Sunday, February 18, 2007
too many
the worst part about being so tied up in writing this durn book for so long is that i've been dying to explore some of the other story ideas popping around in my head. i knew this would happen - i have a short attention span for reading books, so it's only natural that i'd have short attention span for writing them, too. but i must stay focused! at least finish the first draft, or i'll never be done with it.
Saturday, February 17, 2007
Renault's The King Must Die
Just finished Mary Renault's historical fantasy The King Must Die. I say historical fantasy because it is rooted in history, and in fact Renault did a hefty amount of research of Ancient Greece for this novel (according to Amazon and Wikipedia) but it's a retelling of the myth of Theseus, hence the fantasy.
But what a retelling it is. I will say the best parts of the book are the very first chapter and the very last. She starts off describing the sacrifice of a great white stallion, told though the eyes of a four-year-old Theseus. "It was a good clean killing..." she writes. "...Yet, even now, I still remember. How he reared up like a tower, feeling his death, dragging the men like children; the scarlet cleft in the white throat, the rank hot smell; the ruin of beauty, the fall of strength, the ebb of valor; and the grief, the burning pity as he sank upon his knees and laid his brighthead in the dust. That blood seemed to tear the soul out of mybreast, as if my own heart had shed it."
By the end of it I was trembling.
Renault's Theseus is at once an asshole, a cocky youth, and a man striving to be a just and honorable leader. But above all else, he is believable. And I don't know how she does it, but her prose so vividly conveys the sense of the time that you are certain this is indeed how people must have thought and spoken in those days. Most notably I was impressed by how fluidly and naturally she weaves in humanities ties with the gods. I am inspired, and deepy awed, by her writing.
So, too, am I struck by her imaginative power in creating a world of which only fragments remain. Included in those relicts are the ruins of Knossos and the ancient Labyrinth of Messara, which she mentions in her author's notes. For those who know and love the myth, there's a certain thrill in experiencing her rendition of myth into a believable reality.
At times, though, she's a bit too subtle for me. Especially when it comes to the subject of sex she writes with an exceptionally light touch and I'm left wondering, did they, or didn't they? There were several passages where I was sure something profound had passed but it went clear over my head.
At any rate, her book as a power that lingers on the mind. I'll be reading this one's sequel, The Bull from the Sea, next.
This book also made me rethink writing in the first person, which I had previously dismissed. Too often the "I" in books feel too weakly characterized - I felt this most recently in Kostova's The Historian. The third person allows for a more robust protagonist. Not so with The King Must Die. Reading this was almost like being possessed by another person, so strong were his thoughts and emotions.
A fact I did not know about Mary Renault, who was born in England in 1905 and died in 1983: She and her life-long partner Jullie Mullard went to live in South Africa, a place more tolerant to gays. South Africa? Really? Apparently she participated in anti-apartheid demonstrations.
But what a retelling it is. I will say the best parts of the book are the very first chapter and the very last. She starts off describing the sacrifice of a great white stallion, told though the eyes of a four-year-old Theseus. "It was a good clean killing..." she writes. "...Yet, even now, I still remember. How he reared up like a tower, feeling his death, dragging the men like children; the scarlet cleft in the white throat, the rank hot smell; the ruin of beauty, the fall of strength, the ebb of valor; and the grief, the burning pity as he sank upon his knees and laid his brighthead in the dust. That blood seemed to tear the soul out of mybreast, as if my own heart had shed it."
By the end of it I was trembling.
Renault's Theseus is at once an asshole, a cocky youth, and a man striving to be a just and honorable leader. But above all else, he is believable. And I don't know how she does it, but her prose so vividly conveys the sense of the time that you are certain this is indeed how people must have thought and spoken in those days. Most notably I was impressed by how fluidly and naturally she weaves in humanities ties with the gods. I am inspired, and deepy awed, by her writing.
So, too, am I struck by her imaginative power in creating a world of which only fragments remain. Included in those relicts are the ruins of Knossos and the ancient Labyrinth of Messara, which she mentions in her author's notes. For those who know and love the myth, there's a certain thrill in experiencing her rendition of myth into a believable reality.
At times, though, she's a bit too subtle for me. Especially when it comes to the subject of sex she writes with an exceptionally light touch and I'm left wondering, did they, or didn't they? There were several passages where I was sure something profound had passed but it went clear over my head.
At any rate, her book as a power that lingers on the mind. I'll be reading this one's sequel, The Bull from the Sea, next.
This book also made me rethink writing in the first person, which I had previously dismissed. Too often the "I" in books feel too weakly characterized - I felt this most recently in Kostova's The Historian. The third person allows for a more robust protagonist. Not so with The King Must Die. Reading this was almost like being possessed by another person, so strong were his thoughts and emotions.
A fact I did not know about Mary Renault, who was born in England in 1905 and died in 1983: She and her life-long partner Jullie Mullard went to live in South Africa, a place more tolerant to gays. South Africa? Really? Apparently she participated in anti-apartheid demonstrations.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
the twilight princess
"i think it's the best game ever," jane said, her voice hushed.
i rolled my eyes. "oh come on. better than ocarina of time?"
she nodded.
after spending the last two days playing legends of zelda: the twilight princess, i have to agree. it really is the best game. ever. period. the opening music chokes me up. but it also makes me worried - this game has the feel of the game to end all games. after this, what can follow?
the genius of this game falls on two things; the story line and the visual effects. it is breathtakingly beautiful, and the story heartwrenching. admittedly it pushes all the right buttons for me: the battle to save the world against all odds, sacrifice, a hero and heroine who are tragically cursed, and of course, horses, swords, and elves. nitendo has got everything right on this game, combining all the best elements from the previous games. some moments are even lord of the rings inspired - there's a scene taken almost directly from the two towers (when the wargs come over the hill to attack theoden's men on the way to helm's deep) and saruman's smithy - you get to fly through it - it's pretty damn cool. some of the ruins and buildings are similarly lord of the rings inspired. fans of ico will recognize some elements as well (the twilight shadows). and there's a somberness to the story and gameplay that gives each exhilirating victory an element of melancholy. you are forever reminded this is a world in trouble, where you remain only one step ahead of the evil forces at work. you are but link, an elf with a valiant heart caught up in the struggle.
and the game is long... i've been playing just about 50 hours now and still not done. maybe 3/4 of the way though. and there is still so much to do and explore. the puzzles are baffling, the bosses not too difficult, but they require strategy. as each level passes, i think, okay, that's it, it's winding down from here. but no, it just keeps getting better and better. so far i've flown, canoed, smote my enemy from horseback, walked upside down with magnetic boots, and ran around as a wolf in a world trapped in twilight.
the process reminds me that truely, the journey is what matters. the story is simple: save zelda. but along the way, your heart will be captured by link and the inhabitants of the enchanted land, hyrule. the game pulls on powerful mythology that runs deep in the veins.
as i approach the end, though, i get increasingly teary eyed. there's an epic feeling to this game - nintendo held nothing back. so it makes me worry... is this the end?
i rolled my eyes. "oh come on. better than ocarina of time?"
she nodded.
after spending the last two days playing legends of zelda: the twilight princess, i have to agree. it really is the best game. ever. period. the opening music chokes me up. but it also makes me worried - this game has the feel of the game to end all games. after this, what can follow?
the genius of this game falls on two things; the story line and the visual effects. it is breathtakingly beautiful, and the story heartwrenching. admittedly it pushes all the right buttons for me: the battle to save the world against all odds, sacrifice, a hero and heroine who are tragically cursed, and of course, horses, swords, and elves. nitendo has got everything right on this game, combining all the best elements from the previous games. some moments are even lord of the rings inspired - there's a scene taken almost directly from the two towers (when the wargs come over the hill to attack theoden's men on the way to helm's deep) and saruman's smithy - you get to fly through it - it's pretty damn cool. some of the ruins and buildings are similarly lord of the rings inspired. fans of ico will recognize some elements as well (the twilight shadows). and there's a somberness to the story and gameplay that gives each exhilirating victory an element of melancholy. you are forever reminded this is a world in trouble, where you remain only one step ahead of the evil forces at work. you are but link, an elf with a valiant heart caught up in the struggle.
and the game is long... i've been playing just about 50 hours now and still not done. maybe 3/4 of the way though. and there is still so much to do and explore. the puzzles are baffling, the bosses not too difficult, but they require strategy. as each level passes, i think, okay, that's it, it's winding down from here. but no, it just keeps getting better and better. so far i've flown, canoed, smote my enemy from horseback, walked upside down with magnetic boots, and ran around as a wolf in a world trapped in twilight.
the process reminds me that truely, the journey is what matters. the story is simple: save zelda. but along the way, your heart will be captured by link and the inhabitants of the enchanted land, hyrule. the game pulls on powerful mythology that runs deep in the veins.
as i approach the end, though, i get increasingly teary eyed. there's an epic feeling to this game - nintendo held nothing back. so it makes me worry... is this the end?
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
if only my mind were like a web browser...
the i could use the "back" feature to recover lost thoughts. such brilliant thoughts, so fleeting. sigh.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
speechless...
images from the hubble... astounding. it almost looks like a sea with jelly fish creatures. makes me want to try my hand at sci fi.
Monday, January 22, 2007
a question of stirrups
i watched the first episode of hbo's rome the other day. it's no gladiator (they should ave just bought all the costumes) but it was good enough that i'd watch it again (but why or why do they all speak in brittish accents??), the characters engaging enough (thought cicero is not quite as i pictured him). but then i saw it.. stirrups. that's right. romans didn't use stirrups. okay, i understand for the actors' safety why you might want to use stirrups, certainly for the action scenes (gladiator did) but i thought the least they could do is not use them in casual scenes (as gladiator did not).
a minor thing, yes, but it led me to wonder, what fudging is acceptable in a historical piece? i was struggling with this while reading david anthony durham's pride of carthage. he takes quite a few liberties, which he freely admits to. it's an interpretation of historical events, he says, and he tinkered with the time line of events to make it conform to a narrative. most ostensibly, he condensed the appx 15 years hannibal spent in italy to a mere 5... i suppose to keep the threads of romance alive. but this really bothered me because it's a major fact. if you can't keep to the major facts, maybe you should be writing fiction, and not historical fiction. why? because people who read historical fiction expect accuracy. i don't want someone to think hannibal only spent 5 years in italy. besides which, once one fact is off, all the other facts become suspicious.
historical fiction should stay true to the facts. i realize with history, this is a little sketchy. but i think with good research you can come up with the facts that most scholars agree on. contested facts you can interpret, or offer your own interpretation, staying, of course, within the spirit of the characters and times. motive and personality is where the fun of historical fiction comes in. how will the author construct a hannibal that makes him do what he does? i think the author is also free to tweak motives because all of it is conjecture, even if you go to original sources. i think it's perfectly acceptable to ascribe ideas to people not historical. for instance, hannibal decides on a strategy, but maybe he got it from one of his generals not recorded in the history books. finally, bonus points for incorporating quotes attributed to the individual in question.
a minor thing, yes, but it led me to wonder, what fudging is acceptable in a historical piece? i was struggling with this while reading david anthony durham's pride of carthage. he takes quite a few liberties, which he freely admits to. it's an interpretation of historical events, he says, and he tinkered with the time line of events to make it conform to a narrative. most ostensibly, he condensed the appx 15 years hannibal spent in italy to a mere 5... i suppose to keep the threads of romance alive. but this really bothered me because it's a major fact. if you can't keep to the major facts, maybe you should be writing fiction, and not historical fiction. why? because people who read historical fiction expect accuracy. i don't want someone to think hannibal only spent 5 years in italy. besides which, once one fact is off, all the other facts become suspicious.
historical fiction should stay true to the facts. i realize with history, this is a little sketchy. but i think with good research you can come up with the facts that most scholars agree on. contested facts you can interpret, or offer your own interpretation, staying, of course, within the spirit of the characters and times. motive and personality is where the fun of historical fiction comes in. how will the author construct a hannibal that makes him do what he does? i think the author is also free to tweak motives because all of it is conjecture, even if you go to original sources. i think it's perfectly acceptable to ascribe ideas to people not historical. for instance, hannibal decides on a strategy, but maybe he got it from one of his generals not recorded in the history books. finally, bonus points for incorporating quotes attributed to the individual in question.
Monday, January 08, 2007
a bit nervous...
about the upcoming movie hannibal the conqueror, directed by and starring, of all people, vin diesel. on the other hand the sceenplay is by david franzoni, of gladiator, one of the best movies ever made, imho. the hannibal movie's based on a book by canadian poet ross leckie, which i haven't read, but checked out. looks a bit weak. but a good screenplay writer can take any thin novel and make it good..
but vin diesel? as hannibal? i'm tired of cookie cutter heros. i don't want another brad pitt achilles, a colin ferrell alexander (it makes my skin crawl just to remember that). or a mel gibson braveheart. i'm afraid vin diesel will be just that, modern icon of "manliness" transposed into the classical world. same characters, different scene. the only movie of vin's i ever liked was pitch black, a film where he says little and mostly just plays the silent creepy convict who shoots things. very effective part for him. but this, i do not want in hannibal.
so you see why i'm nervous?
but vin diesel? as hannibal? i'm tired of cookie cutter heros. i don't want another brad pitt achilles, a colin ferrell alexander (it makes my skin crawl just to remember that). or a mel gibson braveheart. i'm afraid vin diesel will be just that, modern icon of "manliness" transposed into the classical world. same characters, different scene. the only movie of vin's i ever liked was pitch black, a film where he says little and mostly just plays the silent creepy convict who shoots things. very effective part for him. but this, i do not want in hannibal.
so you see why i'm nervous?
cover songs
every once in a while i'm reminded of how good a cover of a song can be. most covers are a woeful rehashing of the original that leaves you wanting to rage at the artist, why the heck did you even bother? it sounds exactly the same (i'm thinking of the black crowes's lucy in the sky with diamonds) or is such a vapid rendition (smash mouth does neil diamond/ the monkee's i'm a believer) that it's not worth the energy required to play the damn thing. but a good cover song has the power to completely transform the original. the new artist will take it and own it, not just singing it in their own voice but giving it the unique twist that only they can give it. why else would one cover a song?
the first time i discovered this potential i was 14, and my sister had just brought home an album titled "red hot + blue: a tribute to cole porter." "sit down," she said, "you have to listen to this." i looked at her dubiously. yeah, i knew cole porter. my dad played cole porter on the piano. we had dusty vinyl full of cole porter. i'd even sung cole porter. sure, i liked it, but come on, as cover songs? porter's appeal was the same to me as fred astaire's: urbane, slick, and charmingly obsolete. but an older sister's opinion means everything to the younger, and so i sat and listened.
i think my jaw must have hit the ground. the sophisticated wistfulness of "night and day" becomes untempered lust in u2's expert rejiggering. the song seemed to have been written just for them. who better to sing "don't fence me in" than david byrne, for whom the lyrics seem to hold special meaning? kd lang lends the power of her voice to a more conservative version of "so in love," and manages to own the song anyway. and erasure singing the songs of "too darn hot": "i'd like to sleep with my lover tonight... but it's too darn hot..." took on a new, poignant meaning (the album was part of an aids benefit). you can listen to song samplers of the cd from amazon.
few cover songs have since astonished me as much as those. i'm older now, more critical, harder to impress. but cover songs still hold special appeal. well done versions tantilize you with the memory of what the original song was - the same lyrics, the familiar chord winding throug out - but evoke an entirely different mood. Good covers, i'll contend, are harder to pull off than good original songs. so i'm constantly on the prowl for new covers. here are some of my favorites. i'd love to hear some of your favorites.
yesterday i discovered an excellent cover of the cure's "a forest", done by french pop band nouvelle vague ("new wave"), transporting us from the northeastern, cold, conifer forest of the original right into the heat of a lush, tropical rainforest. you can listen to it, as well as some of their other songs (an intriguing version of echo and the bunnymen's killing moon) on their official site.
tom wait's version of heigh ho reminds us, surely, this is what dwarves must sound like.
i'm enthralled by brasilian artist seu jorge's covers of david bowie - played with an acoustic guitar and translated into portuguese, and popularized by the movie the life aquatic with steve zissou. when i first heard them i didn't recognize bowie's beloved notes. but once you catch on, it's simply awe inspiring to listen to him meld and translate the sound of several electric guitars, pianos, whatever in the original into a single, acoustic guitar. another convincing bowie cover: m ward's let's dance (links to artist): a winding, reflective tune. think swaying slowly in a faded floral patterned dress, sunlight through the dusty air from the tall windows of an abandoned house.
two versions of prince's purple rain desmonstate just how original a cover can be in the hands of a daring, imaginative artist. i'm damn impressed by classical guitarist benjamin verdery's rendering of prince's "purple rain" (sorry, couldn't find the link, but it's available on itunes)(also, can this properly be called a cover if it doesn't have the lyrics? i on't know.) the version by a swedish artist stina nordestam (links to artist) is nearly its opposite, evoking smeared lipstick, cigarettes, rainy days, and too much whiskey. neither of them, of course, anything like the original.
johnny cash did a number of covers, the best of which are u2's "one" and depeche mode's "personal jesus"" (many mistakenly assume the cash is the original).
madeleine peyroux (georgia-born, but lived in paris for 10 years) does an intoxicating version of dylan's "you're gonna make me lonesome when you go", which could easily stand on its own merits. her voice is a perfect foil to dylan's, light where his is rough, but she manages to convey the intensity of emotion, the keeness of need, almost as well as dylan himself, while keeping true to the rueful tone of the song while making it all her own. you can hear her version on amazon.
i also love ricki lee jone's kick-ass version of rebel rebel (links to amazon), claiming that song for grrls everywhere.
both covers of "in my time of dying", by bob dylan and martin gore, are very cool. the original, by led zepplin, i have yet to hear.
cake gives gloria gaynor's "i will survive" a cynical bite. i have a special place in my heart for ewan mcgregor's "your song", as sung in the movie moulin rouge. there's nothing too fresh about siouxsie and the banshee's "this wheel's on fire" (original by dylan), but she brings a sassiness to it that i like.
other covers, while originals, are just disasters. tori amos-does-nirvana falls into this category. it fits all my criteria for a good cover song, but i find her treatment of it melodramatic. the whole point of nirvana, to me, was deeply disturbed lyrics sung with complete abandon. sinead o'connor does a good job with nirvana's "all apologies" however. maybe i just love her voice.
the first time i discovered this potential i was 14, and my sister had just brought home an album titled "red hot + blue: a tribute to cole porter." "sit down," she said, "you have to listen to this." i looked at her dubiously. yeah, i knew cole porter. my dad played cole porter on the piano. we had dusty vinyl full of cole porter. i'd even sung cole porter. sure, i liked it, but come on, as cover songs? porter's appeal was the same to me as fred astaire's: urbane, slick, and charmingly obsolete. but an older sister's opinion means everything to the younger, and so i sat and listened.
i think my jaw must have hit the ground. the sophisticated wistfulness of "night and day" becomes untempered lust in u2's expert rejiggering. the song seemed to have been written just for them. who better to sing "don't fence me in" than david byrne, for whom the lyrics seem to hold special meaning? kd lang lends the power of her voice to a more conservative version of "so in love," and manages to own the song anyway. and erasure singing the songs of "too darn hot": "i'd like to sleep with my lover tonight... but it's too darn hot..." took on a new, poignant meaning (the album was part of an aids benefit). you can listen to song samplers of the cd from amazon.
few cover songs have since astonished me as much as those. i'm older now, more critical, harder to impress. but cover songs still hold special appeal. well done versions tantilize you with the memory of what the original song was - the same lyrics, the familiar chord winding throug out - but evoke an entirely different mood. Good covers, i'll contend, are harder to pull off than good original songs. so i'm constantly on the prowl for new covers. here are some of my favorites. i'd love to hear some of your favorites.
yesterday i discovered an excellent cover of the cure's "a forest", done by french pop band nouvelle vague ("new wave"), transporting us from the northeastern, cold, conifer forest of the original right into the heat of a lush, tropical rainforest. you can listen to it, as well as some of their other songs (an intriguing version of echo and the bunnymen's killing moon) on their official site.
tom wait's version of heigh ho reminds us, surely, this is what dwarves must sound like.
i'm enthralled by brasilian artist seu jorge's covers of david bowie - played with an acoustic guitar and translated into portuguese, and popularized by the movie the life aquatic with steve zissou. when i first heard them i didn't recognize bowie's beloved notes. but once you catch on, it's simply awe inspiring to listen to him meld and translate the sound of several electric guitars, pianos, whatever in the original into a single, acoustic guitar. another convincing bowie cover: m ward's let's dance (links to artist): a winding, reflective tune. think swaying slowly in a faded floral patterned dress, sunlight through the dusty air from the tall windows of an abandoned house.
two versions of prince's purple rain desmonstate just how original a cover can be in the hands of a daring, imaginative artist. i'm damn impressed by classical guitarist benjamin verdery's rendering of prince's "purple rain" (sorry, couldn't find the link, but it's available on itunes)(also, can this properly be called a cover if it doesn't have the lyrics? i on't know.) the version by a swedish artist stina nordestam (links to artist) is nearly its opposite, evoking smeared lipstick, cigarettes, rainy days, and too much whiskey. neither of them, of course, anything like the original.
johnny cash did a number of covers, the best of which are u2's "one" and depeche mode's "personal jesus"" (many mistakenly assume the cash is the original).
madeleine peyroux (georgia-born, but lived in paris for 10 years) does an intoxicating version of dylan's "you're gonna make me lonesome when you go", which could easily stand on its own merits. her voice is a perfect foil to dylan's, light where his is rough, but she manages to convey the intensity of emotion, the keeness of need, almost as well as dylan himself, while keeping true to the rueful tone of the song while making it all her own. you can hear her version on amazon.
i also love ricki lee jone's kick-ass version of rebel rebel (links to amazon), claiming that song for grrls everywhere.
both covers of "in my time of dying", by bob dylan and martin gore, are very cool. the original, by led zepplin, i have yet to hear.
cake gives gloria gaynor's "i will survive" a cynical bite. i have a special place in my heart for ewan mcgregor's "your song", as sung in the movie moulin rouge. there's nothing too fresh about siouxsie and the banshee's "this wheel's on fire" (original by dylan), but she brings a sassiness to it that i like.
other covers, while originals, are just disasters. tori amos-does-nirvana falls into this category. it fits all my criteria for a good cover song, but i find her treatment of it melodramatic. the whole point of nirvana, to me, was deeply disturbed lyrics sung with complete abandon. sinead o'connor does a good job with nirvana's "all apologies" however. maybe i just love her voice.
Thursday, December 21, 2006
if i were queen...
edict #5331: any company that lets you sign up for an automatically renewing, annually charged service on line, that company shall be required to provide a way to terminate said service ON LINE.
Sunday, December 03, 2006
kostova's the historian
with much anticipation i began reading elizabeth kostova's the historian. i'd heard quite a bit of buzz about the book. i was hoping for a chilling tale of horror and suspense, but akmost half way through now, I'm pushing on only by dint of sheer will. there's a compelling story in there somewhere, between long conversations spent at cafes (which kostova does not bother to edit for us), over-described journeys across europe, and the convenient arrival of a new character. at one point, she tries to juggle three nested stories, and the book becomes as ridiculous as a recent simpson's episode, where lisa tells marge, homer, and bart a story about mr. burns telling her a story about moe telling him a story about a treasure. in the book it's hard enough trying to keep track of the three different "i's", and the style between the three narrators is so similar it's really impossible to tell who is speaking without looking for external clues in the text. character depth and development become lost in the jumpy narrative and in kostova's eagerness to unwind the plot. like brown in writing the da vinci code, she relies on cliff hangers to create suspense and danger.
but the book has some strong points, the largest of which is the fascinating details of vlad tepes's life and some of the tension between the ottoman empire and wallachia. and it does take you on a sweeping tour of europe, at times reading almost like a guide book. it's one of those stories which it almost hurts me to read, as i am forced to speculate how good it could have been.
the book exemplifies the danger of the "i" p.o.v., which i was warned against in one of my writing books (can't recall which one, at the moment). it's much too easy to fall into "i did this, i did that". i can't help but compare to tartt's book the secret history, a rivetting tale also written in the first person. tartt manages to take less scary material and bring it to life with suspense and intrigue.
she succeeds where kostova does not because she takes you by the hand, knows just when to paint in broad strokes or zero in to sharp detail. from the get go she seizes control of the story, and hence you, the reader, drives you relentlessly towards the conclusion of the book. never once does it get out of her hand. with kostova, i get the feeling the story leaked away from her, even as she hastened to contain the spill.
but the book has some strong points, the largest of which is the fascinating details of vlad tepes's life and some of the tension between the ottoman empire and wallachia. and it does take you on a sweeping tour of europe, at times reading almost like a guide book. it's one of those stories which it almost hurts me to read, as i am forced to speculate how good it could have been.
the book exemplifies the danger of the "i" p.o.v., which i was warned against in one of my writing books (can't recall which one, at the moment). it's much too easy to fall into "i did this, i did that". i can't help but compare to tartt's book the secret history, a rivetting tale also written in the first person. tartt manages to take less scary material and bring it to life with suspense and intrigue.
she succeeds where kostova does not because she takes you by the hand, knows just when to paint in broad strokes or zero in to sharp detail. from the get go she seizes control of the story, and hence you, the reader, drives you relentlessly towards the conclusion of the book. never once does it get out of her hand. with kostova, i get the feeling the story leaked away from her, even as she hastened to contain the spill.
Thursday, November 30, 2006
messiah season has started!
every year for about 3 hours at a time i suspend my doubts and become a devout christian. the vehicle of my faith is handel's oratorio, messiah. probably handel's most famous work, i will contend it is also one of the most briliant and powerful pieces of music ever written. legend has it handel wept while the music flowed through him onto his score. When he wrote it he was indebted, depressed, desperate, but he believed, as i do, that divine inspiration guided his hand through the notes.
it's become something of a tradition for me to listen to messiah every christmas, starting the day after thanksgiving. to me, it epitomizes the beauty of all the positive aspects of that religion through the retelling ot jesus's life, in verses taken from the king james bible. but i am sad to say that after 27 years, my most treasured tribute to handel, the annual sing-it-yourself messiah put on by the san francisco conservatory of music ended last year. smaller versions of the event abound, but pale compared to the majesty of over 1,000 spectators rising to their feet in the davies symphony hall to join their voices in the chorus glory to god in the highest. it doesn't take a pious heart to be moved to tears.
this year, i shall have to content myself with sitting patiently in the audience, watching and listening to the piece unfold on stage. please forgive me, though, if i hum along to a snatch or two here and there.
it's become something of a tradition for me to listen to messiah every christmas, starting the day after thanksgiving. to me, it epitomizes the beauty of all the positive aspects of that religion through the retelling ot jesus's life, in verses taken from the king james bible. but i am sad to say that after 27 years, my most treasured tribute to handel, the annual sing-it-yourself messiah put on by the san francisco conservatory of music ended last year. smaller versions of the event abound, but pale compared to the majesty of over 1,000 spectators rising to their feet in the davies symphony hall to join their voices in the chorus glory to god in the highest. it doesn't take a pious heart to be moved to tears.
this year, i shall have to content myself with sitting patiently in the audience, watching and listening to the piece unfold on stage. please forgive me, though, if i hum along to a snatch or two here and there.
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
i hate harry potter
i know. it's almost a sin. especially for someone who likes fantasy. i went through a period of curiosity - cool, i thought, the series so many people have been raving about. i picked up the first book. meh, thought i. well, maybe the second book was better. they are easy to read, after all, and i borrowed them from people to avoid shelling out the $8 or whatever for the paperback edition. again, meh. i continued on to read the 3rd, by this point mystified by the amount of acclaim the books were getting. now, i've slogged through 5. i experienced a brief flicker of interest with book 3, though that quickly faded.
the thing is, i just don't get it. i suppose i'm happy that kids are reading these books, that fantasy fiction has experienced a flowering, etc etc. but i can't get past the fact that the books are just so poorly written. the prose is completely flat, the pacing atrocious, but worse of all, the characters are cardboard. i don't think i could create a more insipid character than draco malfoy. and by the fifth book, harry was swinging out of control, doing things and acting in ways that i couldn't understand because there was no flow or sense to his development. he was putty in rowling's hands, doing exactly what she wanted, when it was convenient and required for her to move the plot along. okay, now harry has to be mad at hermione. now he has to be apologetic. the effect: he just doesn't make any sense.
it makes me cringe to think there is a whole group of kids growing up thinking this is the greatest stuff around. it makes me want to vomit when people compare rowling to tolkien. but worse than that, it makes me very very depressed, since it seems success as a writer has very little to do with talent or skill. but maybe i should take comfort in that. after all, who am i to presume i have either of those things?
the thing is, i just don't get it. i suppose i'm happy that kids are reading these books, that fantasy fiction has experienced a flowering, etc etc. but i can't get past the fact that the books are just so poorly written. the prose is completely flat, the pacing atrocious, but worse of all, the characters are cardboard. i don't think i could create a more insipid character than draco malfoy. and by the fifth book, harry was swinging out of control, doing things and acting in ways that i couldn't understand because there was no flow or sense to his development. he was putty in rowling's hands, doing exactly what she wanted, when it was convenient and required for her to move the plot along. okay, now harry has to be mad at hermione. now he has to be apologetic. the effect: he just doesn't make any sense.
it makes me cringe to think there is a whole group of kids growing up thinking this is the greatest stuff around. it makes me want to vomit when people compare rowling to tolkien. but worse than that, it makes me very very depressed, since it seems success as a writer has very little to do with talent or skill. but maybe i should take comfort in that. after all, who am i to presume i have either of those things?
Monday, November 27, 2006
nanowrimo 2006
yay me! i finished today, at 50900-ish words. i told ryan in a way it felt anti-climatic. not having a job is part of it. but i also remember feeling so euphoric the first time (2002?) that i finished. i swear, i was on 7th heaven, couldn't stop smiling. now, yeah, i'm happy, yeah, i feel accomplished. but that's about it.
my story has some potential. there are bits i really like. a lot of it is crap. but nanowrimo for me is like novel seeding. you get it all out, follow a story line even if it doens't feel quite right. but i've also noticed that starting stories is easy for me. i have so many scenes and characters running through my head. it's taking up the story, crafting it, and keeping it going that's the most difficult. i have such vague ideas about what my story is about. "i want to write a story about the fight against good and evil, and how the characters come to terms with the fact god is within, not something external." okay, great, but how do i make that into a story that's fun to read?
my story has some potential. there are bits i really like. a lot of it is crap. but nanowrimo for me is like novel seeding. you get it all out, follow a story line even if it doens't feel quite right. but i've also noticed that starting stories is easy for me. i have so many scenes and characters running through my head. it's taking up the story, crafting it, and keeping it going that's the most difficult. i have such vague ideas about what my story is about. "i want to write a story about the fight against good and evil, and how the characters come to terms with the fact god is within, not something external." okay, great, but how do i make that into a story that's fun to read?
Friday, November 17, 2006
Thursday, November 09, 2006
books books books
i need help. i'm addicted to purchasing books. odd, isn't it? it's not to reading them. more than half of the books on my shelves are unread. i purchase books when i want them, thinking i'll read them "someday". well, sure enough, someday never comes around. sadly, amazon.com goes far to facilitate my addiction. a trait i share with karl rove, according to newsweek, anyway.
i tried to put a moratorium on new books, telling myself, i shall read the ones i have before i order more. but sure enough, i catch myself surfing around on amazon digging up new books to order. what can i do? i know it's hereditary - my dad had the same problem. i remember my mom getting so angry with him when he would go out ad spend $100 on new books when we couldn't even pay the electricity bill. my dad was a powerful reader, though - i suspect he read all his books. i just have the purchasing addiction. my sister, on the other hand, is the reader. how does it happen that i just have one half of that? it doesn't seem fair somehow.
anyway, my dad was fery strict about books. he would get mad at us if we put them on the floor, saying we should show respect to them. i think he'd be appalled now at my library. i have books chaotically arranged pretty much anywhere, under the bed, stuffed into my nightstand, lodged behind the bookshelves. someday i'll have to purge all of them, decide which ones to read and which ones not to read. i guess while i still have them all i can at least pretend i'm a well read intellectual.
i tried to put a moratorium on new books, telling myself, i shall read the ones i have before i order more. but sure enough, i catch myself surfing around on amazon digging up new books to order. what can i do? i know it's hereditary - my dad had the same problem. i remember my mom getting so angry with him when he would go out ad spend $100 on new books when we couldn't even pay the electricity bill. my dad was a powerful reader, though - i suspect he read all his books. i just have the purchasing addiction. my sister, on the other hand, is the reader. how does it happen that i just have one half of that? it doesn't seem fair somehow.
anyway, my dad was fery strict about books. he would get mad at us if we put them on the floor, saying we should show respect to them. i think he'd be appalled now at my library. i have books chaotically arranged pretty much anywhere, under the bed, stuffed into my nightstand, lodged behind the bookshelves. someday i'll have to purge all of them, decide which ones to read and which ones not to read. i guess while i still have them all i can at least pretend i'm a well read intellectual.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
throw it all away!
i reread some of the early chapters of my book and i was pretty tempted to throw it all away, in one dramatic sweep into the trash can. i take solace in the fact that i'm not the only writer to have felt this way. the task of rewriting feels overwhelming. all the plot threads that i left behind because i wans't quite sure about them, well, it's not time to deal with them, weave them into the fabric or just pull them out. all i can think is how long and how painful writing it the first time was - how can i possibly rewrite it now? i knew this day would come, but now that it's here, the reckoning seems much mroe than i'd anticipated.
so i've lost a little hope, and a lot of courage. i'm not going to give up. i've come too far for that. but i do feel as if i've bitten off way more than i can chew, and rather than swallow it, i'm just going to choke on it all. i don't want to compromise on my novel, but i'm so exhausted, i'm not sure i have what it takes anymore to get it up to snuff. maybe i'll let it sit and age for another 5-10 years.
so i've lost a little hope, and a lot of courage. i'm not going to give up. i've come too far for that. but i do feel as if i've bitten off way more than i can chew, and rather than swallow it, i'm just going to choke on it all. i don't want to compromise on my novel, but i'm so exhausted, i'm not sure i have what it takes anymore to get it up to snuff. maybe i'll let it sit and age for another 5-10 years.
Saturday, October 07, 2006
so you think you know your geography?
i came across this game, the ultimate geography quiz. you're given a city name and a country, and you have to pinpoint it on the map. you can pit your wits against another person, if you dare.
geosense.
because there are no rivers, and only the largest lakes visible, it can be really tricky to pinpoint cities in some of the amorphous countries. like salt lake city.
i got to within 40 km accuracy. not bad, i guess. the game points out how woefully ignorant of all the countries in africa or those of the former ussr.
geosense.
because there are no rivers, and only the largest lakes visible, it can be really tricky to pinpoint cities in some of the amorphous countries. like salt lake city.
i got to within 40 km accuracy. not bad, i guess. the game points out how woefully ignorant of all the countries in africa or those of the former ussr.
Friday, October 06, 2006
i miss latin
yes, i studied it for five years. yes, it's a dead language. no, i don't consider it a waste of time.
with my knowledge of latin i can:
1. hold a coversation with the pope, with minor changes
2. exorcise demons
3. read the aeneid
i love latin. the language is really unlike any other, even the other "romance" languages. the key to understanding and appreciating it lies in the declension. the nouns and adjectives have a different ending, specific to its role in the sentence. if its the subject it has one ending, another if it is the object or possessive - this is like english and other language pronouns, but latin also has the dative and ablative cases, indicated movement or reference to the noun, taking the place of prepositions. the result: you can scramble words around, allowing for that glorious iambic pentameter. by placing words next to each other, too, you can imply a relationship, though the adjective would technically refer to another noun. i wish i could come up with an example. i'll try to find one.
anyway, i've noticed that my study in latin affects the way i write. there are certain grammatical patterns that i've picked up and deploy. i put down a sentence and it just feels latin, the formality, the placement of the words. again, the lack of example is making my case weak here, but i'm not so good at providing on demand.
suffice it to say, the study of any language, even a dead one, is never a waste of time.
with my knowledge of latin i can:
1. hold a coversation with the pope, with minor changes
2. exorcise demons
3. read the aeneid
i love latin. the language is really unlike any other, even the other "romance" languages. the key to understanding and appreciating it lies in the declension. the nouns and adjectives have a different ending, specific to its role in the sentence. if its the subject it has one ending, another if it is the object or possessive - this is like english and other language pronouns, but latin also has the dative and ablative cases, indicated movement or reference to the noun, taking the place of prepositions. the result: you can scramble words around, allowing for that glorious iambic pentameter. by placing words next to each other, too, you can imply a relationship, though the adjective would technically refer to another noun. i wish i could come up with an example. i'll try to find one.
anyway, i've noticed that my study in latin affects the way i write. there are certain grammatical patterns that i've picked up and deploy. i put down a sentence and it just feels latin, the formality, the placement of the words. again, the lack of example is making my case weak here, but i'm not so good at providing on demand.
suffice it to say, the study of any language, even a dead one, is never a waste of time.
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
cool free games
okay, since i'm unemployed, i play games to amuse myself. also since i'm unemployed (an just 'cus i'm a penny pincher in general) i don't want to fork out a alot of dough for games.
fortunately for me, there's a wealth of free games out there! the ones i like best are browser based.
anyway, here's one of my favorites:
Psychiatrie fur misshandelte kuscheltiere.
Don't worry, there's an English translation for the game: Asylum for Abused Stuffed Animals.
This game just stole my heart. I still think about it, though it's been a good two or three weeks since I've played it. You're a psychiatrist in training, filling in for the doctor while he is on a trip, at the mental institute for mishandled stuffed animals. You're job is to rehabilitate them, by recommending treatment and slowly coaxing the past out of each of four stuffed animals, using a combination of dream therapy, drugs, play therapy, and other options. It is simply quite adorable and also poignant. I was amazed too, by the complexity that went into it, both in thought and in execution.
Bottom line: You will never look at stuffed animals the same way again.
fortunately for me, there's a wealth of free games out there! the ones i like best are browser based.
anyway, here's one of my favorites:
Psychiatrie fur misshandelte kuscheltiere.
Don't worry, there's an English translation for the game: Asylum for Abused Stuffed Animals.
This game just stole my heart. I still think about it, though it's been a good two or three weeks since I've played it. You're a psychiatrist in training, filling in for the doctor while he is on a trip, at the mental institute for mishandled stuffed animals. You're job is to rehabilitate them, by recommending treatment and slowly coaxing the past out of each of four stuffed animals, using a combination of dream therapy, drugs, play therapy, and other options. It is simply quite adorable and also poignant. I was amazed too, by the complexity that went into it, both in thought and in execution.
Bottom line: You will never look at stuffed animals the same way again.
too big for their britches?
i've noticed google's been having problems lately with their service. the chat on gmail is frequently unavailable, at least once or twice a day now, and i've been getting more server errors when i try to log into my gmail. furthermore, on sites that use google ad sense, the loading of the ads can be prohibitively slow... it's made me give up on a couple sites because the ads were taking forever to load.
i guess i can't complain too much - after all, it's all free. but it's frustrating, too. perhaps they need to invest in more hardware and infrastructure.
i guess i can't complain too much - after all, it's all free. but it's frustrating, too. perhaps they need to invest in more hardware and infrastructure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)