Byron Edgington's Blog, page 15
January 4, 2013
OOOPS!
Full disclosure: Anyone who has purchased an E-copy of The Sky Behind Me through Smashwords may have downloaded the wrong file. The Amazon portal (Kindle) is fine. If this has happened to you, and you got a book titled Life is More than Just Surviving by Teresa K. Stockton, please accept our apologies and request a refund. There seems to be a problem with an incorrect ISBN for the file. While I’m certain that Ms Stockton’s book is delightful, it isn’t the one you likely ordered. Sorry for the confusion, and please try again.
Ms Stockton, if you’re reading this, good writing, and if you wouldn’t mind buying a copy of The Sky Behind Me, that would be dandy.
Ms Stockton, if you’re reading this, good writing, and if you wouldn’t mind buying a copy of The Sky Behind Me, that would be dandy.
January 3, 2013
Featured New Release
The Sky Behind Me, a Memoir of Flying and Life is a featured new release at World Literary Cafe’. Much more than aviation memoir, TSBM is for anyone looking for an uplifting book–pun intended–a book that will inspire you to greater heights.
Did you ever crash really hard and thought you couldn’t take off again? Ever have a mid-air collision with a best friend and grope for a way to reconnect? Ever think your last landing is the end, the finale, that life as you knew it was all over? TSBM is the book for you.
Check it out today and take off!
http://www.worldliterarycafe.com/content/promotion-january-new-release
Did you ever crash really hard and thought you couldn’t take off again? Ever have a mid-air collision with a best friend and grope for a way to reconnect? Ever think your last landing is the end, the finale, that life as you knew it was all over? TSBM is the book for you.
Check it out today and take off!
http://www.worldliterarycafe.com/content/promotion-january-new-release
January 2, 2013
Whither Serials?
On this date in 1885 Thomas Hardy issued his first serialized episode of The Mayor Of Casterbridge. It was a weekly serial rather than monthly, and did quite well. Charles Dickens got his start as a serialized writer. Several other authors, Brit-Lit and American started out this way because they lacked funds to publish, readers lacked funds to purchase, authors had no name recognition established and novels had not yet become a pastime in a society where people either didn’t read at all, didn’t have time to or didn’t have enough light to read by after six at night. The serial was the thing.
Today we have plenty of light, but we lack time, books are still quite pricey, there are more stories than we can hope to tackle and once we’ve spent thirty bucks on a book we feel like we must finish the thing.
So why not serialize? Could this be an answer for struggling authors trying to carve a niche? It worked for Hardy, Dickens, Woolf, Hawthorne and Tolstoy.
Today we have plenty of light, but we lack time, books are still quite pricey, there are more stories than we can hope to tackle and once we’ve spent thirty bucks on a book we feel like we must finish the thing.
So why not serialize? Could this be an answer for struggling authors trying to carve a niche? It worked for Hardy, Dickens, Woolf, Hawthorne and Tolstoy.
Whither Serials?
On this date in 1885 Thomas Hardy issued his first serialized episode of The Mayor Of Casterbridge. It was a weekly serial rather than monthly, and did quite well. Charles Dickens got his start as a serialized writer. Several other authors, Brit-Lit and American started out this way because they lacked funds to publish, readers lacked funds to purchase, authors had no name recognition established and novels had not yet become a pastime in a society where people either didn’t read at all, didn’t have time to or didn’t have enough light to read by after six at night. The serial was the thing.
Today we have plenty of light, but we lack time, books are still quite pricey, there are more stories than we can hope to tackle and once we’ve spent thirty bucks on a book we feel like we must finish the thing.
So why not serialize? Could this be an answer for struggling authors trying to carve a niche? It worked for Hardy, Dickens, Woolf, Hawthorne and Tolstoy.
Today we have plenty of light, but we lack time, books are still quite pricey, there are more stories than we can hope to tackle and once we’ve spent thirty bucks on a book we feel like we must finish the thing.
So why not serialize? Could this be an answer for struggling authors trying to carve a niche? It worked for Hardy, Dickens, Woolf, Hawthorne and Tolstoy.
January 1, 2013
Featured New Release
My book, The Sky Behind Me, a Memoir of Flying and Life is a featured New Release at World Literary Cafe' Check it out until January 7th.
Thanks!
http://www.worldliterarycafe.com/
Thanks!
http://www.worldliterarycafe.com/
HNY '13--Resolutions: How to stop making them.
Here’s how to tell the old year really is over–resolutions. Why do we do these things? Nobody keeps one more than an hour and a half, quit smoking, lose weight, exercise more, yadda, yadda, yadda. Here’s mine: I resolve to stop should-ing on myself. I should____more often, darn I should____less often, should___this, should_____that. We should all stop should-ing on ourselves. Really we should.
Happy New Year.
Happy New Year.
December 30, 2012
Hauoli-Maka-Hiki-Ho (Happy New Year!
12/30/2012 12:25:35 PM
Why I (we) write
December 30th as I write this. The age-old phrase has been heard around the house today, 'where the heck did the year go?' 'can't believe it's 2013' yadda, yadda, yadda. The whole exercise makes me feel all kinds of ways, but mostly old. It also, however, gives me a chance to reiterate why, when I ought to be playing with the grandkid, fondling the remote,fine-tuning my will, why I choose to write. Indeed, why do any of us write when it seems we work in a vacuum most days, without feedback, lacking any incentive to keep at it, like talking to ourselves? Why do we keep at the old keyboard?
It's not complicated. In fact, the 'age-old' part is relevant. Since we sat around the campfire 10,000 years ago telling each other grand adventure tales--'...him big damn tiger, I tell you...me at cliff...maybe jump..." we humans must tell our story. So the end of another year brings with it yet another opportunity to tell that story, regardless whether the peril is a big damn tiger, or a fiscal cliff. The only way we get through the scary ass night is telling others about it.
Happy New Year, and keep stoking that fire.
December 27, 2012
The Old Man and the Scythe
Why so grim? They do call the fellow the 'grim reaper' after all. This is one of the differences I've always had with a lot of folks. See, it's all perspective. A lot of people see December 31st bearing down and think grim, the end, it's over. I look at it and see January and the start of a new year, with new possibilities. What's the male equivalent to Pollyanna? Paullyhoma? I'll take it. No resolutions. They seem to be little more than a quick way to convince us how fickle, feckless and fragile we are. Get the 'F' words out of the way early, I say. Let's fling ourselves into the festivities and flourish in the new year. It's almost 2013, the Mayans are still around--some of them--and we for sure are. Onward! This year ('13) I will complete three new works: A Meeting in Waterloo, nearly complete as I write this; ER In the Sky, a follow-up to The Sky Behind Me; Waiting for Willie Pete, a Helicopter Novel of Vietnam. It's going to be (literally) a very good year indeed.
The old man and the Scythe
Why so grim? They do call the fellow the 'grim reaper' after all. This is one of the differences I've always had with a lot of folks. See, it's all perspective. A lot of people see December 31st bearing down and think grim, the end, it's over. I look at it and see January and the start of a new year, with new possibilities. What's the male equivalent to Pollyanna? Paullyhoma? I'll take it. No resolutions. They seem to be little more than a quick way to convince us how fickle, feckless and fragile we are. Get the 'F' words out of the way early, I say. Let's fling ourselves into the festivities and flourish in the new year. It's almost 2013, the Mayans are still around--some of them--and we for sure are. Onward! This year ('13) I will complete three new works: A Meeting in Waterloo, nearly complete as I write this; ER In the Sky, a follow-up to The Sky Behind Me; Waiting for Willie Pete, a Helicopter Novel of Vietnam. It's going to be (literally) a very good year indeed.
December 5, 2012
In response to an old flying buddy about my 'Liberal' views.
Yes, I rubbed shoulders with some of those individuals, too back in the day. It's odd to speak with them now, because the conversations I've had with them, my brother-in-law, for example who did not go, leave me with very mixed feelings. G found a way to avoid the whole Vietnam thing, and today, like a lot of guys who didn't go to the war I've found, he's very conflicted about it, almost envious. No, he is envious. When I discuss the war with him, which is seldom, I sense that he regrets not going.
As for my Liberality, I admit to being a capital L Liberal, mostly because I really do feel we Liberals move this country forward to where it needs to go. This country was founded by a bunch of radical, lefty liberals. If it wasn't for those guys we'd all be speaking English today. Liberals got women the vote, and kids out of the mines, and Social Security, and Medicare, and the 40 hour workweek and OSHA, and the EPA and civil rights. I could go on and on, but the bottom line is that Liberals believe we have an obligation to each other, that we're not a bunch of cowboys who are 'on our own,' not rugged individuals who don't need each other. Nobody built their own school, or freeway, or gas pipeline etc. Are there abuses of the entitlement system, malingerers who take advantage with welfare & Medicaid fraud etc? Absolutely, but it's such a small fraction compared to the safety net that's needed, those people aren't worth mentioning. We've all benefited from some kind of Liberal initiative, the GI bill, for instance, a Liberal idea from the get go.
And my feelings about civil marriage--very simple. Civil marriage is for everyone. I agree with your assessment of religious marriage, and, as I said, if you have that in your relationship I'm thrilled for you. I have it, too, and there's no better way to live. In fact the U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed that it's a human right to marry the person you love. I personally feel that to deny what I have to another human being is somehow morally wrong. That to challenge someone else's "..pursuit of happiness..." is somehow unAmerican. My personal opinion. That's why I work with the Human Rights Campaign and other gay rights organizations on this marriage equality thing. I believe that if some of us aren't free, none of us are. It has nothing to do with religion; it's a civil matter. If it's religious, why are atheists allowed to marry? If it's about procreation old people and those who don't want kids couldn't marry. It's about falling in love, and wanting to marry someone--simple. And finally, it's about equal protection under the law, a concept we hold sacred in this country.
The other aspect of this issue that puzzles me, frankly, is this. Here we have a group of people--our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters--and I have many dear friends who fit that description--who are desperate to commit to each other, settle down, form a home and family, contribute to society, work hard, pay taxes, care for their kids, strengthen the neighborhood. These are very conservative issues. Family values, actually. Why are we discouraging them? Why are we prohibiting these people from marrying? It makes no sense. How many straight people do you know who are desperate to marry?
I mentioned third grade etc. When we stood at our desks and saluted the flag, our little hands on our hearts--remember that? We said the pledge of allegiance, every morning. It was always the last line that got me, even gave me a good deal of comfort, actually. "Liberty and justice for all." You know, Ty, I believed that line. I really took it to heart, and believed it. It said "...for ALL." That means everybody--black, white, male, female, gay, straight, Muslim, Christian etc. No exceptions. I really do believe we're all equal under the law. I believe with all my heart that you and I didn't wear that uniform all those years defending a country that makes exceptions. And yes, that applies to civil marriage, because if citizens are denied civil marriage--a CIVIL procedure, not a religious one, then that's discrimination, pure and simple. It's an exception, and we don't make exceptions. I could go on and on about this, and I often do, but I have to tell you, at the risk of pissing you off, that your disdain for marriage equality saddens me a bit. You spent a lot of time in a country where religious fanatics disrupt society and challenge other people's right to enjoy the benefits of that society. I wasn't there with you, but I'm assuming most of the chaos in Iraq is based on religious difference and attendant feelings of superiority, Sunni Vs, Shia. That those poor people still have no real concept of a society based on the rule of law. This is what makes America the greatest nation on earth. Here we understand that the law is above all else, yes even religion. It's not easy being an American. It means we have to accept all manner of people and faiths and practices and tastes etc. And to me it means that our sacred documents are not the bible, or the koran, or the vedas, but the U.S. Constitution and its amendments. And the 14th is relevant for marriage equality. It contains two clauses--the due process clause, and the equal protection clause, which states that we are all--there's that word again--all of us are entitled to equal protection under the law. To me the radical idea is NOT allowing gays & lesbians to marry. The truly radical idea in this country is denying them that right, denying them equality.
Whew--sorry, I still get exercised about things like this. Here's the bottom line. Yes, I really do feel it's one reason the uniform meant so much to me. I wore it not for those who were in the mainstream, the people who took their rights and benefits for granted and didn't need my defense of their freedom. I wore it for those who didn't have those rights, and deserved them as full citizens of this country. So when I see people denied those rights today, I guess I suit up all over again.
As for my Liberality, I admit to being a capital L Liberal, mostly because I really do feel we Liberals move this country forward to where it needs to go. This country was founded by a bunch of radical, lefty liberals. If it wasn't for those guys we'd all be speaking English today. Liberals got women the vote, and kids out of the mines, and Social Security, and Medicare, and the 40 hour workweek and OSHA, and the EPA and civil rights. I could go on and on, but the bottom line is that Liberals believe we have an obligation to each other, that we're not a bunch of cowboys who are 'on our own,' not rugged individuals who don't need each other. Nobody built their own school, or freeway, or gas pipeline etc. Are there abuses of the entitlement system, malingerers who take advantage with welfare & Medicaid fraud etc? Absolutely, but it's such a small fraction compared to the safety net that's needed, those people aren't worth mentioning. We've all benefited from some kind of Liberal initiative, the GI bill, for instance, a Liberal idea from the get go.
And my feelings about civil marriage--very simple. Civil marriage is for everyone. I agree with your assessment of religious marriage, and, as I said, if you have that in your relationship I'm thrilled for you. I have it, too, and there's no better way to live. In fact the U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed that it's a human right to marry the person you love. I personally feel that to deny what I have to another human being is somehow morally wrong. That to challenge someone else's "..pursuit of happiness..." is somehow unAmerican. My personal opinion. That's why I work with the Human Rights Campaign and other gay rights organizations on this marriage equality thing. I believe that if some of us aren't free, none of us are. It has nothing to do with religion; it's a civil matter. If it's religious, why are atheists allowed to marry? If it's about procreation old people and those who don't want kids couldn't marry. It's about falling in love, and wanting to marry someone--simple. And finally, it's about equal protection under the law, a concept we hold sacred in this country.
The other aspect of this issue that puzzles me, frankly, is this. Here we have a group of people--our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters--and I have many dear friends who fit that description--who are desperate to commit to each other, settle down, form a home and family, contribute to society, work hard, pay taxes, care for their kids, strengthen the neighborhood. These are very conservative issues. Family values, actually. Why are we discouraging them? Why are we prohibiting these people from marrying? It makes no sense. How many straight people do you know who are desperate to marry?
I mentioned third grade etc. When we stood at our desks and saluted the flag, our little hands on our hearts--remember that? We said the pledge of allegiance, every morning. It was always the last line that got me, even gave me a good deal of comfort, actually. "Liberty and justice for all." You know, Ty, I believed that line. I really took it to heart, and believed it. It said "...for ALL." That means everybody--black, white, male, female, gay, straight, Muslim, Christian etc. No exceptions. I really do believe we're all equal under the law. I believe with all my heart that you and I didn't wear that uniform all those years defending a country that makes exceptions. And yes, that applies to civil marriage, because if citizens are denied civil marriage--a CIVIL procedure, not a religious one, then that's discrimination, pure and simple. It's an exception, and we don't make exceptions. I could go on and on about this, and I often do, but I have to tell you, at the risk of pissing you off, that your disdain for marriage equality saddens me a bit. You spent a lot of time in a country where religious fanatics disrupt society and challenge other people's right to enjoy the benefits of that society. I wasn't there with you, but I'm assuming most of the chaos in Iraq is based on religious difference and attendant feelings of superiority, Sunni Vs, Shia. That those poor people still have no real concept of a society based on the rule of law. This is what makes America the greatest nation on earth. Here we understand that the law is above all else, yes even religion. It's not easy being an American. It means we have to accept all manner of people and faiths and practices and tastes etc. And to me it means that our sacred documents are not the bible, or the koran, or the vedas, but the U.S. Constitution and its amendments. And the 14th is relevant for marriage equality. It contains two clauses--the due process clause, and the equal protection clause, which states that we are all--there's that word again--all of us are entitled to equal protection under the law. To me the radical idea is NOT allowing gays & lesbians to marry. The truly radical idea in this country is denying them that right, denying them equality.
Whew--sorry, I still get exercised about things like this. Here's the bottom line. Yes, I really do feel it's one reason the uniform meant so much to me. I wore it not for those who were in the mainstream, the people who took their rights and benefits for granted and didn't need my defense of their freedom. I wore it for those who didn't have those rights, and deserved them as full citizens of this country. So when I see people denied those rights today, I guess I suit up all over again.
