Here come the viruses

Posted on June 24, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

Our language says a lot about us, doesn’t it? This is especially so for the language we consciously adopt to describe our evolving culture. So it’s particularly telling, I think, that we (“we” being the users, creators and squatters of the www) have chosen the adjective viral to characterize internet memes that explode in distribution, that almost literally take on a life of their own.

Because they do spread like viruses, don’t they? From person to person, picking up speed, and eventually ‘infecting’ entire populations.

More often than not we apply that word, viral, to videos; viral videos are the ones that stand out somehow, that inexplicably shoulder past the innumerable rest to capture our attention, or elicit our laughter, or tug our heartstrings.

By now you’ve surely heard of Karen Klein, the grandmotherly bus monitor so cruelly treated by a group of middle-school boys. The video of her being ‘bullied’ (and that word might be apt based on the behavior, but it feels weird to use when the victim is five times the age of the perpetrators) has not only gone viral, it has generated a bewildering windfall for Mrs. Klein.

The fact that the video went viral, and has sparked such sympathy, isn’t all that surprising. She’s a sympathetic figure, stuck in a harsh circumstance.

And her tormentors, rotten bullies though they might be – well let’s face it, they’re 13 year-old boys. We might wish they didn’t act this way, we might even all agree they’re deserving of some punishment. A summer without Xboxes might teach them the lesson they’re sorely in need of.

But are they the inhuman monsters this virus is portraying them as? Or are they 13 year-old boys, acting like 13 year-old boys always have, who happened to do in front of a camera and in the age of viral communication?

A notable percentage of viewers (I’m looking at you, 4chan) has reacted (without a shred of conscious irony), by bullying the bullies. The harassment of the boys has included death threats, anonymous calls that have brought police to their doors, and more cyber-bullying than we’ll probably ever know (and that will probably go on for months, or until something else new and shiny distracts 4chan’s attention).

Thousands of other viewers decided to take a more constructive path. Coordinated through Reddit, it began as a modest campaign to raise enough money to send Mrs. Klein on a nice vacation. That goal seems a bit random, but the intent was clearly good. But then the campaign took on a viral life of its own, with donations pouring in. At last check they’ve topped $600,000. Mrs. Klein, understandably, is thinking about retiring.

It’s a nice outcome for her, and food for thought for everyone with a YouTube account. How many camera phones are at this moment being clicked on, with the intent of generating a windfall? How many people are making the saddest videos possible because the case of Mrs. Klein has proved that’s how you win the lottery?

What comes next is all but inevitable: a slew of heart-tugging videos, with concerted efforts to kickstart the viral phenomenon. Call it viral-engineering: greedy people are now incentivized to take the randomness out of the way we select our memes.

Here come the viruses. Our online culture is about to change once again, and not at all in a good way.

Posted in New Post | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Hypocrisy all around

Posted on June 16, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

To call this, the U.S. presidential election cycle, the silly season, doesn’t at all do it justice. Because there’s nothing silly about naked hypocrisy and raw cynicism.

On Friday, June 15th the Obama administration announced a change in policy at the Department of Homeland Security that will, in effect, implement portions of the long-stalled DREAM Act. The new policy will cease deportation of, and allow work permits to be issued to undocumented immigrants who were brought to this country as children. Opponents of the president’s move are calling it amnesty. Proponents are calling it long overdue.

But at least those opinions, diametrically opposed though they are, are heartfelt. More worthy of contempt is the professional political class, which is desperately trying to figure out how to parlay this into votes.

Exhibit A is Mitt Romney, who veered hard right during the primary (particularly on immigration issues) and is now tacking back toward the center. In the debates he all but buried Rick Perry for supporting the DREAM Act, but now says he “agrees with” Marco Rubio, who’s authored his own version of DREAM (one that is in substance remarkably similar to Obama’s new policy). Romney is criticizing the president for his method of implementation, yet tepidly seems to support its goals, yet refuses to say whether he’d overturn it if elected. For those keeping score, that’s three weak-kneed positions on the same issue. It’s almost as if he’s given the Etch-A-Sketch a good shake, but hasn’t figured out what to do with it next.

And then we have Marco Rubio himself. The Tea Party-backed junior senator from Florida calls the policy “welcome news,” but also says it’s a “short-term solution” that will complicate, even prevent, a permanent legislative remedy. This from the senator who touts his immigration policy, who urges his party to get on board with it, but who refuses to actually put it up for a vote. Why? Because he knows immigration reform of any stripe is doomed to be blocked by members of his own caucus. This short-term solution is the only solution, and Rubio knows it, because as long as anti-immigration Republicans have the ability to filibuster, the DREAM Act (in any form) is a non-starter. Instead of recognizing this reality, one that’s plain to see to anyone not blinded by partisanship, Rubio criticizes the president for not following a path we all know leads to nowhere.

And last in this far-from-complete rogues’-gallery of hypocrites is the president. One only needs to look at the calendar to see the impetus for his decision. His defenders will argue: “Well of course it’s political. That’s the nature of the beast. It’s still the right thing to do.” But if that’s true then why wasn’t it the right thing to do a year ago? Or two? Or – if not day one of his presidency, then at least the day it became clear his legislative agenda would be hopelessly blocked (day two)? Just last year he told the Spanish-language channel Univision that he couldn’t halt deportations through executive order. It’s true that he still hasn’t done so (this represents a change in DHS procedures, not an executive order), but again, why wait until now? More importantly, how many innocent kids were deported while Obama was waiting for the most politically advantageous moment to make his move?

This jockeying for Latino votes is shameless in its hypocrisy and breathtaking in the undisguised way it’s being carried out. All sides are to blame here; no hands are clean. And it’s most symptomatic of the depths to which American politics has sunk, where no good deed can be performed without first counting the votes that might result.

The hypocrites should be reminded that we-the-people are desperately seeking candidates willing to do the right thing for its own sake.

Posted in New Post | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The hands of the artist, across time

Posted on June 14, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

This is art history, to a prehistoric degree. And it just may cause us to rethink whether art belongs to our species alone.

A newly perfected uranium-thorium dating technique has drastically pushed back the dates of several European cave-painting sites, including the above hand stencils from El Castillo cave in Spain. These sites are now found to be thousands of years older than previously thought, with some paintings dating from 40,000 years ago at the most recent.

That date is provocative because it refers to a time when modern humans, Homo Sapiens, were not the dominant hominid on the continent.

Are we looking at the hands–that is, the artwork–of H. Neanderthalensis?

To be sure, there’s no evidence, beyond the dating, that Neanderthals created these or any other cave paintings. But Neanderthal researchers have previously identified intriguing signs of complex Neanderthal culture, including use of ornamentation, ritualistic burials, even the manufacture of musical instruments. Would painting be such a departure?

It’s also interesting to note that the dating reflects a time of coexistence, possibly even interbreeding, between Neanderthals and their H. Sapien neighbors. So the El Castillo artwork might not have been crafted by another species, but rather our own hybrid ancestors.

One thing’s clear: almost all traces of the artists’ culture have disappeared and are all but unknown to us. Yet still, 40,000 years later, we can look upon their works and admire the very hands that created them.

Posted in New Post | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Time for a giveaway!

Posted on June 11, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

It couldn’t be easier to score you some free swag!

And by ‘swag,’ we mean signed, first edition copies of Voracious and Refrigerator Magnets. We’ll even spring for the postage! (and for that reason – sorry – U.S. and Canadian participants only, please)

So how do you get in on this amazing offer? Glad you asked. Just click on over to the Voracious Facebook page and leave us a comment on the Wall. Any comment will do – “Register me to win” or “Four score and seven years ago,” even “we LOVE Voracious” or “we HATE Voracious.” Anything! (oh, and feel free to click the ‘Like’ button while you’re there. It’s not required but always appreciated.)

One lucky commenter will be chosen at random on July 7, 2012 and will be contacted via Facebook. Shortly thereafter, your signed first editions will be on their way.

It’s just our way of sharing some spooky Voracious love! 

So why wait? Go to Facebook.com/ReadVoracious now and leave us a comment! We’re dying (horrifically, with massive exsanguination) to give you some books!!

Posted in New Post | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Car Talk – end of an era (but a well-earned retirement)

Posted on June 9, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

The concept of “radio show” is almost an anachronism now. The golden age of radio is long past, and most of us turn to other media for long-form entertainment.

But there’s a holdout, a happy anachronism, for me and millions of others. NPR–National Public Radio–offers not just news and classical music (nice as those offerings are) but also shows. Dozens of shows on dozens of subjects. From the lively storytelling of Garrison Keillor’s A Prairie Home Companion, to the gourmet advice for clueless gourmands on The Splendid Table, NPR continues to prove that the radio show is alive and well, diverse and enjoyable.

Oh, but this fall (cue dirge music here), NPR’s lineup gets a little less lively, a little less fun. Car Talk, brought to you by Click and Clack the Tappet Brothers (aka Tom and Ray Magliozzi), ceases production.

If you’ve never listened to Tom and Ray, you must. They’ll continue recording new weekly shows (check your local NPR station’s listings for times) between now and the end of September. And Car Talk will continue in syndication after that, thanks to the tens of thousands of listener calls they’ve answered over the years.

That’s right – for an awe-inspiring 35 years, Tom and Ray, both professional mechanics and repair-shop owners, have been fielding calls, helping hapless listeners sort out their car woes. Simple enough format, yes? Maybe; but if it were that simple, it wouldn’t have earned that longevity.

It comes down to their personalities. These guys are hilarious. They bond immediately with every caller, perhaps gently make fun of them and their situation (“Sticky brakes? Yeah, you’re doomed.”), but they always try to help, and they always entertain.

Their wit and wisdom are legendary. They’re the authors of the almost-scientifically-proven Donna Factor. That is, if you see a woman driving a red Firebird or Camaro, nine times out of ten her name is Donna. (I mentioned this once to a co-worker of old, a proud owner of a red Firebird who’d personalized her license plate with her first name: Donna. She’d never heard of Car Talk, but the Donna Factor made her smile. A little.)

I’m such a fan of Car Talk (and the Donna Factor) that I gave them both prominent mention in my first novel, as my lead character purchased her coveted red Camaro. I named her Sara, though, hoping she could be that exception who proves the Donna Factor rule.

All of that–the Donnas and The Puzzler and the whackily informative interplay between two grizzled old gearheads–will be sorely missed. Yes, Tom and Ray have more than earned their retirement (in their announcement they said ‘it’s time to stop and smell the cappuccino’). After 35 great years, how could it be otherwise?

So–thanks Tom and Ray. Enjoy your retirement.

But before you go: I get a grinding noise every time I turn left; what should I do? (Their probable answer: turn right instead.)

Posted in New Post | Tagged , | Leave a comment

We don’t care if John Travolta is gay

Posted on June 8, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

There’s a sudden drumbeat, it seems, to out John Travolta as gay, promiscuous, even frighteningly aggressive when on the prowl. Although rumors about Travolta’s sexuality aren’t new–they go back decades, in fact–a strange new emphasis on the subject has appeared within the last two months. It makes one wonder if there’s not some kind of orchestrated campaign behind it.

It started earlier this spring with a lawsuit filed by an unnamed masseur, accusing Travolta of sexual battery and harassment. The suit is remarkable for a couple reasons; first is its ‘he said/he said’ nature, and apparent lack of substantiation, which would seem to make its chances of success rather doubtful.

Equally suspicious is its lurid details, which we won’t go into here but can be viewed in entirety in this .pdf. The narrative of the suit reads less like a legal document, and more like an attempt at blackmail – or at least public humiliation.

From there, the drumbeat has only continued, with more accusations, more public browbeating. The latest bombshell dropped late this week, with a story of a 6-year relationship between Travolta and his personal pilot.

So how should we react to this? As for Travolta’s sexuality, I’d echo Hollywood’s long collective yawn on the subject, as voiced by Carrie Fisher back in 2010: “We don’t really care if John Travolta is gay.” Indeed, there’s no better industry for a gay man to work in, no better region for him to live in. Whatever lifestyle Travolta wants to live, whether out of the closet or in, Hollywood is the perfect place for it.

And let’s emphasize the point that the choice about being in the closet or out should be Travolta’s alone. Outing prominent gay men has become a sport–a bloodsport, really. It shouldn’t be that way. If the struggle for LGBT rights is a civil-rights issue (and it most certainly is) then it should be incumbent on every individual to decide for himself or herself how to assert those rights. John Travolta alone should be the one to decide whether and how his sexuality becomes public.

Of course, these arguments become null and void if Travolta has indeed committed sexual battery, and if his family is hurt by his indiscretions.

His relationship with his wife and family are equally private, and we’ll respect that here. One can only hope for happiness, contentment, and some kind of resolution, for all of them.

As for the lawsuit and for Travolta’s supposed victims, we’ll likely never know the full truth of it. If the accusations are even partially correct then they’re owed recompense and an apology. That’s between them and Travolta, and between Travolta and his conscience.

But clearly, I have my doubts. Why? Maybe it’s because I’ve been a fan of his since the Kotter days, and because his performance in Pulp Fiction still blows my mind.

I’d like to think, though, that I’ve fairly evaluated that which has become public, as outlined above, and reached a sad but logical conclusion: someone is trying to destroy John Travolta.

Who? Why? Maybe John Travolta knows. All I can do is speculate, which really only means perpetuating crazy-sounding conspiracy theories.

John Travolta is a well-known member of a controversial religion, which I won’t name here (because that religion has a track-record of attacking critics, and I’m far from anonymous). It has a checkered history of homophobia, and there are rumors it uses blackmail to control closeted members.

So is John Travolta being attacked, publicly if surreptitiously, by his own church? We can’t say; we can only posit the question.

All we can do is offer this message for John Travolta, and hope he somehow hears it: You’re a talented actor and we love your work. And we don’t care if you’re gay.

Posted in New Post | Tagged , | Leave a comment

A fine art conundrum

Posted on June 4, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

Should art museums throughout the world be free to lend their collections, thus spreading culture and goodwill? And should victims of art theft, particularly those victimized through wartime plunder, be free to pursue the return of their property?

For most of us, the answer to both of these questions is yes. Therein lies the problem.

The United States, more than any other country, has a history of allowing the seizure of art while on loan from abroad. Holocaust victims in particular have had considerable success in reclaiming their stolen treasures this way.

As a result, foreign museums have been less and less inclined to loan works to America–and not just in cases of disputed provenance. Russia has been the first to cease all art loans to American museums, with several other countries threatening to follow suit.

In response, Senators Diane Feinstein and Orrin Hatch have introduced legislation that would indemnify loaned artwork against most attempts at seizure.

The Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity Clarification Act (Senate Bill 2212) is designed to augment earlier laws (including the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and the Immunity from Seizure Act) by narrowly defining the types of cases that can result in seizure. In so doing, the bill’s authors hope to alleviate most of the concerns of foreign museums and thus encourage a more robust system of cultural exchange.

Critics on one side say the definition is far too narrow. The bill will allow seizure only in cases where wartime plunder can be proven beyond reasonable doubt. This would eliminate the claims of an entire class of victims: those who “sold” their artwork to Nazis, but only under threat of death and at a fraction of fair market value.

Meanwhile, foreign museum directors seem unimpressed. They’ve signaled an unwillingness to resume normal exchanges with the U.S. unless all artwork is protected from seizure. It looks as though compromise legislation that was designed to placate everyone is pleasing no one.

It’s a conundrum. On one hand, a functioning system of worldwide cultural exchange is necessary and vital. On the other, plunder and theft should always be redressed, no matter how many years have passed and how many feathers are ruffled.

I can see no easy solution. The only thing that’s clear is that S.B. 2212, however well intentioned, changes nothing.

Posted in New Post | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Pepys’ last post

Posted on May 31, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

May 31st marks a poignant if peculiar anniversary. For it was on this date in 1669 that Samuel Pepys stopped journaling.

Pepys (pronounced “peeps”; go figure) was a British parliamentarian and Royal Navy administrator who is today best remembered for the diary he kept from the first of January 1660, to the final day of May in 1669. It was an intensely personal document, never intended for publication, that chronicled Pepys’ daily comings and goings, his pursuit of women and his illnesses and infirmities.

It is invaluable to historians, though, because it supplies eyewitness accounts of the Great Plague of 1665, the London Fire of 1666, and the Second Anglo-Dutch War of 1665-67. It is also considered the most comprehensive account of the Restoration of the Monarchy.

So what did Pepys have to say on this day, 1669? That final, 398 word entry begins with a visit to his accountant, his lunch at home, then a trek by boat to Whitehall. Then he begins complaining of his eyesight, which he admits has been making his journaling more and more difficult: “And thus ends all that I doubt I shall ever be able to do with my own eyes in the keeping of my journal…”

The next line must have been painful; he at last admits the diary is coming to an end: “I being not able to do it any longer.” One wonders if he knew, before he wrote those words, what decision he was making. He affirms it a couple sentences later: “My eyes hindering me in almost all other pleasures.”

And in the next short paragraph, his 10-year diary was complete. He could have had no idea what his writings would mean to future generations, so from his perspective this was nothing but finality, and in his own words a death in of itself:

And so I betake myself to that course, which is almost as much as to see myself go into my grave: for which, and all the discomforts that will accompany my being blind, the good God prepare me!

Posted in New Post | Tagged | Leave a comment

Happy Memorial Day, and thanks to service members everywhere

Posted on May 27, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

We’ve started a tradition, over the last couple years, of dedicating this space on Memorial Day and Veterans Day, to service people in general – and in particular to a single soldier, sailor or airman, as a way of sharing his or her story. It’s a way of remembering that although war and conflict are grand geopolitical events, they are experienced by real people in real, tangible ways.

With your indulgence I’ve brought this Memorial Day’s post a bit closer to home, by dedicating today’s post to my late uncle, Don Abicht, who served with the USMC in Korea. His daughter, my dear incomparable cousin Sandi Abicht-Guelker, was kind enough to share the following memories of her father. Thank you, Sandi; and thank you, Uncle Don.


My dad and a couple other buddies forged their birth certificates to enlist in the Marines at age 17.  I asked him once whatever possessed him to do such a thing and he shrugged and said “It felt like the right thing to do.”

That admission, and a memory of how they had worn out their boots, was pretty much all I was ever able to get out of him.  He just never wanted to talk about it.  We used to take long road trips out west in the summer. Once, in the middle of the beautiful, open plains he said “San, this is the greatest country in the world.” He went on to tell me why he thought it was so – one of those rare and very precious times he shared his feelings.

So I learned early on from him to love this country, enjoy it, protect it, take care of it, treasure it.
My Aunt Carol told me that he once said that, when he shot a Korean soldier, he would think “that was someone’s son, brother, father, friend…” and I thought “how typical, that he’d feel compassion for even the enemy”…

And that was my dad, always thinking of the other guy.  From that example, I learned empathy, I learned to never forget that even our enemies are human.  We may have to fight sometimes – hurt, kill those enemies – to protect this country; a necessary evil. But never lose touch with the fact that we’re all humans… He’d say “never judge a book by its cover”, meaning that no matter what the outside looks like – black, white, yellow, brown – the insides were all the same stuff that makes us human.  That’s our common ground, and I’m sure he felt that if we could just focus on that, and go from there, we could avoid the necessary evils.

I think the main reason he was reluctant to talk about the war is because he never felt that what he’d done was “special”. He was too humble to think that what he did (at any time in his life) was anything that anyone else wouldn’t do.  He always just did what he felt was right. Every year on Veterans Day I’d call dad and recite “Thank you for your sacrifice all those years ago, and for fighting for this country” and every year, without fail, he’d snort (he had a great snort when he laughed, which I  inherited) and say “Now, now”. Always unfailingly humble.

He taught me to always do what I felt was right, yet respect the points of view of others.  I learned to be humble and never belittle even the smallest achievements of my fellow humans. He was always – ALWAYS – encouraging to everyone around him, and never failed to recognize the smallest good in others.

My dad was quiet, dignified, gentle, humble, and the most consistently even-keeled person I ever knew. My Uncle Jim called him “the calm in our storms”. I miss my dad so much!

Posted in New Post | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Culture on Memorial Day

Posted on May 26, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

This purports to be a cultural deconstruction thing. An art/film/literature fanboy thing. Kind of thing that’s frivolous around the time of somber memorial holidays.

Maybe. Or maybe the line twixt culture, and the service-people sworn to protect that culture, isn’t so stark. Or maybe I just wish it wasn’t. But the opinion of me and (sorry) thee probably don’t carry as much weight, in this debate, as these:

* Glenn Miller, Jimi Hendrix, James Stewart, R. Lee Ermey, Oliver Stone, Lee Marvin, Ernest Hemingway, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, Dale Dye, Winston Churchill, The King, and General Marcia Anderson (who’s not exactly a celebrity, but should be).

Posted in New Post | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Posted on May 25, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

Simon Pegg zombified by neural linguistic programming. Real or fake? You tell me:

Posted in New Post | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The fine art of frantically selling books

Posted on May 23, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

Most books these days have exactly one lead salesperson/cheerleader: the author.

Oh, there are exceptions. Undoubtedly you’re thinking of your favorite author, who simply writes books. Maybe gives interviews from time to time. But toiling in the crass commerce of selling? Never.

That’s probably true. And that’s probably why he or she is your favorite. There are a few dozen A-list authors who get the heavy lifting of marketing performed on their behalf. From their publishers’ perspectives this makes perfect sense: these authors are guaranteed commodities. Supporting their new releases (even their backlists) with vigorous marketing campaigns is only good business.

This means, however, that the other 99% of authors, whether self-published or aligned with a small press or even contracted to one of the majors, receive almost no marketing support. Such authors should consider themselves very, very lucky if their publishers spring for twenty or fifty review copies, or for the expenses of a short book tour.

Most writers (including all who self publish) don’t even get that. So their choice is simple: let their book die a lonely death, or handle the marketing on their own.

Writers tend to be an introvertive lot, so this could clearly be a problem. But today’s writers are fortunate to have at hand, for very little cost, an almost unlimited array of electronic tools that make selling simpler and more effective than ever. This, coupled with what should be the writer’s most profitable asset (creativity) means that modern authors can not only sell their books, they can sell them very well.

One completely new selling phenomenon, almost always driven by the author’s vision (if not created solely by him or her) is the book trailer. First seen in 2002, trailers are short videos that consciously echo more familiar movie trailers, and are usually hosted by YouTube and imbedded in the author’s homepage. They can introduce characters, storylines and plots, or they can merely hint at the book’s grand themes. Since they’re usually devised by the person who knows the book best, they can be awesomely creative outlets – even extensions of the books themselves.

Take the following trailer, which preceded by several months the release of James Renner‘s novel, The Man From Primrose Lane. It created quite a bit of buzz at the time and had many people thinking about time travel and asking, who is the man from Primrose Lane?

Or this one, supporting Kameron Hurley‘s Bel Dame Apocrypha series. It much more closely follows the movie-trailer formula, with hints of the action and personalities to be found in the books’ pages. It’s also compelling and engaging, not to mention slickly produced. And the author created it almost single-handedly .

Returning visitors to this page are likely aware that I too am currently hawking a book, a humble little fright tale called Voracious. This means I’m engaged, for several hours per day, in the challenges of internet-based marketing.

So – a book trailer for Voracious? Well, not yet. I haven’t yet envisioned a cinematic teaser for the book that wouldn’t, alternatively, look cheesy or require a blockbuster budget.

Instead I’ve been trying to create a buzz via social media: Facebook, Twitter and horror-fan forums. Building a buzz takes a while, of course, but that’s okay. I’ve got time and the work (which is really just a series of conversations on enjoyable if spooky subjects) is plenty of fun.

And there’s this place I tend to steer those conversations. (Pay attention and you’ll notice I’m doing the same thing right now.) It’s my creative outlet-cum-marketing effort, my book trailer if it weren’t so damned static. Its budget was next to zero but it’s generating nothing but compliments (and maybe a book sale or two? here’s hoping).

It has also been a great chance to collaborate with some incredible writers. I’ve been lucky enough to entice Susan Hart, Benjamin Norris and Stephanie Schoppert into the Voracious world, to do what they do best.

You can be the judge. Stop by the Voracious page and see what you think.

There’s no right or wrong way, in this new and evolving world of author-launched marketing. There’s only the tried and untried. I expect every author, every creative person, would vie for the latter.

Speaking only for myself, I can say I’m having a blast. Writing a book can be lonely and painful. Talking about it, hyping it, getting others to hype it–that’s the payoff. Any books get sold as a result, well that’s just the icing on my sweet, sweet cake.

Posted in New Post | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The week Disco died

Posted on May 20, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

Or rather if disco isn’t dead, it has in the last week suffered mortal wounds.

RIP Robin Gibb (22 December 1949 – 20 May 2012). And RIP Donna Summer (31 December 1948 – 17 May 2012). Both refuted to the end that disco had ever gone away, simply through their existence. Simply through the fact that every day, everywhere, they were making people get up and dance.

So stop resisting, and mourn them properly. Get up and dance…

Posted in New Post | Tagged , | Leave a comment

From Wired.com: from Reddit to a movie (USMC vs SPQR)

Posted on May 19, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

Awe and congrats to James Erwin, who went from writing software manuals to landing screenplay contracts, based on his participation in a Reddit thread: “Could a US Marine Battalion Destroy the Entire Roman Army?”

Write like the wind, James, because we gotta see your movie. We lack a time machine, thus a definitive answer for that question. We’ve got the next best things: CGI and imagination.

Posted in New Post | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Horror news: remake of Carrie in the works

Posted on May 14, 2012 by editor, facilitator, decider

Slated for a March, 2013 release is an updated (that is, set in the present day) version of the 1976 classic Carrie, which was adapted from Stephen King’s first novel.

Chloë Grace Moretz (Dark Shadows, Kick Ass) reprises Sissy Spacek’s Oscar-nominated role as the tortured teen who makes prom so memorable. Kimberly Peirce (Boys Don’t Cry) will direct.

Film adaptations of King’s work have always been hit-or-miss (see: Maximum Overdrive. Or rather, don’t). Carrie, however, remains a classic. One frets over just how bad a remake might be.

On the other hand, a modern retelling is an intriguing proposition. How much worse will Carrie’s peer-generated torment be in the age of Facebook and cyber-bullying? How does Carrie’s horrible mom (Julieanne Moore) manage to keep a millenial child sheltered, ignorant and repressed? Thirty-six years on, and the passage of time between the original Carrie and the remake is a potential fascinating subplot in of itself.

I guess we’ll see next year. As a die-hard Stephen King fan I am hoping for the best and prepared for the worst. With the adaption of his Dark Tower series perennially delayed, this is the one upon which we pin all our hopes, at least through 2013. But since King’s productivity shows no sign of slowing, neither probably will the adaptations thereof. So more, as they say, is undoubtedly to come.

Posted in New Post | Tagged , | Leave a comment