Bryce Moore's Blog, page 264

Writing in Reality: Vodnik Chapter Twenty

Quite a few people have asked me (after reading Vodnik) about how much of the story is actually true. I know that seems like an odd question to ask if you haven't read the book. It's a novel about a watery trickster who steals souls and puts them into teacups. Not exactly something you'll see in a 60 Minutes episode. But I think people ask about how much is real because the setting is real. Very real. And having had the chance to be in that setting--to actually live in it, so to speak--might add a stronger twist of reality to this fantasy story than perhaps other books might have.



Writing a novel is a really strange experience. It's such a big undertaking, and there are a lot of details to keep straight over the course of the story. How your characters behave, what action is happening when, where it's all taking place, what the limitations are--tons. For me, it often helps to take a step back and keep asking myself, "Why am I writing this?" What was the thing about the idea that made it so irresistible in the first place?



This helps me keep the story tight and focused. I have a tendency to ramble (on the blog, in real life, in my writing--you name it.) New ideas come to me, and sometimes I switch focus to them too quickly--to the detriment of the original ideas. In some ways, this is very helpful. I rarely have a lot of trouble coming up with new ideas. In other ways, this can be a real pain, since a completed first draft of one of my books can look sort of like Tarzan swinging from idea to idea, with great ideas left behind in a sea of vines and metaphors that were taken too far. I have to come back afterward and play clean up. Even things out. Take the good ideas I came across and make sure they spread across the whole story. That sort of thing.



A big part of the reason Vodnik got written was that I wanted to write about Slovakia--and in particular Trencin. So when I went back to revise the book, I searched for details I could add in about the city--on every level possible. The way the rain will just pour for a half hour or so, and then shut off. How people treat strangers in the city. The way the cobblestones feel under your feet. All sorts of real life details that were very easy to add, as long as I took the time to think about what it's really like to be there.



Writing about reality is easier in some ways. There's a "there"there, if you know what I mean. When you're writing about fantasy, you have to come up with the whole thing all on your lonesome sometimes. Then again, there's no one to tell you that you messed something up. Things are the way you described them, and that's not the case when you're writing about a city people can actually visit. Still, I like the challenge of each.



This chapter has some of those real life details woven in to the story. Tomas looking around the town for Katka. The rain. The apartment in the castle. All sorts of tidbits that I've seen in my visits. One of my goals in writing the book was to write it well enough that people feel like Trencin is a real place--that they see it the way I see it. Judging from some of the responses I've gotten back from various people, I succeeded, at least to some extent.



This Christmas, we're going back to Trencin for the holidays. My son (who's now read Vodnik) will be able to see it all first hand. I'll be interested to hear if he has anything to say about the city--if any of his perceptions have changed having read the book. I'll be sure to keep you posted.



Anyway--that's all I have time for today. Thanks for reading!

A Birthday Wish

Yes, as Facebook is even now loudly proclaiming, today's my birthday. Not really doing too much special on the day--TRC is sick and throwing up even as I write this, so my birthday dinner is kind of shot for the day. We'll try to do that on Sunday or something, I think.



In the meantime, I'll be heading off to work for the day, then come home and maybe . . . watch a movie. I've got a John Carter bluray waiting for me from Netflix. It can't be that bad, right?



But this short post is just to say thanks in advance for all the birthday greetings. Facebook certainly does a great job with that. If any of you would like to know what I'd like for my birthday, it would be . . . Vodnik reviews! :-) That's right peoples--if you haven't taken the time to write up a quick review of my book (assuming you've read it, that is), taking the time today and posting it over at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, or Goodreads would be downright spiffy. Or heck--just liking the book at Amazon would be something. With a book from a smaller press like mine is, it can be difficult for it to find its way in front of readers. Vodnik has been doing admirably, but it could always use more word of mouth--I think any book could always use more of that.



Anyway--I'm off to do my writing for the morning. Hope you all have a super day, and I'll see you on Monday!

European Christmas Vacation

Denisa and I have wanted to go over to Europe for Christmas for quite a long time. The problem has always (of course) been funding for the trip. This year, with her teaching a class at the university, that problem was taken care of, and so I'm very excited to say that we bought our tickets yesterday. The whole fam is headed to Slovakia, Germany, Austria, and the Czech Republic for the holidays this year!



Christmas itself will be spent with Denisa's family. She was thinking it over, and she's pretty sure it's been at least 16 years since she last had Christmas at home. I can't imagine what that would be like, since "Christmas at home" in this case means "the traditional Christmas she grew up with." In many ways, she's adapted to the American Christmas we have here. And while that's really admirable, and we've gotten some of our own traditions going that incorporate Slovak festivities as much as American ones, I'm still super excited that we get to head over there and be there for Christmas.



I've also been wanting to go back to Germany ever since I left the country (November 1999). This year, a friend was crazy enough to move his entire family there for a year and a half. He gave a standing invite to anyone of his friends crazy enough to come visit. I called him on his bluff. Having a home base to catch your breath (or at least, knowing the home base is there if you need to) can make an international trip much more manageable.



It also helped that Aer Lingus has a great deal going right now on European fares. We flew them about five years ago when we went to Dublin and Slovakia, and we were very happy with the flight. (Even better? They give a discount on tickets for children age 2-11--that can make a real difference.) We had budgeted $4,000 for air fare, and we managed to get it down to $3,155--and that's just heading over with one stop in Dublin. No airplane acrobatics this time!



We'll head over before Christmas, do a tour through southern Germany and Austria (so excited to be going back to Salzburg--and at Christmas time!), then going on to Slovakia, staying a while, then heading north through Czech Republic to East Germany (my old mission stomping grounds), then turning west to explore central Germany before we head back.



For a guy who professes to hate flying, I know I do an awful lot of it. And the low-level stress has already begun: I have no idea where we'll be staying, when we'll be where, what we'll see and do. There's a ton of logistics to get done for a trip of this scope. Good thing I've got lots of practice.



So.



If perchance you're over in Europe and would like to see the Bryce Clan, send me an email or message on Facebook. If you're also going to be over there this Christmas and would like to meet up somewhere, let us know. We'll have a car and will be very mobile. Last time we went, we toured through Vienna with some of Denisa's friends and had a blast. If you need tips on deals for flying, etc--I'm up for those, too.



Three months and counting!

Book Review: Leviathan

Leviathan by Scott Westerfeld

My rating: 5 of 5 stars



I've been a fan of Scott Westerfeld since his Uglies Trilogy (fantastic sci-fi YA dystopia series), and so I had pretty high expectations when I picked up Leviathan. Right away, those expectations were raised even higher--the book just looks fantastic. The map on the inside flap, illustrations throughout: this looks and feels like an awesome book.



Thankfully, the content keeps up with the form.



It's a steampunk WWI alternate history novel, and if that doesn't sound like awesome incarnate to you, your Awesome Incarnate Meter is broken, and you should really look into getting it replaced.



In this version of history, Darwin discovered not just the concept of evolution, but he figured out how to speed it up, creating all sorts of interesting, useful animals. England, Russia, Japan--these countries have embraced this new technology. On the other side, you've got Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire--countries which have devoted themselves to machines and gears. So "Darwinists" vs. "Clunkers."



The first book introduces two main characters: Deryn (a girl pretending to be a boy so she can serve on a Darwinist airship (essentially an flying whale), and Alek (the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, on the run from German assassins).



Westerfeld does a fantastic job keeping the plot rolling along, but what makes this series stand out even more to me is how fully realized the setting and background seemed to be. You've got historical figures and scenarios blending with these fully realized alternate technologies. It's fun to see the different ways the Clankers and Darwinists have come up with for dealing with common everyday problems. (Disclaimer: I'm not extremely well-read when it comes to steampunk, so for all I know, Westerfeld is just playing on well worn tropes. But the books are aimed at the younger YA set, so his prime audience wouldn't be extremely well-read in steampunk, either. So it all works out, regardless.)



The books are good clean fun, great for a fast, entertaining read. My eight year old son's working his way through the second now, too. He loves them for the plot and illustrations, and he's now dead-set on getting over to Germany and Austria so that he can see if they really have cool machines there. (He's reluctant to believe my claims that they do not, in fact, have those machines.)




View all my reviews

At the County Fair

It's the middle of September, and that means it's time for the fair to roll into town. Hard to believe, but this is already the sixth Farmington Fair we've been to. Craziness incarnate.



As has become tradition in the Bryce household, Denisa and the kids entered submissions in a variety of contests. This year, the spoils were as follows:




DC won second place twice (once with a painting of a cat, and once with a painting of flowers).
TRC won first place for a recycled article--he'd made a basket out of phone book pages when Denisa's mom was in town earlier this year.
Denisa won first place for yellow string beans, second place for peppers, third place for garlic, second place for basil, and first place for canned fruit. (Or was that second? I don't know--I didn't take notes.)


TRC and DC had a blast yesterday going on all the fair rides. What was really surprising was how adventurous DC has become. She went on every single ride TRC went on. Even though she's only four, she's over 48 inches tall, which meant she could go on everything unaccompanied. The Scrambler, Tilt-a-Whirl, Thunder Bolt--you name it, she was game. We ended up staying until 9:20, with the kids just going on ride after ride after ride. It was a ton of fun to watch their expressions--particularly on the Scrambler which the guy let run for probably twice as long as usual. The kids were well and truly scrambled by the time they got off.




And the demolition derby was a riot, as always. Very good competition this year, with one car actually driving up over other cars on three separate occasions. (Should I be scared that I'm becoming sort of a demolition derby connoisseur?)




Another big part of the fair is--as always--eating. And so we had dough boys, shave ice, stew, donuts, fudge, fries, hot dogs, maple syrup samples, maple cotton candy--food was consumed by all.




I unfortunately had a splitting headache at the beginning, but it was gone by 8 or so, which is one reason we let the kids stay so lage. I was finally enjoying myself. The iPad was out of batteries, though, so I don't have pics to share with you at the moment. Hopefully on FB later.




In any case, another successful fair is in the books. The kids are already planning for next year . . . 

On Racism, Rivalries, Idiots, and Bill Murray

It's Monday on Bryce's Ramblings, and usually that would mean a Vodnik Chapter Commentary. But not this Monday, because I've got something to say to you people, and it's gotta be said today. Why today? Because the BYU/Utah game was Saturday evening. Because we're coming into the home stretch of Major League Baseball games. Because the November elections are right around the corner.



And because I've had enough of all of it.



Yes, BYU lost the big rivalry game--something that BYU has been very good at doing (losing the big rivalry game) for the last while. Why do we lose? I have no idea. It seems like typically Utah is far more pumped up to play the game than we are. But I'm just watching from the comfort of a living room, so I really don't know. I *do* know what I would do to motivate the team next year--if we were playing Utah, which we're not. I would sit them all down, and show them this movie clip.







In fact, this is a clip that I think all sports fans would do well to watch and understand--and be forced to keep watching until they understand. Because do you know what?



It just doesn't matter.



It matters to the players, yes. But what really doesn't matter is what sports team you support. You're not a better person than anyone else because the team whose logo is emblazoned on your sweatshirt happened to beat a team whose logo is emblazoned on that other guy's sweatshirt. It doesn't grant you the ability to fly, or laser vision, or even a lifetime pass to cut in line at water parks. You're still just you.



At Saturday's game at Utah, my little sister (a BYU fan) was in attendance. Here's part of her status update after the loss.

I may have been a Cougar on Ute trurf, but I am also a human being. I had men, women, and even a seven year old boy spit on me. I was told I wasn't good enough to walk on the sidewalk, sworn at, laughed at, and had smoke blown in my face.

I haven't had the chance yet to talk to her to get the whole story. I'd like to think it wasn't as harsh as that sounds. Surely people wouldn't spit on a girl just because she roots for a different team. I know my sister. She's not the kind of gal to be being obnoxious at a rivalry game. This is uncalled for, and I don't think anyone would argue that point with me.



What makes this all even more pathetic is the fact that--for almost all values, BYU and Utah fans are pretty much identical--especially to an outside observer. They are by and large Mormon. They live in the same towns as each other. Drive the same cars. Make the same money. Share the same skin color. Typically have the same political views. Yes, you might get some anti-Mormon sentiment among some Utah fans, but I don't think that's the basis of the rivalry.



The one thing that makes these two groups of people stand apart is that half of them like to cheer for the Cougars on Saturday, and half of them cheer for the Utes.



Of course, if you actually ask the fans of one team about the fans of the other team, you get a much different story. "BYU fans are ___________." "Utah fans always ____________." Let me fill in the blanks with some descriptions I've heard lobbed at each side over the years.



"BYU fans are all so holier-than-thou. They're a bunch of arrogant imbeciles."



"Utah fans are nothing but a bunch of drunk frontrunners. When their team is doing well, they care, but as soon as the team's doing poorly, they don't."



I wrote a post after last year's loss, in which I wondered why Utah fans were so dead set against BYU sports. And I heard some very valid answers. But what I *don't* understand, and what I doubt anyone is going to be able to justify to me, is why fans hate other fans. Why they make generalized statements like the ones I just threw out there above this paragraph.



Because here's the fact: people are uniform. They're always people. Take a group of anybody, and you're going to have some geniuses, some idiots, some jerks, some gentlemen--some of any description you want to look for. People are people.



Are some BYU fans full of themselves? You bet. So are some Utah fans. Are some Utah fans drunk frontrunners? You bet. So are some BYU fans, no doubt (and highly ironically).



When people start making broad generalizations about another group of people, that smacks strongly of racism.



LET ME BE PERFECTLY CLEAR: I am not likening the problems of being a BYU or Utah fan to the situation dealt with by minority groups. What I *am* saying is that it seems to me a lot of the same issues are involved in both areas, just on drastically different scale.



What it seems to come down to is an inherent belief that anything "Other" is "Worse." This extends beyond sports rivalries into any number of other areas. Politics and religion are biggies, too. I'm friends with Republicans and Democrats on Facebook and Twitter. The amount of bile that's spewed both ways is deplorable. As a Mormon, the arguments I've heard made about Mormons in general are just depressing.



It seems like it's more justified or acceptable to dismiss another category of people (Republicans, Mormons, Utah fans, etc.) if they're part of that category because of some voluntary choice. If it's a choice people make, then it's just fine to call them stupid or ignorant or _______ because they made that choice.



But I'm sorry, that just doesn't hold water with me. Because again, people are people. Do you have some Republicans who just mindlessly believe what Glenn Beck or whoever is telling them? Sure. But you have some Democrats who do the same thing (just not with Glenn Beck). Do you have some Mormons who are total space cadets? You betcha. But space cadets can be found among all races, creeds, and nations.



The fact is that most people make the decisions they make, believe the things they believe, because they've weighed things out in their minds and made what seems to them as the best possible choice. I don't know anyone personally who said, "I know I'm about to do something really stupid, and which 'll always regret, but I'm going to do it anyway."



Here's a tip, folks--if you're gearing up to dismiss *any* group of people with a blanket statement that you believe covers the majority of that group, then you're out of line. And you're wrong to do it.



Why can't we just learn to evaluate people by the decisions and actions they make on an individual level?



Maybe it's because we like to justify our own decisions and opinions. We like to be right. And in some cases (sports, for example), if another person is right, then that must mean we're wrong. We're threatened by the idea that there might not *be* a right. Or maybe it's because in situations like politics, if enough people believe something you believe is wrong, then you could well be out of luck come November.



I've been a missionary--an official representative of a church, tasked with talking to strangers about that church. I didn't do it in an argumentative fashion (though I know there are missionaries who do). My goal was simply to inform people who were interested in listening--tell them what I believed and why. If they were still interested and wanted to learn more, super. If they weren't, at least they (hopefully) no longer thought Mormons were the same as Amish (a popularly held belief in Germany, where (to the best of my understanding) the Harrison Ford movie "Witness" had translated "Amish" as "Mormon" in the German version. Thanks, Harrison.) I wasn't more or less "right" in my beliefs based on how many people I got to join the church.



Anyway. This post has gone on long enough, and I don't want to get it all weighed down with a religious debate. But it's been weighing on my mind ever since I saw my sister's status update. If you're about to cast judgement on a person you've never met based on anything about them you've heard, maybe you should question why you're doing that. If you're going to write a pithy post on Facebook accusing a group of being stupid, or bigoted, or greedy, or ________, realize that if you have a large number of friends, chances are some of those friends belong to the group you're about to call names.



We're a diverse bunch. Let's celebrate that.



And as for rivalries? I'm all for them. I love some good competitions and hard-fought games. I'm all for being mad at the other team. Being frustrated with how they play the game. Getting upset at how the refs are favoring them all the time. That's all part of the game.



But hating the other fans because they're doing THE EXACT SAME THING YOU'RE DOING, just from the other side of the field?



Get over yourselves, people.



It just doesn't matter.

Movie Review Roundup: Six Movies in Two Days

I've come down with a nasty bug the last few days, and you know what that means: movie time! I've now watched six films in the past two days, and I'm here to share my opinion of them with all of you. All of them on Netflix Instant, waiting for you even as we speak. Ready? Let's go.



First up, we have Haywire, a movie I had never heard of until it popped up in Netflix's recommendation queue for me. (Seriously, that queue is one of the best things ever. What a great way for movies to get noticed.) It said I'd give it 3.8 stars, and for an action flick, that's pretty high for me. So I gave it a shot. I don't want to tell you too much about this one--it's a twisty turny plot that's not really original, but is a fun ride nonetheless. The thing that stood out the most to me in this movie was the star: Gina Carano. It's not often you have a leading lady in an action movie, and she did such a great job with the action sequences. I looked her up online to discover she's got an extensive fighting career in MMA, and it shows on the screen. The movie is realistically violent (or at least, it feels that way)--meaning, the characters actually deal with consequences when they get hit. They get hurt. That's always a plus. And it had a fantastic opening scene. Three stars out of four.



Next, there was Snatch. one of my favorite Brad Pitt roles even if he's just a supporting character. This is a convoluted heist movie, with tons of intersecting plot lines and more than a little gallows humor. One of my favorite heist films, actually. What's it about? A huge diamond, and a boxing match, and a Russian gangster, and a dog with a squeaky toy inside it, and--everything else. Very quotable. Totally brutal movie, but really spot on for what it tries to be. This was my third time watching it, as I recall. Three and a half stars, but not really for the faint of heart.



Killer Elite was another new one, following Jason Statham over from Snatch. Statham is an elite assassin who's decided to get out of the killing business. But when his mentor (Robert De Niro) is captured, it's up to Statham to get back in the game and assassinate three last victims, or De Niro will die. Again, nothing ground breaking about this movie, but if you're in the mood for some action, it scratches that itch admirably. Three stars.



Empire Records is a cult classic I'd heard a lot about, but never watched. Netflix thought I'd only give it three stars, and I ended up giving it five. Not a perfect movie, but an almost perfect-for-Bryce film. It's a day in the life of the employees at an independent record store. Sort of along the lines of High Fidelity (which I adore), but more of a teen movie than a romantic-comedy. Released in 1995, so the soundtrack was aimed directly at me. The characters are goofy. the plot is predictable, but I just didn't care. It was just . . . fun. Maybe you have to be in the right mood for it, but I give it 3.5 stars.



Legend of the Fist: The Return of Chen Zhen is a Donnie Yen sequel to a Jet Li remake of the Bruce Lee film, Fist of Fury (which I almost mistyped as "Fists of Furry," which would be a much different movie.) If that last sentence made any sense to you, then congratulations. You're in the target audience. If it didn't, you should probably look elsewhere. I'm in the target audience. It's an interesting marital arts movie, primarily because it's got a strong Communist vibe to it. Donnie Yen released it in 2010, and it's a movie that's unabashedly obvious in its "China is going to dominate the world one day" undertones. Which I actually kind of appreciated, mainly because American movies do that sort of thing all the time, and it was nice to see a Chinese take on it. (But maybe I'm just more sensitive to that sort of thing, having lived in former East Germany for two years. Communist stuff is often pretty easy to spot.) Don't get me wrong--it's hardly a commie propaganda movie. It's still martial arts fun. But it's there in the background, and Yen lets it dominate the plot from time to time. Still, I enjoyed the movie and gave it 3 stars.



Last, I rewatched the original Tom Cruise Mission: Impossible flick. And you know what? It's aged very well. I bumped up its Netflix rating from a three out of five stars to a four out of five stars. The action scenes are tense, I had no trouble following the plot at all, and I thought Cruise did a great job. I was very glad I'd given it another go around. Three stars out of four.



Maybe I've been in a three stars kind of mood the past two days?



Anyway. That's all I've got for you today. I'm going to go back to sleep now. Tomorrow I have to head off to Bar Harbor with Denisa to do a service project as part of the Mormon youth group in the region. (Well, I'll at least be watching the service project. I might not actually participate.) And tomorrow night? BYU/Utah, baby! I love me some fall football . . .



See you all on Monday.

Gold Panning for Fun and . . . That's About It

I unfortunately have no pictures of this, but this past Saturday I headed out with the fam and some friends to go hiking and GET RICH . . . or at least, PAN FOR GOLD, which is the same thing, right?



The hike was a ton of fun. Just a half mile up to a gorgeous 90 ft waterfall called






Cool, huh? TRC and DC had a great time. The weather was nice and cool, not too sunny--great stuff. We then hiked down and drove a little way to a part of the stream that's supposedly RIDDLED WITH RICHES. Or at least, people have occasionally found a bit of gold now and then. We spent a couple of hours panning, and found . . . a single flake that was too small to even really capture in a vial.



There goes my savings plan for TRC and DC's college education.



Panning turns out to take a lot of time, effort, and patience. You dig up a pan full of dirt (places behind large rocks are apparently notorious for sucking in gold), and then take it to the river and swirl that pan for all you're worth. The gold--being so heavy--sinks to the bottom, and you swirl out the lighter stuff. Meaning big rocks. And you swirl and swirl and swirl and swirl some more, until you're left with this fine powder. Most of it is reddish stuff, there's some iron stuff, and then--hopefully--some gold stuff.



Take it from me: there's a lot of swirling involved. I imagine it must be easier in places with a higher concentration of gold. I've decided that Bryces Don't Like Panning for Gold, though. I liked being outside in the river, but I'm not planning on quitting my job to go prospecting.



Still, always fun to do new things, and I might do it again sometime. It's as good an excuse to be outside as fishing is, though you're not likely to take home more than you would with a reel.



Any of you been panning? Had more success? Please share![image error]

Why I'm Giving Up eBooks--For Now

[image error] You all know me. You know I'm an author and librarian. To say that books play a significant role in my life would be an understatement. I read, and I read a lot. I read quickly, and I plow through books I love.



Or at least, I used to.



Something's happened to me for the past few months. Maybe even the past few years. Lately I've been looking at my Goodreads account and wondering why it is that I don't seem to have read as many books as I used to. Am I busier? Well, yes. I've got plenty of stuff going on in my life, no doubt. But that's never made a difference to me before. In high school, I was working twenty hours a week, playing in orchestra, band, county band, dixie band, pit band, taking all AP classes, acting in the school play, playing a ton of video games and STILL reading a slew of books a month.



Reading is a priority for me. So why was it that despite feeling like I was still reading a lot, the actual "reading" part wasn't happening?



I've taken a look around, and I've made a few experiments, and I've found the culprit: my iPad.



Ever since I got my iPad and started reading books on it, my books per month number has plummeted. It's not because I don't love reading. It's because every time I pick up my iPad, there are so many other things I could be doing on it. Games to play, email to check, Facebook, Twitter, websites, weather, news, movies to watch, music to listen to--oh yeah. And books to read. Not only that, but it sends me notifications when I'm reading. "So and So just posted such and such on Facebook."



I'm easily distracted. I have a lot of different interests, and I have trouble paying attention to all of them at the same time. And the result is that my iPad has been killing my reading. True story. I've stopped reading on it, and started reading those old things called "normal books," and I'm reading a ton again. It's made a huge difference, and it's mainly because when I pick up a book, there's only one thing I can do with it. (Well, two--if you count squishing spiders, which I do.) I get swept up in the story, and I lose track of time. Everything I've always loved about reading.



So will I never return to eBooks? Doubtful. There's things about an eReader that really appeal to me. The ability to read at night and not bother Denisa. Instantaneous access to books, and no clutter. Also, I'm a technophile, so there's that, too. But then again, which format to go with? I'm not interested in a Fire at all--I already have a tablet that works great for me. But I'm seriously looking at a Nook or one of the new regular kindles that are lit up. Something that's exclusively for books. It's been a while since I was looking for a gadget that had fewer capabilities--on purpose. But I want something that's eBooks and nothing else. I'll have to weigh my options.



In the meantime, there's all these lovely physical pages waiting for me . . .[image error]

A Review of Redshirts

Galaxy Quest meets Stranger than Fiction. That's the best way I can describe this intriguing book by a man who comes as close to sci-fi royalty as it gets these days: John Scalzi. And much as I hate to admit it, Redshirts is the first book of his that I've actually read. (What can I say? I'm typically more of a fantasy kind of a guy--particularly of the YA variety.) But I heard the premise: a bunch of stock characters in a real life version of Star Trek start to discover they're . . . a bunch of stock characters, good for nothing but getting killed off to increase the dramatic tension. And how could I resist that?



Answer: I couldn't.



I read the book in about two days. And I really enjoyed parts of it. Most of it. But some of it just didn't sit well with me. And much as I'm usually reluctant to openly critique the books of fellow writers, I'm going to make an exception in this case for two reasons. First: it's John Scalzi, and he can take it. Second, I really enjoyed the book, so it's not like I'm tearing down.



Like I said, it's a fast read. As far as the book-for-book's sake goes, it's a fun read, too. The meta story got a bit carried away now and then for my tastes, but that's a matter of taste. (I don't want to go into details too much here, because me no likey spoilers, but let's just say there got to be one or two too many layers.) The book also succeeds at making you think differently about literature and genre in general, and I really appreciated that.



So what inspired me to write a post longer than "This is a good book"?



The language.



That's right, folks. I'm a prude. The book drops a few f-bombs here and there, and I get all uppity. But before you start calling me a Puritan and asking if I saw Goody Osburn with the devil, allow me to explain.



I've got nothing against harsh language. People use it. People other than me, typically, but it's a well known fact that f-words are dropped on a regular basis across the country. Certainly across my campus. So why should I object to having them in a book?



To be honest, I normally wouldn't. Some of my favorite movies and books are peppered with saltiness, and that doesn't turn me off. But the saltiness matches the book or the movie. It fits the subject material. (And I realize that now that I'm saying this, the other half of the people out there--the half that didn't call me Puritan to begin with--is now getting ready to hurl some "Heathen!" comments my way. What can I say? I like to irritate everybody equally.)



Let me take Galaxy Quest as an example. The movie's an absolute blast. It's a send up of Star Trek in much the same way that Redshirts is. It's flat out hilarious, and one of the best Star Trek movies out there--maybe *the* best, but I won't make that statement, because there's only so much controversy one book review can handle.



What would Galaxy Quest be like with the addition of five or ten f-bombs?



I argue it would be a worse movie. It would alienate (no pun intended) a good number of potential fans,  limit the audience, and for what in return? Grittiness? Realism? It's a sci-fi sendup. Realism and grittiness aren't necessary. At all. And the same holds true for Redshirts. Yes, I suppose by adding in a few four letter words, Scalzi uses a short cut to say "These people are real. They swear just like you and me." But I don't think that short cut is necessary. The characters are well-written as is.



This isn't an adult book. This is a book that would work just fine for all ages. (Although, yes--there is that meta thing that goes on, which might be over the head of a few age groups, potentially.) There are a sizable number of adults in the world who have no desire to read profanity when they don't want to, but who would love to experience the wonders of Redshirts. I wish I could whole-heartedly endorse the book for them, but I can't.



And Scalzi no doubt knows this, and is fine with this. And when I write, I make the same decision a lot of the time--what to include. How "real" to make the material. How violent? What sort of language? Sexual tension? And no doubt some of my decisions cross the line for other people out there. It's just not often that I find myself on the other side of the line, saying "It was good, but . . ." and having to hem and haw about language. It's helpful for me to remember what that feels like.



And in this case, it feels like the book reached too far. Like it stepped over that line for kicks and giggles, and it got nothing in return. But that's just my two cents.



Four out of five stars. Recommended for everybody, but watch out for some language.[image error]