion. So is the joy. So is the humor. So is the sadness. It's all right there on the surface, and in our world of carefully worded political correctness, in our pale day to day existence of consumerism and icono-literacy, genuine emotion is an affront to the peaceful non-existence that most people prefer.
In the post-September 11th era (knowing full well that you do not share these emotions, Heather, you'll have to extrapolate for me), where we have all had our hearts ripped out and handed to us, still warm, still beating, I have marvelled at the outward expression of genuine emotion all around me. As this phenomenon fades and life returns to a certain normalcy, so to does this genuine emotion fade. Why? Because it makes us uncomfortable.
Harlan's anger is most definitively NOT stylistic flourish. It's genuine. And can you imagine if we all felt as strongly as he does about the things we care about, and weren't afraid to show it, to talk about it, to write about it, what a terrifying and wonderful world this would be? The coming days will tell.
(There's a rant about education, self-expression, and the media in there. Something about the pen being mightier than the sword and not having to fly yourself into a skyscraper to get your fucking point across.)
Yours with heavy heart this morning,
L.
Heather:
You adverted to my "photography background" -- that's a different David Loftus. Lives on the East Coast, I think. Probably Irish background, I'm guessing. I'm a descendant of Norwegian Loft(h)uses. My ancestors raped and pillaged those johnny-come-lately Irish Loftuses.
David Loftus doesn't seem like a very common name, but I've heard of many others -- even two with the same middle initial -- and I occasionally receive emails from people looking for a different David Loftus. (One was an Irish priest, another an Olympic swimmer from Australia.)
That being said, I do enjoy "doing photography"; I just haven't done it professionally.
Peter:
You raised the issue of writing contests and reading fees. As to the latter, it all depends on WHICH contests and in what context. Longtime writing contests that have nothing to do with the Internet are likely to be more respectable, of course.
I think writing contests can be useful, but not for the obvious reasons. If they spur you to write, then that's all to the good. Any excuse to write is a good one. Forget about winning anything, just like you should forget about publishing. Just produce, get the stuff out there where someone else sees it, and go on producing.
Jim Davis:
Yes, I am tired of people asking if I did a lot of research -- as a joke. If they pose it as a serious question, as I think you have, then I have no problem with it. I DID do a lot of research, but not into pornography itself. Oh, I rented "Deep Throat" and "Behind the Green Door" because they're classics and I'd never seen them, so I figured I should know what other people are talking about, and maybe a couple others, but my research consisted mostly of reading what OTHER people have written about porn, from the radical anti-porn feminists to the Christian presses.
Since the latter are not widely available, I reluctantly had to order copies of distraught Christian wives' memoirs of their hubby's "addictions" (what arduous reading that was!), and crusading researchers' attempts to prove the deadliness of porn and the evil of Kinsey. (Dr. Judith Reisman, now THERE's a character.)
I should point out that my book is not about pornography, really; it's about men, and what they think and feel. I spent a lot more time talking to guys -- in person and on the Net -- than doing research, let alone looking at porn. I asked a broad variety of men about their experiences, attitudes, perceptions, tastes, recommendations for social policy.
All the research was tiring, though, and made me fantasize about writing a novel next. Surely that would be easier, I thought, though I never believed, before I began this book, that I could write fiction. Now I think I may have to give it a try. I have an idea for a novel. But of course it will require lots of ... RESEARCH!
Joseph:
I wasn't that impressed with McElroy's book. If you're interested in women's personal accounts of their fascination with pornography, I suggest you seek out _Tales From the Clit_, a collection of essays edited by Cherie Matrix. It's earnest and honest, despite the facetious and tacky title.
If you're more inclined toward scholarly analyses of pornography and its role in American culture, the best books are Linda Williams's _Hard Core: power, pleasure and "the frenzy of the visible"_ (in which the UC Berkeley prof compares the style and techniques of video porn to movie musicals), and Laura Kipnis's _Bound and Gagged: pornography and the politics of fantasy in America_ (in which porn's transgressive approach and aims are discussed; the chapter on Hustler magazine and nude Jackie O pics is incredible).
One more quickie.
LYNN: Thanks for your comments on my FORGET-ME-NOT story. Gave me a proper goose for the day, it did. (Read that in some kind of Cockney accent, and it may work better). Thanks too for posting the Terry Bisson URL. I DID laugh aloud at that story, and days later keeping thinking about "meat flapping" as our means of communication. :)
You definitely picked up on the not-so-subtle subtext/symbolism of the story, though surprisingly few people did. (One person thought I was writing about the inside of an Etch-a-Sketch! Which is kind of an interesting idea, now that I think about it, but of course patently goofy.) I, too, wonder where my mental faculties are going to be when I head into my twilight years. I had a grandfather with Alzheimers but also a grandmother who at 93 could calculate the Pi to the kajillionth digit. Crap shoot, I guess. In the meantime, I try to read more than zone in front of the t.v., engage my brain in mental puzzles, and generally tell myself that when I say, "Did you put the cat under the mat" (insead of KEY), it's just a sign of speaking faster than I think and nothing more sinister than that.
More later on the voluminous posts, but I just wanted to send a shout-out to Heather, re: poetry.com.
RUN, HEATHER, RUN! Don't enter their contests. Don't post on their website. Don't have anything to do with them. They ARE the same agency that has been defrauding writers for I-don't-know-how-many-years now.
The way it works is that after you submit, they write to tell you that you're a "runner-up" in their contest, and that they'd like to include your work in their "Greatest Living Poets of All Time" anthology. They don't pay, even in copies, but if you'd like to purchase said anthology, well, it's a mere $50.
Even if you see that for the scam it is, many people do not, and by submitting to them you're helping them perpetuate what is basically fraud. Those who DO shell out the money for said anthologies are generally mortified to find that their poem has been crammed on a page with eight others in a book where you're lucky if you get seven-point type.
Grrrr.
Over and out --
Lorin
Peter:
I agree with ya. I wouldn't normally bother with writing contests as I think, in most cases, it's simply a license to print money for those collecting entry fees. I promise to be careful with poetry.com too. $10K for a poem -- I saw the fellow's poem, nothing special -- but it may have been as much a marketing sorta thing. yanno?
My take, right on, on paying gigs.. contests or otherwise.. will be to make money for KICK.
Longterm.. with the way the Internet is.. I'll work on having my OWN site with ebooks or whatever.. but in the meantime, and while Harlan needs dough.. I'll try the contest, etc. route.
Please comment..as you have done.. on any contest sites you've heard rumors about. That website Lori did the contest on, has a newsletter and, in it, they mention notorious paying companies, on occasion. Good resource, that sorta thing.
Now.. to my original quick comment.
Someone said they can't toss the vitriol the way Harlan does. They are too even-tempered.
Uhmm...I realize Harlan has a rep (that's just IT, it's a rep) but if he was in this constant state of anger you sense he's in while he writes, he'd have blown more than a heart gasket, years ago.
I sense Harlan's "anger" is something of a stylistic flourish? What's your take on that?
Anyone can get up a head of steam and write their heart or mind or thoughts out..and add a little venom.
Just my opinion. Off to collect $20 bills.
Heather
Leonardo who? :)
10:30 pm -
11:30 pm Leonardo DiCaprio and Sir Arthur C. Clarke - a Titanic effort to save the gorillas. chat at Yahoo! Chat
Never pass up on a chance to hear from Sir Arthur C. Clarke!
Since the writing thing seems to have come up again, I direct your attention to Faulkner's acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize:
http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/faulkner/faulkner.html
Take it to heart.
For your consideration:
http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/news/pages/sti/2001/09/23/stiusausa01024.html
A little over the top at places (Clinton as a smiling mask and window dressing?), but a fine look at anti-Americanism.
Scott,
And let's distinguish vanity presses from the entirely different self-published side, just to be complete.
Jim,
Yep, as usual, Twain has sometin' to say about the situation. For some reason, I've also had "A Letter To Earth" and "The Story of a Campaign That Failed" rattling around in my head.
Regards,
Joseph
Jim:
Auden himself would have been deeply upset that “September 1, 1939” has been revived. He rejected it not long after it was first published and it never appeared in another collection during his lifetime. He felt it offered the sort of shallow apothegms which people expected of poetry but of which he had higher expectations – “The most dishonest poem I ever wrote. I pray to God I shall never be memorable like that again”. He was outraged when it was later misquoted in the infamous Lyndon Johnson daisy chain/nuclear bomb TV campaign – “One cannot let one’s name be associated with shits.”
The poem by Auden I was afraid was more likely to get dragged up for partisan use was “Spain 1937” with the lines (later amended):
“Today the deliberate increase in the chances of death;
The conscious acceptance of guilt in the necessary murder;”
Further oops--when I mentioned vanity presses in connection with fee-charging agencies, I unintentionally implied that all vanity presses are dishonest. Not so. The dishonest vanity presses I was speaking of are usually tied into or owned by said fee-charging agencies (like, for example, Sovereign Publications, which was owned by the same people as the Deering Literary Agency).
Oops--forgot to type the entire URL.
The URL for "Writer Beware" is:
http://www.sfwa.org/beware/
Peter: Generally, I avoid *anything* that involves a fee. I don't know what my position on those contests is--I don't know much about them--but USUALLY editors (or agents) that charge reading fees right up front are either bilking the writer, or involved in a vanity press (which ends up being dishonest). The saga of the Deering Literary Agency is a very good example--I don't remember all the specifics of the case, but they would solicit manuscripts (targeting new or unpublished writers), charge them a reading fee, and then the books would go to a vanity press (which they had a huge stake in), where the writers would pay pretty much the entire publishing costs, plus a little lagniappe for the Deering people. Their methods were underhanded enough (and so few people apparently got the books that they had paid to print) that the Deering agency ended up being prosecuted for fraud.
http://www.sfwa.org
(the official website of the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers Association, for th