Kevin Lucia's Blog, page 46

On Being A Book Snob...Or, Maybe Just A Reading Snob

So, it turns out I'm a bit of "book snob".
Or maybe, just a "reading snob". 

Now, this is another one of those "randomly-generated-blogs-as-I-was-falling-asleep" sort of things, so I don't want anyone to take offense. Blogging, to me, is often like thinking aloud about a variety of things. As such, I sometimes don't have my filter on, and it's also hard to judge folks' tones over the 'Net.  So, that having been said, no offense is meant by this post, just my random, unfiltered thoughts.

 Anyway. I'm a freak of nature. I understand this.

Ever since elementary school, I've consumed books like air. I was the kid who got to walk over the 'big' high school library to check out books in sixth grade, because I'd exhausted all the options in our elementary school library.  By senior year, I'd done the same.

Now, I read three books at a time. One in the morning for breakfast, one at night before bed, and one for lunch (usually what I'm teaching).  And, hey, I'm an English teacher.  Figure it's sorta my job to read a lot.

And I know that for some people, reading - especially fiction - just isn't their thing.  Especially as an English teacher, I know that.

But I find two things I have less and less patience for as a I grow older:

1. people who say they want to write fiction but hardly ever read it
2. people who say they write horror but hardly ever read it

Again, I understand I read more than the average person.  This isn't exactly a compliment, it's more like an admission of an addiction, or that I have no life.   And I definitely believe in a standard of quality for books, especially as a writer.  In many ways, I've drawn a line in the sand over the kinds of books I'll spend my free time (when not reviewing) reading.   But even then, I read LOTS of different things.

And, as a horror writer, I realized a year ago that my "horror palette" was pretty narrow, so I decided to intentionally widen it.   I'm chronicling that journey over at The Midnight Diner in a series of posts labeled "A Modest History of Horror", under Diner Recommends. 

But I see SO many people posting on Facebook and twitter about their new releases and the fifteenth novel they've self-published this year, and see nothing about what they're all reading.  And okay, maybe they're not as big a Goodreads freak as I am.  Along with being a reading freak, I'm a little of a bibliophile, also.

But still.

I know I'm being judgmental, but the idea that someone is dead serious about being a writer but isn't dead serious about reading fiction just doesn't. Make. Sense.

Maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe one has nothing to do with the other, and I'm just bragging about how much I like to read (and, maybe I sorta am. A little.)  And I know this is the clarion call of old fogeys who fear the future and everything in it, claiming we're only two steps away from Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, because hardly anyone - apparently even authors - read fiction or even poetry anymore. 

But I sometimes feel that way.  Even about being an English teacher.  As a teacher, seems like our days are filled with SO many things and tasks we're supposed to do.  I often stop and think: "Wait.  A HUGE part of my job is teaching literature, and the critical interpretation of it. Shouldn't a large part of my job be reading, then?"

And it's the same with being a writer.  In laboring to produce a craft, shouldn't a large portion of our time be spent studying said craft?  Again, slipping into judgmental mode again, probably, but I HATE the following argument with a BURNING passion: "I don't have time to read. I'm too busy writing. If I read more, I certainly wouldn't be able to write NEARLY as much!"

No offense, but in my mind, unless there are hefty advances from legacy publishers riding on you finishing that novel, your argument is invalid.  And, no offense, but if some writers read more, forcing them to maybe write less...

Maybe that's a good thing.  I know it happened with me, regarding short stories.  Once I really started diving into the great short stories written by some of horror's giants, I SERIOUSLY slowed my writing down...because I realized what utter garbage most my short story ideas were.

Anyway, I'm going to end this rant with the following quote. Found it recently on Katherine Coble's blog, and I stole because I love it, and I think it's the best advice for all writers in every genre: 
"Read, read, read. Read everything -- trash, classics, good and bad, and see how they do it. Just like a carpenter who works as an apprentice and studies the master. Read! You'll absorb it. Then write. If it's good, you'll find out. If it's not, throw it out of the window." 
William Faulkner   
So, that's it. Stop reading this blog. 
And get reading some fiction.

On Regression and Autism

I've been planning all week on posting several different things about writing, publishing, reading, and my current WIP, but something else a little bigger has loomed above those things, so I'm going with that this morning.

Regression. 

re·gres·sion - n. Relapse to a less perfect or developed state
Any parent knows that raising a child is a push-pull-restrain-two-steps-forward-five-steps back sort of affair.  Soon as they unlearn a bad habit or trait, soon as they mount another level of development in one area, they fall back or regress in another.
It's a normal state of affairs. And every child is different, developing at different rates. However, for autistic children, regression can be a huge setback leveling a much bigger impact than a child returning to diapers after being potty trained, or sticking that thumb back into their mouth after spending months thumb-free.
If you're not a parent of an autistic child, then you don't understand.  Yes, we love and care for all our children equally no matter what their strengths and faults, but the BIGGEST hurdle - in my opinion - that autistic children face others don't is learning appropriate social behavior, reactions, and communicating in a way that is useful, beneficial, and functional.  
It's hard enough to get children not suffering from autism (notice I didn't say normal children) to this point, but for autistic kids, that's their main struggle: their inability to communicate feelings and needs, this impairment that holds them at a very developmentally delayed spot while others march on ahead.
And probably the worst - and scariest - part of autism is how regression can be sparked by one, simple little thing, undoing months...or a whole year...of progress that now needs to be rebuilt.  And it was so hard getting there in the first place that, depending on the level of regression, the impact can be disheartening to the point of debilitating. 
If you're not the parent of an autistic child, you just don't know. I'm not being unloving or uncaring, I'm just stating the facts as  they are.  And the fact is that right now, Zack's in the middle of a frustrating regression, of sorts.
As always, I need to again emphasize how lucky we are. Some families have it much worse. Sorry, not to mince words, but some suffering from autism have no hope at a socially functional life (again, notice how I didn't say normal). Zack has a more-than excellent chance.  But still, he's prone to setbacks (like all humans) and prone to regression, which we're getting a sobering reminder of.
Last week, I posted about how we're changing our daily television habits, turning the TV off every night before bedtime and just playing audio stories.   And so far, it's worked well.  Zack at first didn't know what to do with himself, while Madi adapted much more quickly, reading or drawing or writing (making Daddy proud with that last one, of course).  Zack is doing better now, sitting quietly and listening to the audio stories better than he was.
But he's regressed, sure enough.  We'd got him to the point in which he "stimmed" very little. For a little review:
Stimming is a repetitive body movement that self-stimulates one or more senses in a regulated manner. Stimming is known in psychiatry as a "stereotypy", a continuous, purposeless movement. 
Stimming is one of the symptoms listed by the DSM IV for autism.  Common forms of stimming among people with autism include hand flapping, body spinning or rocking, lining up or spinning toys or other objects, echolalia, perseveration, and repeating rote phrases.

That last has vexed us to no end.  In many ways, Zack's memory and intelligence is staggering.  He memorizes things word-for-word, and can repeat them and re-combine things and almost compose them from heart, almost word to word of the original. Someday, this may become a very useful trait.

But right now, it's also his worst enemy.  Because when this happens, he "goes away".  That's the best way to describe it.  His personality disappears, his eyes glaze over, and he's completely taken over by whatever he's "stimming" on.  Right now, it's Blue's Clues, and again, this is the frustrating part of autism. Blue's Clues is normally a pretty harmless, educational show. One we support.  

But for the last month, Zack has been literally OBSESSED with Steve and Blue and his notebook.  Literally, he barely watches the show once a week, but lately, almost 75 % of his daily activity is spent in stimming on acting out Blue's Clues.

Now, please understand. All kids mimic and act out.  Madi does it all the time.  But the difference is how much control  this stimming exerts over the individual.  Madi acts out certain shows and scenarios with her toy animals, but we can speak to her. Communicate with her.  She can put them away and come to dinner.   But when Zack gets into his groove....

He's not there anymore. There's nothing but the stimming, and it's like talking to a Zack-shaped robot. 

And he'd been doing so well. Worst part is, it came out of nowhere.  Not even sure how this happened.  Two or three months ago, he'd been watching a lot of Blue's Clues, writing in his notebook, and we though it was "cute."  I actually liked it, because he was writing and drawing different shapes, which he'd never taken much of an interest in before.  And there's something ELSE frustrating about autism.  Something they start doing or acting out that seems cute and fun at first...until it hits almost a "critical mass" and takes him over.

Completely.

Things are getting a little better.  Reducing the television at night, he no longer plays with his sister's Leapster (hand-held educational game system) because he was stimming off that, too.  And finally, he's returning to playing with things and his toys, his beloved trains in particular.

But it was a sober reminder.  All kids suffer setbacks, many of them mature at different rates.  But regression is always a looming specter unique to autistic kids.   And it looks like we've surmounted this one.  But, there will be more.

And that's just a fact of living with autism.

Monday Afternoon Round-Up

Have a few ideas for blogs brewing under my hat, but because I'm posting in a variety of places now, here's a round-up of the last few weeks of blogging:

I've been running a series at The Midnight Diner called "A Modest History of Horror", which is by no means a comprehensive history of the horror genre, just a history of MY explorations of it.  The initial post is here. So far, I've hit the following topics: 

Modest History of Horror: Part 1 - T. M. Wright Modest History of Horror: Part 2 – Charles L. Grant  Modest History of Horror: Part 3 – Whispers Anthology Series
Next week, I'll feature Part 4 -  J. N. Williamson by way of Gary Braunbeck
And as also previously mentioned, I'm reviewing on a regular basis again, for Shroud Magazine.  In the past few weeks, I've reviewed the following titles:
Shoebox Train Wreck, (Chizine Publications), by John Mantooth The Dropper, (Cemetery Dance), by Ron McLarty Dark Inspiration, (Samhain Horror), by Russell James Angel Board, (Samhain Publishing), by Kristopher Rufty
And there's your Monday round-up. Enjoy.

Operation: Blackout - On Autism and TV

No, it's not a plan for me to unplug from the internet, fast from Facebook and Twitter and focus entirely on writing with no connection to the outside world.  Would be wonderful if I could do that, but in order to do so, I'd have to take off for a week and live in a cabin with no internet access.  We do that once a year when we vacation in the Adirondacks every summer, so that time's coming soon enough.

Actually, I'm talking about how much television we let the kids watch.   Don't get me wrong: I'm not one of those "all television is BAD and kids shouldn't watch it, ever" type of guy.  Honestly, I don't get those hardline folks.  I'm very much in line with C.S. Lewis' adage: "Enjoy all things in moderation."  My parents set limits on my sister and I, there were times to do things, and times when certain things weren't allowed.  But things weren't FORBIDDEN or BANNED like I see some folks do with their kids.

To clarify, there are some SHOWS I don't let the kids watch, simply because they're not ready for them.  Sponge-Bob, for one. My students look at me like I'm crazy when I tell them that, because they love Sponge-Bob, think it's hilarious.  Then I say to them: "Hey, you're sixteen, and you find it hilarious.  To me, that means my seven and five year old probably shouldn't watch it."

Anyway, my guiding light for shows my kids should watch is twofold:

1. age appropriateness
2. narrative format

The first one is a no-brainer.  On one hand, I certainly don't want to inhibit my kids' growth and have them remain childlike longer than they should. But Madi is seven and Zack is five.  They should act as seven and five year olds. Ergo, they should only ingest material appropriate for seven and five year olds. 

The second (well, the first, too) really requires a parent to sit down and watch television with their kids.  Any show that's age appropriate and engages in a narrative format gets the green-light in this house.  And what I mean by that are television shows that engage in classic storytelling.  With characters, conflicts, resolutions, and morals at the end. So, for example, shows high on my list for the kids are:

1. Little Bear
2. Thomas the Train
3. Little Einsteins
4. Mickey Mouse Clubhouse
5. Franklin
6. Blue's Clues (with Steve, because Joe sucks)
7. Little Bill
8.Max and Ruby
9. Wonderpets
10. Wow-wow Wubzi
11. Octonaughts
12. Jake and the Neverland Pirates

...and a few more.  Of course, you gotta have those shows that are funny and hilarious, and Phineas and Ferb rocks the vote for me, on that one. Plus, Madi's just getting into classic 'toons on the HUB channel: G. I. Joe, Transformers, and JEM, and those are harmless, and ironically enough, have pretty decent "moral centers" to them.

But, we've decided we need to start turning the television off more.  Over the summer this happens a lot.  Abby's working, Zack is still in school, and Madi and I are out and about doing things.   But in the winter the television is probably on more than it should be, and even with the nice weather coming, we've decided that after bath, before bedtime every night, we should turn off the television, play some music or audio stories, and not watch TV.

Turns out, this is something we've needed to do for a real long time.  Madi adapts quite nicely to it.  And actually, I think she prefers turning the TV off before bedtime. She colors, plays with her toys, finds plenty of things to do.  It's Zack that has trouble.  He's really struggling because he simply doesn't know what to do with himself with the hour and a half of no television.

Which is kind of a wake-up call, for me.  Madi transitions well between things now, and she eventually gets bored of television.  With the TV off, Zack simply can't decide what to do.

Part of this is his autism, which is also partly why we're enacting the blackout.  Lately, he's been feeding off certain shows - even the good ones - and doing nothing but reenacting them.  Almost to the point in which his personality is subsumed by these shows, severely limiting his communication ability.

And that, of course, is the core issue of autism: communication.  There's lots of other things attached to autism, but the inability to communicate needs and wants is the hardest thing about autism to manage. And the fact that Zack gets....lost, for lack of a better word...in these stories and shows is a little scary.

Maybe you're thinking I'm making too big a deal of this, but unless you're a parent of an autistic child or know someone with autism, you just don't understand.  When Zack goes into his "Blue's Clues" or "Fresh Beat Band" zone...it's like he's not even  there.  That someone has scooped his personality out, and replaced it with a recording of this show.  His eyes glaze over, his face goes slack, and he's nothing but a walking recording of whatever show he's "stimming" off that day.

Scary.

Trust me.

So, Operation Blackout.  Hopefully, by limiting his media input before bed, we can cut back on his "stimming", as they call it.  Of course, turning off the television means we have to actually do stuff with them...but that's another blog post for another time...

On My Writing Manifesto; What Started You Writing? Why Do You Keep Doing It?

It's one of those things that writers don't tend to think about much.  I never used to, anyway.  Was too inside the "belly of the beast", in some ways, too busy pushing the pen further along the page to sit back and analyze WHY I continue to do what I do.

But in the last year or so, as I've confronted and accepted the path my career has taken, as I've accepted my writing pace and struggled with this whole "self-publishing vs. legacy publishing" rap, it's something that I've pondered A LOT.  

Because, well....WHY? Why continue doing something, even as more and more roadblocks seem to rear their heads and bar the way? As frustrations continue to mount, setbacks are endured, confidence flags and friends ...colleagues...drop away....




WHY?

WHY CONTINUE WRITING? AND WHY CONTINUE AIMING AT A PROFESSIONAL WRITING CAREER?

And, even though I've thought about this and have mused and struggled and ranted and repeated myself and then contradicted myself here on this blog, I'm not sure I've ever articulated why it is I continue.   Last night, I got the chance to.  A former student - and future writer - asked for some help with a college assignment, and ironically enough, I think her asking me for help helped me, also.  

She's been working on a final project on arts advocacy for her Arts Administration class.  She asked if I'd be able to write a paragraph or two explaining what first made me want to be a professional writer and what keeps me "writing in spite of the challenges and frustrations that seem to be unique to the pursuit of an artistic career."

And this is what I came up with.  I like it so much, I'll probably add it to my bio.  But in any case, here's what I produced last night - my Writing Manifesto, if you will: 
I wrote my first story in 8th grade. Can't remember about what exactly, except it was to appear in thefirst issue of our “8th Grade Newspaper”. Neither materialized –I mean, we were 8th graders, after all – but that's when I firstrealized writing fiction met an important need inside (though I couldhardly have articulated it then). 
I played around the next fewyears, crafting half-stories and descriptions, finally writing myfirst “novel” in a Mead spiral notebook my senior year. Something about a high school senior leading his basketball team tothe state championships and winning back his ex-girlfriend, nothingof which had ANYTHING to do with my life at the time. At all.
There's lots I could say about why I aim towrite professionally. Why I persist in the face of a public thatreads less than ever, despite a turbulent publishing industry,despite the conflicts inherent in melding ART with BUSINESS. But thebottom line is: I discovered something inside when I wrote that first“novel” that could only be satisfied by telling a story. Inwriting. Several nights in a row, literally hiding under my coverswriting by flashlight, drunk on the idea that I was making somethingthat maybe people would read. 
And that right there is it. 
Yes,there's more. Like getting paid. Self-Publishing versus LegacyPublishing. Ebooks vs. Print. Writing for a living, or part time.But none of this would matter if I hadn't discovered that I neededto write, and I needed to be read. None of the frustrations would beworth it, if I hadn't ever discovered I needed to write stories,regardless of whether or not I'd ever make a living writing them;but rather, the flip-side – I could never imagine truly living notwriting them.
And there, as they say, is it. My Writing Manifesto. Probably the best definition I've yet to come up with as to why it is I do what I do. 
So - and you? When did the writing bug first bite you? Was it a specific instance, like mine? Do you have a clear memory? Or was it just something you found yourself gradually doing more and more of?  Share....

On Building A Platform; Klout, Pinterest, Twitter, Facebook...What Does It All Mean? I AM MY BRAND.

Building an author platform.

Branding.

Networking.

What does it all mean?  If you're a writer today, are thinking about being a writer, or are trying to be a writer, or - like myself - have some small stuff out there and are hoping to move forward, you can't escape it: "branding" or building a brand or an author platform or networking via social media is no longer the fresh, new, innovative way to reach out to potential readers and consumers and fans...

It's apparently one of the main ways, now.  Pretty central.  If you don't have a website, blog, Twitter, Facebook...that's almost as bad as not having something written, depending on whom you talk to, these days.

As always, I'm blogging from the perspective of someone who's in the middle of grappling with all this.  I'm no expert. And, I'm going to be honest: with my schedule, I've got time for reading and writing.  That's it.  Television doesn't even fit in there.  So I'm certainly not going to spend lots of time researching social media, reading blogs about social media, books about social media.   Best I can do is throw myself out there amongst the digital rabble, and hope something "sticks", so to speak.

And also, I've yet to come across (granted, I haven't looked very hard) specific research or data that links blogging and networking frequency with sales numbers.  I can tell you I don't think that way about the fiction I purchase (although, I could be considered old, easily). 

For example, I don't care whether or not Ron Malfi or Norman Partridge or Rio Youers ever write another blog.  Or in Ron's case, a blog ever. I'll always buy their work, because they.... well...they're fantastic writers. I'd rather them be writing than blogging, any day.

But it's pointless to argue or push against the digital tide.  And for me, I seem to be a very slow writer, and recently I've accepted that.  Or, maybe it's just the phase of life I'm in: with two kids under the age of eight.  So,  because I'm a slow writer, I'm bound to suffer gaps between publications.  If nothing else, blogging and reviewing and Twitter and Facebooking fills in the gaps.  Sort of a like a "Hey! I'm still alive over here!"

But, an author's social media CAN'T be all about writing and being an author and pimping their work 24-7.   Author Gary Braunbeck - one of my favorites - wrote a blog about that, recently.  One of my favorite snippets: 

In short:  don’t be an obnoxious, in-your-face ass-hat when it comes to choosing where and how to pimp your new book.  Don’t graft the subject into discussions where it does not belong.  And don’t make sure to mention it in every conversation on-line and off, or you’ll become a slashing bore in a hurry. 
BUT, in today's digital world, authors/writers need a digital, Internet presence.  In some ways - and maybe this says something about the voyeuristic society we live in - potential readers want to know authors before they buy into their work, more than ever before.
So.  My brilliant internet marketing strategy - while hopefully not being an obnoxious, in-your-face-ass hat?

Just be me.
And that's about it.
On Facebook, I try just to be me.  For just about everyone to see.  My page is set to 'public', so even if you aren't a friend, you can see my stuff.  And I've got a WILD mix of friends. And family. And former students. And colleagues.  And fellow alumni from all three colleges I attended. And heck, even my Pastor.  Luckily, "me" is a pretty low-key kinda guy.  But, at the same time, I try not to worry about what the "horror folks" think about a post I throw up, or what some of the more conservative folks think about it.  I'm just me, and that's all there is too it.
Here on the blog - which of course, is tied into Twitter, Facebook, Goodreads, Triberr, and my Amazon Profile - I blog about whatever is on the top of my head at that moment. Stuff I like. About reading. About parenting. About teaching.  About something that's bothering me.  About my worries, fears, and dreams.  I try to blog whenever I have a thought.  But I also resist "planning" my blogs. Obviously, if something good happens on the writing front: a review, a new publication, whatever, I blog about that.
But this blog is just me.  Some folks advocate planning out your blog in advance.  Me, I'm not into that. I guess it just feels false.  I try to blog regularly, and that's all.  It helps that I'm a pretty random guy.  That's what Twitter and Facebook are fun for.  The ultimate in "randomness".  And I love being random.  It's a good thing I DON'T have an Iphone I could just post stuff from. I'd Tweet every single random moment on my day, and you don't need that.  Seriously. 
Pinterest and Goodreads are turning into really good platforms for blabbing about stuff I really like.  Granted, both of them have specific uses for a writer.  Goodreads imports my blog, and has a bunch of promotional tools for writers, and I use them. But I'm two things in addition to being a writer: an addicted reader and bibliophile.  So Goodreads brings me intrinsic satisfaction for that alone, because I get to share my interests when it comes to reading.  Also, I'm a Goodreads Librarian. FEEL THE POWER!
And Pinterest allows me to collect images I like. Again, ironically enough, these images are book covers - and yes, some book covers of things related to my writing - but mostly book covers I've really liked over the years, or books I've read, or am reading. I also copy my blog over there, too.  But there are TONS of other reasons I use Pinterest.
And then comes this new mysterious thing called Klout.  Klout is, according to them:

Klout measures influence online: Our friendships and professional connections have moved online, making influence measurable for the first time in history. When you recommend, share, and create content you impact others. Your Klout Score measures that influence on a scale of 1 to 100.  

So basically, Klout is supposed to rate how effective a "influence" I am. Determine what I blog most about, and how that influences folks in my "network".  In some mysterious way, they calculate the number of likes, comments, reposts, shares, retweets, blog comments and hits, to determine what subjects I'm "influential" in, and how much I "influence" people.

 According to Klout, I'm influential in the following areas: 

- writing: STRONG 
-  horror: STRONG 
-  authors: MEDIUM 
- Amazon: LOW 
- Books: LOW 
- Magazine: LOW 
- Autism: LOW

Now. How much stock do I put into all this? What has Klout done for me? For the most part, the only benefit Klout has shown is basically free stuff.  Apparently, I'm considered to be influential in "writing, horror, and authors", so I get free  stuff related to those areas. To date, three free Stephen King novels, including his newest, before anyone else. And hey, free stuff? I'll take that.

But my Klout "score" of 60?  I look at it like this: as a writer in the new digital age who must build a platform - whether I want to or not - I need to be active on my various social media hangouts.  Klout simply reflects that, and if the score dips, I don't freak out, just see that as a reminder that I'm slacking off a bit, and need to get more active again.  As for how I'm active on all these things...

I just be me.  Really, what point is there in being anything else?  Success in a writing career depends on so many intangible variables, it would be IMPOSSIBLE to build an overnight brand, impossible to calculate the EXACT right social media approach. I be me. I blog about what I like and dislike, what's on my mind, and usually what I like and dislike and what I'm thinking about ranges from horror to books to reading and writing and literature in general, maybe movies, but can veer over into parenting, teaching, education, and other random topics.

So my brand?

Is me.  I am my brand.  And if you like it, follow me. Hopefully, I won't be a an obnoxious, in-your-face ass-hat along the way....;)

On The Miniscule Differrence Between 4 and 5 Star Reviews: Your Thoughts?

Another random blog before the whole family - including in-laws and cousins - treks down to Lancaster to see a Sight and Sound production live, a Christmas gift from Abby's parents to the whole family. And again: this is a random blog generated by sleepy, half-formed thoughts after I finished writing for the morning, so if it rambles, please excuse...

So.  Before I start - reviewing. They're opinions.  Critiques.  Preferences.  Impossible to predict or control.  Can be helpful or hurtful.  Illustrating the duel importance of a writer having both thick-skin and a swell-resistant head.

And, of course, there's severe oddness in being a rabid reader and reviewer who doles out reviews - but also being a writer who GETS reviews.  Ironically, becoming the latter has not tempered my honesty in being the former, although writing LOTS of reviews and reading LOTS of reviews has convinced me that above all, in the middle of being honest, it's important not to trash or belittle a work and its writer.  At least in my opinion.  

That having been said, onward....

I find it difficult, sometimes, to articulate to myself the difference between four and five star reviews. Three star reviews are usually pretty easy to identify.  A three star book could very easily be written capably on the prose level, but for me, I awarded it only three stars because of a serious issue with something in the story itself: plot development, characterization, resolution...something like that.  I'll be reading along, then hit a major snag in the story that just screams to me: THREE STARS.

But the difference between a four and five star review is very narrow, while some fives are easy to spot.  For example, I recently read a book that my gut (and future review) immediately and clearly classified as a 4.  That was followed by a Ramsey Campbell collection, which had identified itself as a clear 5 about halfway through.

Right now, however, I'm in the middle of a book that could go either way. And it's interesting how much that decision hangs by a thread. I thought about it for a bit - as I was drifting on a haze of half-sleep after writing this morning - and I think I zoned in on two major things that differentiate between a four and five star review:

1. balance, rhythm, variance...and lyricism of the prose
2. overall uniqueness of the story

A brief explanation.  And YES, these judgements are completely preference based. 

1. balance, rhythm, variance...and lyricism of the prose: I very much appreciate tight prose.  If it's tight, controlled, observes all the fundamentals of grammar and structure, I automatically give tons of points to that. In fact, that's why my 3 star reviews aren't 2 star reviews.  Because if something in the plot really jarred me, I'm giving the writer props for their actual prose.

But tightness in prose is not enough for a five star review.  Maybe the writer's prose is tight and controlled, but didn't vary the sentence lengths enough.  Or there's very plain word choice, or not very detailed word choice.  Or not enough variance in their word choice.  For whatever reason, even though I can't FAULT the prose in any way, it simply didn't achieve that sensation of flowing, balanced lyricism.  So in other words, even though I found nothing wrong in the writing, there was nothing there that stood out. Nothing there that made me stop, re-read it and think: Wow. Now that's really something. 

2. overall uniqueness of the story: now, I will say this: I take AWAY points when people try to be way too original and fail at it.  I'll award more points a - 4 over 3 - for a writer operating in a well-used trope that we've all seen before, but everything is contained and makes sense, characters operate the way the author has created them to, and there's nothing in the plot that makes me think: WAIT. How is that even possible? My biggest pet peeve here are unthinkable plot-twists.  To me, if they've been done well, I shouldn't think: Wow. This makes no sense, I should be thinking Wow. I totally should've seen that coming.  How did I miss that?

However, sometimes writers craft prose that hits the requirement in #1, and their story is unique, different AND meets the requirements of #2.  Then, we're talking a five star review.

So, in the long run...how important is all this?

Not that important, I suppose.  The only thing that makes it even noteworthy is it not only clarifies what type of fiction I love to read, but the kind of fiction I'd love to write, someday.  Past that, I'll admit: the above judgements are  highly based on preference.

In any case, here comes the rare question, so show me some blog-love: what does it for you? What nudges that book or short story or novella you're reading over the edge from a 4 to a 5 star review?

On Basketball Glory Days, and How They Apply to My Writing Career

First of all, it's fun to look back at ourselves when we were younger.  Sometimes.  In this case, a fellow high school/community college student unearthed a highlight video of my community college's 1993-94 basketball season.  It was a tremendous season. Kinda one of those "storybook" experiences that would transfer really well to a novel or even movie.

We came into the season loaded with talent.  And, BCC (Broome Community College) had a pretty solid reputation.  They were powerhouses back in the sixties and seventies, but most recently, they'd sported decent teams often hampered by grade troubles in the classroom. 

ERGO, they'd post good first semesters, then when grades came out, they'd lose quite a few a players for second semester.  This actually happened my sophomore year at Broome. We lost our point guard, and also our back-up point guard to low grades.

Anyway, we didn't lose anyone to grades my freshman year, but the way we played first semester, it didn't seem like it'd matter.  Lots of tension on the court.  Players not getting along or working together.  Some racial issues, too. Also, matters of philosophy. It was a mix of kids who grew up playing in the city and kids like myself who grew up playing in the country.  A divide opened up.

We ended the first semester 6-6, I believe.  Not bad, but not as good as we should've been.  And when the second semester began, we immediately dropped our first two games.  

6-8.

Us squabbling, not getting along.  Didn't have to worry about grades ruining our season, we were doing just fine for ourselves.

And then something "happened."  That's the only way I can describe it.  After one particularly disastrous game, at the hotel that night, one of our captains said something along the lines of: "Screw it. I'm not having any fun. Are you guys having any fun? This supposed to be fun." 

So we ordered some pizzas, hung out in each other's rooms, watched movies....maybe raised a little low-grade Cain....

And had fun.

And proceeded to win our next 10 games straight.  Dropped a game, then won six more.  Then, after losing in the Conference Championship - which still awarded us Co-Conference  Champion status - we destroyed a city team in a sub-regional game, then tore a swath through the Region III tournament, to become Region III champs, and earning a berth in the 1992-93 NJCAA National Tournament. 

Our first game?  Against a team that had solidly beaten us earlier in the year, defending National Champs, Delhi Tech...on their home floor.  Because back then, if you won the tournament, you got to host it every year as long as you posted a 500 record.  So there we were.  Facing off against the defending national champions,  who had already beaten us once that year, on their home floor, opening game of the National Tournament.

And we destroyed them. In front of their home crowd.

Now, we got got destroyed in the next round against a power-house Sullivan County Community College team - all five of their starters had signed letters of intent to Division I schools - but even so, that whole season was like one big, unbelievable dream. Especially catapulting from 6-8 to 26-10, Conference Co-Champs, Region III Champs, and placing 5th in the nation.  Not a bad season's work, I'd say.  

And for me personally, that season served as an affirmation. I was one of our high school's best players, but we were such a small school.  Doubt always plagued me how  "good" I was.  Could I make it at the next level?  Well, discovering that had been delayed for a year, because the year before I'd attended Binghamton University (back then, only Division III), where I'd originally been recruited.  And I'd broken my wrist in tryouts, had to sit the year out.

So at the beginning of this season, I hadn't played for a year, and was pretty out of shape. Oh yeah, and I couldn't run very fast or jump very high, either (think: stereotypical white guy).  And I didn't start the first game, which made me wonder how the season would go. However, that game I was determined to show Coach what I had.  We had four guards who averaged double figures, so I knew I wouldn't score much.  Plus, my shooting hadn't adapted to the quickness of the college game.  So I did everything else I could that one game to prove I deserved to start:

- dived on every lose ball
- took charges 
- dived out of bounds for lose balls
- rebounded
- and did whatever the coach told me to do, all the time

And it must've worked, because I started every game for the rest of the season.  Also collected 33 charges in 36 games, earning the nickname Mastercharge, scored 10 points in the Regional Championship, finally hitting some jump shots.  So not only was that season awesome on the team level, it was awesome on a personal level.  

Ironically, when I get frustrated with my pace along my writing career, I always go back to that first season - because it's the work that matters.  You do the work, every day...and things will fall as they should.  And so far, that has held true as a writer, too.

Anyway, one of my friends unearthed the following highlight reel.  You can see me (33) at the 1:46 and 1:56 marks:


Ironically enough, this team also boasted a stand-up comedian in guard Paul Morrissey (22). Not only was Paul a point guard extraordinaire with a killer hesitation move, he's gone on to perform live on "The Late, Late Show with Craig Ferguson" on CBS, HBO Comedy Festival, and "Comics Unleashed with Byron Allen."  And, that team also featured English teacher and Comic Artist Andy Slocum (Think the Far Side with animals). 

One thing I've always wanted to do is write a novel about that season.  Which makes a sort of poetic sense, because it was at BCC - up in their library - where I wrote my first short stories.  I've even got a name - provided by Paul Morrissey, on one of our road trips: A Season Is A Lifetime.  And I don't even think it'd need to be horror.

Of course, I am what I am and, most importantly, who I am.  I'm sure there's some way I could write a "coming-of-age basketball story" and mix something dark and spooky into it.

It's just what I do.... 

On Killing Your Darlings, the Continued Importance of IMPARTIAL Editors, and How I Just Pulled the Trigger

"Killing Your Darlings."

No one knows for sure what literary figure said this, but if you're a writer, you're probably intimately familiar with the phrase. Or, you should be.  Should've at least wrestled with it at one time or another.

The idea is this: that in the processes of crafting a story, writers become very attached to a scene, description, bit of exposition, a character, paragraph or even a whole CHAPTER that they realize, upon completion of their magnum opus, they don't need.  Not only do they not need it, said "darling" either doesn't advance the story at all...or, even worse, impedes it.

So, the necessity to "kill your darlings".  Obviously, as writers, we never press delete - no matter how bad it is - we cut stuff out and paste it into a "junk file" for future reference (or at least I do).  But the important point here is forcing yourself to take a chainsaw to your story, cut those darlings out. To be as objective as possible.

And again, this isn't about bowing to publisher pressure to remove things from your story.  This is - I believe - a sign of growth on the part of a writer.  A sign that they're well read, have studied the craft, and can just tell at the end of a project where the chaff is.  Where to judiciously, objectively - not without cringing, mind you - apply that much needed chainsaw.

 However, this again highlights the absolute necessity - at least for us younger writers, still feeling our way through the craft, still discovering our voices and style - for an impartial editor. And I DON'T mean an editor you hire personally.  I've seen lots of writers who self-publish - or, even worse yet, writers who write for the small press - who hire their OWN editor, then claim their manuscript is perfect, in no need of editing by the publisher.

WRONG. Because no matter how you spin it, the bottom line is that you're paying that editor. And they know it, even if only on subconscious level.  What's really needed is an editor that possesses two qualities:

1. is working for the publisher and is separate from the writers' whims
2. has an uncanny sense of what makes a good story; even better, understands what the author is trying to do, and helps that author achieve it through refining their voice

Granted - #2 can be a rare quality.  Self-publishing manifestos abound with stories of horrible editors who "just didn't understand my story!"  But I'm not getting into that debate again today.  Bottom line; a writer who knows their stuff eventually develops the ability to highlight their darlings and kill them; or, develops the ability to listen to good editors who suggest killing their darlings.

And recently, I just "killed a darling".  Yesterday, actually.

So, I'm writing a novella.  Have the opportunity to pitch it to a pretty good publisher.  And it's been going really well.  But two days ago I had a brainstorm about a device I wanted  to use.  Spent the next three days frantically writing it down and fleshing it out.

And the entire time, a little voice kept whispering in the back of my head: "I dunno. This might be a bit overdone.  Are you sure...?"  But I ignored that voice, plunged on, drafted it several times, typed in 12 extra pages.

Then decided yesterday evening not to use most of it.  Because by the end, when I stepped back - keeping in mind this is an excellent opportunity for me - I realized what I'd done.  I'd pasted something into the story that I really WANTED to be there.  But in the end, it didn't work.  In fact, it jarred pretty badly with the rest of the story.

I didn't have to toss the whole thing.  But I realized most of it had to go.  I had to "kill some darlings".  And it didn't even hurt. Was actually quite satisfying.  Because even though I didn't WANT  to get rid of those parts?

It felt right.  Felt like the decision of a mature writer who knows the story is boss, not me.  Which, of course, is the ultimate goal...

How Reading Cliched Books Can Maybe Be Okay...And Good For You...

A few days ago, I posted a blog asking "How Does Reading Affect Your Writing". The implied thrust of the post and its comments, of course, centered on how reading positively impacts our writing, how do we seek out reading that has a positive impact on our writing, and the type of reading we avoid while engaged in a writing project, for various reasons.

However, Alan Oathout made the following comment that dovetailed well into my next post: 

One other side-note: Sometimes when I realize that the book I'm reading is *not* well-written, I'll deliberately keep going with it. I just let my inner editor loose. I stop reading for enjoyment, and start reading as if I've been hired to do a free-lance editing job on the work. By doing this, I often learn something I can apply to my own writing. 

I think Alan was possibly talking about a book being "not well written" on a craft level, but this works when it comes to story, also.  For example - I blogged not too long ago about reviewing books on regular basis, again, for various reasons.  Anyway, implicit with that decision is the truth that, until summer, I won't have the time to be as choosey as I'd like to be with my reading, in order to keep up with my reviewing schedule.

But, I realized while reading a book for review not too long ago, that's not a bad thing.  Because I recognized a story that - if things had turned out differently - I would've written myself.

And it provided lots of thought about my development as a writer; thought I wouldn't otherwise have had if I'd just read books of strictly my own preference.

Now, to clarify - the book boasted very tight prose.  Very well written, in that aspect, completely living up to my standards in that regard.  However, the story was solidly placed in a pretty classic - some folks may even say overused - horror trope.  Again - it's pretty clear from the novel this was the intent.  So this isn't a slam against the book in any way.

But it took me aback, because in overall tone, plot development, even character types...I'd almost written this same exact novel, two years ago.   And to be honest - though I can't find much fault with the book in question as a reviewer - as a writer, I'm glad I never wrote that story.  Not because it's a bad one, or that I'd be embarrassed I wrote it...

But seeing a story like that in its final format, so close to the one I never finished, made me realize maybe that story wasn't the kind I was meant to write. Or even wanted to write, in the long run. 
 
It sounds weird, I know.  And this book in question is a quality book I'd recommend to anyone.  But seeing the close similarities between this trope and the kind of story I almost finished was an eye-opener, for me.  And I stop short of calling this book cliched, like I referenced in the title.  But it also reinforced for me - once again - how important reviewing can be, simply for this reason: reading and evaluating fiction you'd never write yourself can be just as useful in sharpening your own voice, as reading work consistent with the voice you want to develop.