Daniel Clausen's Blog - Posts Tagged "the-rebel-s-sketchbook"
And now for something completely different: Rupert Dreyfus’s The Rebel’s Sketchbook
The Rebel's Sketchbook
This book is called the “Rebel’s Sketchbook.” Is this book subversive? Is this book rebellious? I think it’s just a lot of fun. Also, it’s not entirely mean, either. There is no aftertaste of nastiness to the book (except for the story “Eat Nasty”). Most of the characters in the book are just archetypes anyway, so there is no problem when bad things happen to them.
Here is my very controversial take on why the book is good (one the author is free to argue with): The book is good because it is not subversive. When it is, it’s subversive in a light-hearted tongue-in-cheek sort of way that avoids the excesses of internet trolls, pundits, or conservatives who have adopted the form (but not the substance) of the 60s radical movements. In other words, it avoids the stupid subversiveness of the creatures of the age of phony outrage -- an age where people are outraged by everything, call themselves mavericks, but don’t need to have any coherent agenda.
The establishment in this book doesn’t seem particularly real or threatening. It just seems ridiculous. Reality is inherently silly, thus the philosophy is more Douglas Adams than Frankfurt School (Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Herbert Marcuse).
The book’s dedication reads: “Dedicated to all the rebels who long to be free…”
I never saw “freedom” as anything more than the personal search for freedom. For me this is a good thing, because typically large-scale emancipation projects have usually ended in people trying to put other people in chains of a different sort.
Things that made me think he could write more good work: Rupert has an excellent sense of pacing, easy beats that offset dialogue nicely, and good comedic timing. In other words, he has a prose style that is evolved and carries stories easily from one scene to the next.
Something that might disappoint: There isn’t a coherent ideology that underpins these stories. Many of the stories have a light touch -- they are funny, they are dark, they have style and at times grace. But that’s about it. Also, some of the stories have endings that just seem to end for the end of it...for ends sake.
Things that surprised me: Stories narrated from the perspective of inanimate objects.
Things that made me guffaw: Really, not laugh, but guffaw -- the clever use of a penis as a plot device (guffaw!); mentions of the Fingerbang Twins; politicians acting like idiots; hints and winks at Monty Python.
Things that made me think: “Sentenced” was one of the smartest stories in the book. Again, like the other stories, nothing in it made me want to rebel; but I thought it had a very smart take on social media. It was also a gripping and suspenseful mystery.
In the end...the book was a lot of fun and a very easy read. Cheers!
This book is called the “Rebel’s Sketchbook.” Is this book subversive? Is this book rebellious? I think it’s just a lot of fun. Also, it’s not entirely mean, either. There is no aftertaste of nastiness to the book (except for the story “Eat Nasty”). Most of the characters in the book are just archetypes anyway, so there is no problem when bad things happen to them.
Here is my very controversial take on why the book is good (one the author is free to argue with): The book is good because it is not subversive. When it is, it’s subversive in a light-hearted tongue-in-cheek sort of way that avoids the excesses of internet trolls, pundits, or conservatives who have adopted the form (but not the substance) of the 60s radical movements. In other words, it avoids the stupid subversiveness of the creatures of the age of phony outrage -- an age where people are outraged by everything, call themselves mavericks, but don’t need to have any coherent agenda.
The establishment in this book doesn’t seem particularly real or threatening. It just seems ridiculous. Reality is inherently silly, thus the philosophy is more Douglas Adams than Frankfurt School (Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Herbert Marcuse).
The book’s dedication reads: “Dedicated to all the rebels who long to be free…”
I never saw “freedom” as anything more than the personal search for freedom. For me this is a good thing, because typically large-scale emancipation projects have usually ended in people trying to put other people in chains of a different sort.
Things that made me think he could write more good work: Rupert has an excellent sense of pacing, easy beats that offset dialogue nicely, and good comedic timing. In other words, he has a prose style that is evolved and carries stories easily from one scene to the next.
Something that might disappoint: There isn’t a coherent ideology that underpins these stories. Many of the stories have a light touch -- they are funny, they are dark, they have style and at times grace. But that’s about it. Also, some of the stories have endings that just seem to end for the end of it...for ends sake.
Things that surprised me: Stories narrated from the perspective of inanimate objects.
Things that made me guffaw: Really, not laugh, but guffaw -- the clever use of a penis as a plot device (guffaw!); mentions of the Fingerbang Twins; politicians acting like idiots; hints and winks at Monty Python.
Things that made me think: “Sentenced” was one of the smartest stories in the book. Again, like the other stories, nothing in it made me want to rebel; but I thought it had a very smart take on social media. It was also a gripping and suspenseful mystery.
In the end...the book was a lot of fun and a very easy read. Cheers!
Interview with Rupert Dreyfus (Micro-Interview)
Hey everyone, this is part of a series I'm doing of micro-interviews with Indy authors on Goodreads. I feel it's a good opportunity to learn from other authors and share experiences.
Not too long ago, I had the pleasure of reading The Rebel's Sketchbook. I hope you'll check out the book or one of Rupert's other works.
"What does being an Indy author mean to you?"
It means realising that not having a literary agent breathing down my neck is a good opportunity to provide an alternative voice to the traditionally published spectrum of books. The literary marketplace has made dissent almost impossible, but now indie authors can shake things up if they want to and show that there's a readership for this sort of book. I'm trying to take full advantage of this by pissing off the powerful as much as I can; but there are millions of possibilities to shake things up through storytelling. The first step is realising that you have a greater degree of creative freedom than being some publishing house's latest gimp on a leash.
However, it also means building a lively community and helping other indie authors to get out there as far as possible. All we need is one decent representative of the indie scene to break on through to the other side with a remarkable book and it'll be a new day for us all. From the quality I've read over the last couple of years -the stuff that not many readers are bothering with right now- I'm confident this will eventually happen. It's slow burning but don't lose faith. Someone is going to break through.
"What’s your favorite sentence or paragraph from one of your books? What does it mean to you?"
Great question! It's probably the following from my debut novel Spark:
"This is what a life working for large corporations does to people. The workplace is a place not to be you; it’s a place to be the corporate you. The you that doesn’t really exist. We all see this corporate you and pretend that it’s a normal part of life. But we know that something isn’t quite right. We know that the real you is slowly fading away like old wallpaper. The corporate you is a myth; just like Icarus. And yet we are powerless against it. All of us are powerless against the wrath of the corporate world."
It's the essence of what I'm trying to say with pretty much all of my stories. The system we're wallowing under is often absurd and soul destroying. So I try to call it out.
"What advice would you give other indy authors starting out?"
Don't listen to me is the first line of advice I give to everyone. Like everyone; I just guess. However, if you trust my guesses then I'd say to abandon the standard storytelling template created by the industry and put out something as original and as brilliant and as beautiful and as devastating as you possibly can. Even if you're writing for a genre, do something new with it. Swim against the tide because those waves aren't as strong as they think they are.
"Have you ever had a pure "writerly moment"? If so, describe it."
Yes! Writing Spark was an enlightening process which allowed me to discover a style which suits me down to the ground. Like most people who get into this game, I'd been writing stories for years, experimenting with style and whatnot, and looking back I was writing stories the safe way. Then I found myself writing in the conversational first-person voice with an emphasis on dark humour as a weapon against the established order, and something just clicked. I can only describe it as a feeling of absolute liberation and as if I wasn't writing for my own ego; I was writing to reassure other people that they're not going completely nuts. I can now take on all the themes I care for. Shit boy bands? Done. Police brutality? Done. Your cunt of a boss? Done. Hacktivism? Done. Gnome fetishes? Done. Donald Trump's poetic hairdon't? Still to do. And on and on it goes...
"What question would you like to see in future interviews?"
What's children's cartoon best represents your personality? Only joshing. A good question might be: how do you see the indie scene in 50 years time? To which I'd reply: it's going to be the norm in publishing. Editors and artists will still be needed but the rest of them can take a swing. The indie revolution is taking writing back from the establishment and with so much talent out there they've got good reason to be worried.
That's it for this Indy interview. Thanks Rupert.
Not too long ago, I had the pleasure of reading The Rebel's Sketchbook. I hope you'll check out the book or one of Rupert's other works.
"What does being an Indy author mean to you?"
It means realising that not having a literary agent breathing down my neck is a good opportunity to provide an alternative voice to the traditionally published spectrum of books. The literary marketplace has made dissent almost impossible, but now indie authors can shake things up if they want to and show that there's a readership for this sort of book. I'm trying to take full advantage of this by pissing off the powerful as much as I can; but there are millions of possibilities to shake things up through storytelling. The first step is realising that you have a greater degree of creative freedom than being some publishing house's latest gimp on a leash.
However, it also means building a lively community and helping other indie authors to get out there as far as possible. All we need is one decent representative of the indie scene to break on through to the other side with a remarkable book and it'll be a new day for us all. From the quality I've read over the last couple of years -the stuff that not many readers are bothering with right now- I'm confident this will eventually happen. It's slow burning but don't lose faith. Someone is going to break through.
"What’s your favorite sentence or paragraph from one of your books? What does it mean to you?"
Great question! It's probably the following from my debut novel Spark:
"This is what a life working for large corporations does to people. The workplace is a place not to be you; it’s a place to be the corporate you. The you that doesn’t really exist. We all see this corporate you and pretend that it’s a normal part of life. But we know that something isn’t quite right. We know that the real you is slowly fading away like old wallpaper. The corporate you is a myth; just like Icarus. And yet we are powerless against it. All of us are powerless against the wrath of the corporate world."
It's the essence of what I'm trying to say with pretty much all of my stories. The system we're wallowing under is often absurd and soul destroying. So I try to call it out.
"What advice would you give other indy authors starting out?"
Don't listen to me is the first line of advice I give to everyone. Like everyone; I just guess. However, if you trust my guesses then I'd say to abandon the standard storytelling template created by the industry and put out something as original and as brilliant and as beautiful and as devastating as you possibly can. Even if you're writing for a genre, do something new with it. Swim against the tide because those waves aren't as strong as they think they are.
"Have you ever had a pure "writerly moment"? If so, describe it."
Yes! Writing Spark was an enlightening process which allowed me to discover a style which suits me down to the ground. Like most people who get into this game, I'd been writing stories for years, experimenting with style and whatnot, and looking back I was writing stories the safe way. Then I found myself writing in the conversational first-person voice with an emphasis on dark humour as a weapon against the established order, and something just clicked. I can only describe it as a feeling of absolute liberation and as if I wasn't writing for my own ego; I was writing to reassure other people that they're not going completely nuts. I can now take on all the themes I care for. Shit boy bands? Done. Police brutality? Done. Your cunt of a boss? Done. Hacktivism? Done. Gnome fetishes? Done. Donald Trump's poetic hairdon't? Still to do. And on and on it goes...
"What question would you like to see in future interviews?"
What's children's cartoon best represents your personality? Only joshing. A good question might be: how do you see the indie scene in 50 years time? To which I'd reply: it's going to be the norm in publishing. Editors and artists will still be needed but the rest of them can take a swing. The indie revolution is taking writing back from the establishment and with so much talent out there they've got good reason to be worried.
That's it for this Indy interview. Thanks Rupert.
