Catching up with Classics – The Time Machine

I enjoy reading sci-fi, so it came as a bit of a shock when I realized I’d never actually read anything by a writer who many consider one of the father’s of science fiction: H.G. Wells. Ok, I believe I did read the radio play adaptation by or Orsen Welles of the classic novel “The War of the Worlds”, but I’ve never actually read anything by the man himself.

So I decided to try “The Time Machine”. I wasn’t very long and I figured if I couldn’t get into the style then I wouldn’t have to try too hard to finish it. My only experience with the story is the classic George Pal film from 1960. When I was a kid I used to watch this one my with my dad, who probably enjoyed it in his youth. I remembered the basics, how he traveled into the future and met the blonde folks and the ugly underground dwellers. But aside from that, I was a newbie.

The first part of the book threw me off, mostly because the time traveler starts speaking about math right off the bat. Being a writer I have issues wrapping my head around conceptual math, so I was a bit nervous about the rest of the book. But after explaining the basic principle of why time travel should work, we jump into the story.

I enjoyed it quite a bit. Wells does a good job of creating a story that revolves around the idea of mankind in the far future but splitting into two very different paths. At first you aren’t even sure that these are both decedents of man, more like alien beings that ended up taking over. But when the truth is revealed the horror of it is pretty interesting.

Would sci-fi be the same without this novel? Hard to say. Time travel stories abound now, especially in shows like “Star Trek” and “Stargate”. When they are told well, they can be very entertaining, like the “Back to the Future” trilogy. But Wells does something that you don’t see very often, use time travel to comment on humankind. Where are we going and how will we get there? Will we like what we see? To Wells, the future wasn’t shiny and exciting, but disturbing and bleak. He wanted us to see that social ills could develop into a horror story. While some view this as simplistic, I think that Wells did a good job at creating an entertaining story that made you think -something that the best sci-fi authors (like Asimov) strive for.

What did you think of “The Time Mahine”? Did you see any versions in TV or film that you enjoyed? Do you have a favorite time travel adventure story?

If they can do it… - Writer’s Envy

I had the experience of reading a book that wasn’t very good, by an author that is fairly popular in a genre that I enjoy. The trick is, I find I read a lot of “classics” and not much new material. Not sure if its because I’m afraid of things that aren’t tried and true, or if its because I’m not sure I want to know who my competition is.

In this case I felt pretty good that I’m better than the competition. This writer has a pretty high place in the Kindle reading list for the genre. Of course several of this writer’s books are free. I picked up one of the free ones myself. But the first thing I noticed was the inconsistencies of style, something that actually hurt my enjoyment of the story.

The big offender was switching perspectives from one paragraph to another without a break of any kind. You’re just reading along and it’s Joe’s perspective. Then the next paragraph is told from the point of view of Lou, who just showed up. That goes on for a few paragraphs and then it jumps back to Joe.

I found myself disoriented and needing to reread sections to make sure I wasn’t missing something. At first I thought it was an error on Kindle, and then I realized after the fourth time or so that this is just how the writer writes. I wondered why an editor didn’t say something. Am I a fuddy duddy and the hip kids are doing this kind of thing now? Or is this breaking a rule of basic writing.

Look if you’re going to be artsy in your work, if you want to make a point about changing perspectives and you pull that – hey I can understand that. Its part of your message and theme and you’re using the medium to make the point. But this just felt sloppy.

One of these changes was to a character who had one scene and then was gone, never to resurface in the book again. Ok, then what was the point in getting in her head. It added a tiny bit of perspective, but at the same time it really didn’t have much relevance to the overall tale. I’m pretty certain a good editor would have caught that and cut it.

Then there was the lead character. Now having your lead be an unpleasant asshole can work. “Lord Foul’s Bane” had this issue and actually pulled it off, making a point about the man and his view of the worlds. But this main character was angry and bitter and filled with so much bile that I started hoping he’d get killed, because the other characters were slightly more interesting. And since the author had no problem switch perspectives then it was possible to just jump over to the other character –right? Sorry, we’re stuck with this jerk. Since it was a series, we’re stuck with him for several books.

It takes a skilled writer to pull off a good antihero, or a lead who is so unpleasant that you are curious about how he’ll end up. But this author only made a guy who was annoying enough to make you want to see him dead. Not a good sign.

I didn’t finish the book, I couldn’t. I read about 40% of it before I gave it up for lost (nice that Kindle can show that % complete). But I was still puzzled that if someone who wrote this can be a top author in sales on Kindle, than that means that someone who writes better (maybe me) could do the same thing. Like I said this was a series and looking at the comments of the book I saw a lot positive reviews. My question is, how did the author get the word out and get people to read the books in the first place. Giving them away helps a great deal I’m sure, but if others don’t have a problem with sloppy writing, well I can say it gives me hope.

Have you run into sloppy writing in a popular book that made you feel – hey I can do better! Tell your story. Am I a fuddy duddy and the freedom of writing can be warped for the art? Should I be worried that a poorly told tale is attracting so much attention or does it merit some hope?

A Different Track – Firestarter

Picked up Stephen King’s “Firestarter” for the first time. I’ve been doing my best over the years to read more of his older work, and I’ve found much of it very entertaining and some of it top notch stuff (“Salem’s Lot” was excellent). “Firestarter” has a lot of good things going for it, and I can recommend it as an above average work by the author.

What I found most interesting is that the novel really isn’t a horror story. It reminded me much more of something you’d find on “The X-files”. It follows a father and daughter on the run from a shadowy government agency that will stop at nothing to obtain them. The father has the ability to psychically persuade people to do his bidding, even going so far as to blind them by telling them “You’re blind”. This ability comes at a cost, doing damage to his brain with each use.

His daughter, Charlie, is more powerful, with the ability to start fires with her mind as well as move objects and even limited telepathy. But she’s only six and can barely control her powers. It becomes obvious early on that the government agents are really after Charlie, because of her potential. The kicker is that Charlie’s parents were both drugged in college by this same agency to test a chemical that would heighten brain activity. Once the scientists realized that not only had this change become permanent, but that it affected the parents genetic code – they see a million uses for this drug as a tool for national security.

The novel was written in the late 70’s and you can feel the disillusion with the government seeping out of every pore in the book. Watergate is mentioned numerous times, and one of the main villains, Rainbird, is a seriously deranged veteran of the Vietnam war. It puts a definite time stamp on the book, but one that could easily be moved to the conspiracy crazed days of the mid and late 90’s or the post 911 world. How eager would any government be to find a way to use these gifts to defend or attack as needed?

Not too long ago I listened to a pod cast that discussed how both the US and USSR experimented with mental abilities during the cold war. According to some, the USSR actually got a few telepaths and precogs to work for them. You can see how an interesting story can develop. I wonder how much of this research came up when King did his work on the book “Carrie”.

It reminded me how much my novels and stories are affected by the times in which they were written. My third novel dealt with virtual reality. Remember when that was all the rage in the late 90’s? Yeah me too. If I ever revisit that novel, I’m gonna have to update that part a bit, along with the references to dial up modems.

Ever read “Firestarter”? What did you think of it? Have you ever read a story that seemed very influenced by the time period it was written and wondered how it would have worked if it was written later or earlier? Have you found a past work you’ve written affected by the times it was written during?

A Dark Adventure - Dracula

As a kid I loved fantasy and sci-fi movies and stories and so I missed the whole fascination that many of peers had with horror films, classic and otherwise. Sure I knew about vampires and werewolves, but I never really saw a vampire movie till “The Lost Boys”. My first exposure to any form of Dracula was actually the 1992 Coppola version. I really like that film, in spite of its flaws, and at the time it really captured my imagination. I ended up seeking out Bram Stoker’s book and was amazed by two things. First, Coppola had stayed pretty true to the story (only adding the Beauty and the Beast romantic angle for the Count and Mina). Second, the book was duller than dirt.

I found the idea of a book comprised of journal entries and letters to be absurd. I was annoyed that Dracula never got a point of view in the story. I thought that any horror was horribly diluted by the style and that it took away from any punch the story made have had. I thought that Coppola was right to add the romance angle and crank up the sexiness that was buried in the narrative. I actually gave the book away, I was so annoyed with it.

Flash forward to this summer and for my birthday my wife gets me a Kindle. As I’m playing around with it, checking out all the public domain books I can choose, one title jumps out at me, “Dracula”. Having just enjoyed a successful reread of another horror classic, “The Haunting of Hill House”, I used that as my test book. I figured I’d just download it to see an example of how the public domain novel would look on my new device. I started reading Jonathan Harker’s journal entry… and was unable to put the book down until the end.

Safe to say that I really enjoyed it this time around. Why the big change of heart? I think it’s because I knew what to expect this time around. I also discovered that while the horror of the story is diluted, it instead turns into more of an adventure story. Well heck, I love a good adventure story. The letters and journals create interesting characters, with Stoker giving each a unique voice and perspective. Dracula is more enigmatic because we never see his point of view, only the view of the victims and hunters. I was also intrigued to see how loathsome and deadly the vampire was in this incarnation. Our modern vampires (yes I’m looking at you “Twilight” but Ann Rice’s sudsy creations are just as guilty) really look like whiney wimps compared to the count in this novel.

A quick check on the ever-reliable Wikipedia tells me that “Dracula” was actually considered an adventure story when it was first published. It was also considered a tale of invasion; with the dark force from central Europe creeping into England and threatening it’s women. But it wasn’t considered a classic tale of horror until the silent film “Nosferatu” was released in 1922 I’ve seen that film and yeah, it’s still pretty darn creepy.

What’s interesting is that Stephen King viewed the novel “Dracula” as an adventure novel too, but with a horror twist. He said he noticed it when he read “Lord of the Rings”. As he was reading Tolkien’s work he was amazed how many parallels he found with Stoker’s novel. So he always considered Stoker to the originator of the modern fantasy novel. I don’t know if I’d go that far, but I can see where King is coming from. Without having that horror stamp hanging over it, “Dracula” seems like a better novel, because it works well with its adventure and mystery elements. The macabre overtones act more as accents that make it distinctive. If you want a good vampire novel that actually chills, check out King’s “Salem’s Lot”. Not only does he take Stoker’s ideas and modernizes them, but he adds a bit of Lovecraft as well. It’s a very good book, especially for a second novel.

I’m getting off the track here. “Dracula” will always be a classic, and will probably always be considered a classic horror novel. But give it another read (or a first read if you’ve never tackled it before) and see if it works a little better as an adventure story.

What do you think of the novel “Dracula”? Ever read a book with a set of expectations that actually ruined the experience of the novel? You think King is right in calling Stoker the inventor of modern fantasy?

What a character! – The Haunting of Hill House

The movie “The Haunting” is one of my favorite horror movies. While the opening credits informed me clearly that it was based on a book, I never thought to seek it out. A few years ago, I finally did get around to reading Shirley Jackson’s novel – and frankly I thought it was really lacking. There was no momentum to it. It went on and on about the main character and took forever to get to scares that never really happened. It was such a letdown – especially compared to the movie, which creeped into my brain as I watched it and had me jumping at shadows all night.

I decided to revisit “The Haunting of Hill House” again and see if maybe a few years would make a difference. Well, I think the big difference for me this time was that I knew what kind of book I was getting into. This was not a haunted house story, not really. It’s really a haunted person story. Eleanor is the focus of the book. The narrative often takes her point of view and when it doesn’t, it’s focused on her. Jackson is very careful to give us a very detailed look at the way Eleanor acts and reacts to the events leading up to her arrival at Hill House and her interaction with the other characters when she gets there.

The drive up to Hill House was one of the most annoying parts of the book when I first read it. Eleanor comments on many of the seemingly mundane things around her. I didn’t care! Get to the haunted house already! We get a little of this in the movie, but it’s only a couple scenes of her taking the car and leaving the city. The book actually charts all the stops she makes and what she does there. What’s the point? My second reading revealed that we see exactly how Eleanor takes these mundane stops and works herself into each situation in her mind. She creates elaborate fantasies about herself and these stops. Later in the book when she’s alone, Eleanor takes these fantasies and weaves them even further into her adventures at Hill House. Reality seems to slip away from her and the further she goes, the further into the house’s power she falls.

Make no mistake, Hill House is truly haunted by some power. The way it works on all the characters is a little different. We know more about Eleanor, because she’s the focus of the story, but it affects each character in its own way, filling them with dread. The house’s affect on Eleanor is causes her to see less and less harm in the house. It becomes a sanctuary for her. There are moments when the dread and fear are evident, but for the most part Eleanor is enchanted with Hill House and feels that she must become part of this fantasy. She almost becomes childlike at the end, completely giving up all sense of self to the fantasy of the house and her place in it.

In my mind, this book is a well-executed character study. Its moments of the supernatural are handled well, creating a feeling of unease. There have been arguments that the book takes place in Eleanor’s head. I don’t agree with that take. The house is haunted and Eleanor is the perfect victim, it swallows her whole. As for scares, the book still didn’t give me the creeps like the film did, but I will say that I enjoyed it a lot more and look forward to reading more of Jackson’s work.

What did you think of “The Haunting of Hill House”? Do you think Eleanor was an interesting character? Can you think of a book that was improved with the transfer to a film? Do you even want to discuss the 1999 version of the film?

A bit of Inspiration – On Writing

Sometimes we just need a mentor’s kind words to get us going back on track again. And it can pay to have that mentor in a handy dandy book form. One of my mentors is Stephen King. Now I know it may be a bit cliché now, but I’ll tell you what, the man can write and he has millions of readers. You could do worse than study his style and his technique. You should also pick up his view of writing in his book conveniently called “On Writing”.

The first part of the book is something of a biography that gives you an interesting portrait of the man. It covers what he feels are some of his influences and some of the events that shaped the kind of writer he is. It also covers the details of his attempts to crack into the world of publishing and his following success. He gets into his drug addition and his battle to free himself from it. He also talks about the accident that nearly took his life. Frankly it’s pretty straightforward and clear cut, not coming across as indulgent but as a way to give advice about being a writer and telling a good story.

After that he gets into the nuts and bolts of the process itself. He recommends books to use (Strunk and White’s Elements of Style) and gets into his process for creating a story and revising it. Like most writers, he’ll tell you to find your own way of doing things, but he does provide some hard and fast rules that I found very useful. One was to step away from your first draft for a while (a month if you can help it) and come back with a more subjective mind. It does work wonders, you see issues with greater clarity and you also have forgotten some of the really good stuff you put in there.

I see “On Writing” come up quite a bit as a book that most writers recommend to other writers, and I agree. Its like having the man right there helping you along and providing his advice in simple clear terms. King gets to the point and keeps it short. If you’ve never given the book a read, give it a try. Even if you don’t like his advice on writing, his biography is interesting enough to make it worth checking out.

Have you ever read “On Writing”? What did you think of it? Do you have a favorite book or essay from an author about writing? Do you read it from time to time to get you energized about writing?

A Tale of Two Edits – Editing Your Work

I recently had the pleasure of editing two very different novels back to back. The first was a space opera that I completed about a year ago. I had gone through it with the red pen earlier in the year. I found my usual issues of repetition and over-explanation were running rampant. I also found that my ending was really poor. So I reworked the ending completely and put the book aside for a month and a half. Then I went back and made the edits to the document in my computer, going over the new ending at the same time.

What was interesting about this editing adventure was that this book was written at my leisure over the summer. I didn’t have a deadline, I just wrote the story idea I had and worked my way through it. I did end up losing steam by the end of the story and that explains why I didn’t really end the story so much as let it whimper out. The editing process reenergized my excitement about the story and so I carried that over into the new ending. I think it’s a lot better than what I originally created.

I also found that certain plot resolutions I had forgotten about were actually pretty clever. I’m talking about plot points that I injected into the story as I wrote, and didn’t have a clear resolution for. Turns out I had a resolution for them, and I just needed to connect the dots and make it a lot clearer. I’m still not sold on the opening of the story. I think I take too much time introducing my main character and not enough getting the story rolling. This book Is supposed to be an adventure story that grabs the reader. In my concern to create an interesting character I spend too much time showing him in his dullness, instead of showing him in action. My wife is of the same opinion, and I’m already planning some editing at the beginning. But I’m hoping the middle and end work as well I felt they did. Hopefully this can shape up to be a fun book, exactly the goal I’m looking at.

The other edit was for my National Novel Writing Month entry for 2009. This was my supernatural thriller. I wrote the initial draft in 30 days and it ended up being a little over 50, 000 words roughly 250 pages. It’s also fragmented, choppy and lacking a real punch at the end. I think this is a direct result of the deadline and brisk pace I set for myself. I like the basic story and some elements work really well. This is actually a more character-based story than my space opera. Unfortunately my main character suffers in this choppy version, and I feel she needs some better scenes shaping her personality.

I also ran into issues where elements of her past were mentioned and never expounded upon. They are important to her character, but I’m not sure if I want to include them in flashback (something I try to avoid) or include a series of scenes at the beginning of the book spanning those moments. I don’t like that idea because the opening chapter of the book has a great punch to it, really grabbing the reader.

The speedy writing also created several issues with continuity. I didn’t have time to check of a character burned her left or right hand, and so the burn switches as you go through the book. So little things like that need to be updated too.

In short I think this book is going to require more work than the one I spent more time on. Makes sense, but the thing I liked about the short writing time from NaNo is that I didn’t lose the energy of wanting to write. I was still excited about the novel as I crossed that finish line and you can feel it in the ending. It felt explosive and fun. While the space opera felt like a slog by the end as I was writing.

So, very different experiences writing and editing. Still not sure what is the best, and if maybe I can create a happy medium. Maybe a month and a half to write the novel? I’m still keen on giving NaNoWriMo at try this year, but I’m not sure I have a new story idea yet. Can I wing it and survive? I think that’s another blog.

Have you tried different styles of writing drafts and how did that affect the editing process? Do you find editing interesting or more like a tedious part of the process? Do you have a problem keeping the energy going for a long work?