Reading and Critiquing - Part 1

Some writers (in the works) believe they don't need to read to know how to write good books of their own. Some go far as to say, "I just don't have the time."

Other people lose so many of their marbles over a certain story, their political correctness sensors going so completely haywire, that they take it upon themselves to rewrite the whole thing from scratch. 

I'm seeing such a thing happen right now with the books of Roald Dahl and R.L. Stine. Since neither author has entered the public domain, these "editors" are setting themselves up for one doozy of a lawsuit. 

I say all these people are full of baloney. 

It should go without saying that reading and writing go hand in hand. You can't have one without the other, and while I understand some books aging better than others, we must keep our history in mind, no matter how uncomfortable it makes us, if we have any hope in the world of not repeating it. 

So, I thought I'd do another critique of some of the books I'm checking out myself right now. 

One book I finished just today is James and the Giant Peach, by the one and only Roald Dahl. 

This one was a pretty easy read. The chapters are so short and the story moves along at an incredibly brisk pace. For me, it was a little too brisk, and in some ways, the movie was done much better. 

Which is not to bash the book by any means. 

I only mean to say that the characters, as fun and quirky as they are in the book, are a lot more fleshed out in the movie. There's a bit more variety to their adventures and perils, their personalities are more distinct, and we have a little more time to get to know them as individuals, whereas the book kind of lumps everybody together.

In the book, the only protagonists to really jump out at me were the Grasshopper and the Earthworm. The Earthworm is darkly funny with his perpetual gloom-and-doom mindset, finding something to whine about even when there's nothing to whine about at all. As for the Grasshopper, he has a moving paternal streak toward James, and I automatically like any character who's not only good with kids but also becomes a satisfactory parental substitute.

In this regard, the movie does a better job at answering the question, "What makes a family?"

Even the villains get more time and depth on the screen. While we never fully understand why Sponge and Spiker are such nasty people, the movie makes them less of a cardboard cutout.

So, while the book makes for a fun, fast, feel-good, slightly bizarre read, it's the movie that delivers the strongest messages. 

But, of course, you wouldn't have the movie in the first place without the book. 

In the book's favor, Roald Dahl is a master poet. His songs are impossibly catchy, and I'm very glad they included some of those quirky lyrics in the movie. Furthermore, the descriptions of the giant peach will always make your mouth water for an actual peach or some other peach-flavored treat.

Where both book and movie are concerned, speaking as a certified insectophobe, this is one of the very few stories involving insects that I actually like.

Which serves as a nice segue into the next story on my list: Charlotte's Web by E.B. White.

I absolutely despise spiders, and I think Charlotte A. Cavatica is the only spider, even if she is make-believe, that doesn't creep everybody out. 

The way E.B. White describes her friendly and loyal (if somewhat bossy) nature sure helps. It also helps that in the movies, they got such pleasant-sounding women to provide her voice. While I am partial to the cartoon Debbie Reynolds version, Julia Roberts did a fine job in the live-action. 

Besides all that, White's simple narrative weaves a certain kind of magic, for all its realism. He makes you feel what it's like to live in a barn, with all its sights, sounds, and smells. He makes a spiderweb sound like something truly ethereal on a foggy morning. 

And without fail, he'll make you ravenously hungry with the elaborate descriptions of Wilbur's slops. 

Anna Sewell weaves a similar spell with her one and only book, Black Beauty. 

Besides mandatory reading for anyone who's nuts about horses, this book is a beautiful, heartbreaking reminder of the harsh realities of life and how far a little kindness can really go. 

Not only does Anna Sewell teach us that horses are made of flesh and blood, and thus they feel things as we do even if they can't express them as well, but she also shows the practicality of good treatment. Good treatment makes horses last longer and behave so much better. In the long run, a bit of humanity can save you a lot of time, money, and sheer hassle.

Thanks to Sewell and her literary gem, people have never looked at horses the same way again. 

I've read the story and heard the audio recordings enough times to have pretty much memorized the whole thing. Nevertheless, I'm always happy to give it another go, as I'm giving it this very moment.

Another story I've never grown tired of (and most likely never will) is The Last Unicorn by Peter S. Beagle.

This one holds an extra special place in my heart, because it inspired my own unicorn story involving Terence, and Terence led to pretty much all the other characters I've got in my stockpile today.

Even if that weren't the case, this is great for anyone who likes unicorns in general. I can no longer count the number of times I've read the book or seen the movie, and I couldn't care less. These days, I often like to watch the movie after I've read the book. So, I see another full view of the movie on the horizon.

The graphic novel is awesome, too. I even bought a copy of Beagle's newest book, The Way Home, which features "Two Hearts" (which I also read and enjoyed) and the long-awaited sequel, "Sooz." 

I'm forcing myself to wait until I've finished the original book and "Two Hearts" before I jump into "Sooz." But I will mention that "Two Hearts" also had a terrific impact on my current story, The Wolf at the Door. Once again, Mr. Beagle, I am very much obliged to you.

Speaking of last things, the last book I'll mention tonight is considerably more controversial. 

If people think Roald Dahl is offensive, he's got nothing on Margaret Mitchell, the author of Gone With the Wind. 

Yes, I'm still plowing through that book. I'll admit it's a pretty heavy read; if Dahl's story moves like a bicycle on a downward slope, Mitchell's story moves like a bicycle through a mud patch. 

Mitchell practically smothers us in background info while just managing to keep the characters fascinating. Most sensible authors wouldn't do this kind of thing today, but to be fair to Mitchell, people had more time and patience for super-wordy books in her day. Authors also got paid more if they wrote more, and like I said, Mitchell's characters are still interesting and her descriptions paint a lovely picture. 

So, if you have the time as well as the patience, you'll like what you read. I do, anyway.

But since this takes place in the Civil War South, readers should be forewarned of the descriptions of the black characters and how slavery is not only deemed normal, but fairly glamorized. 

Again, in Mitchell's defense, this was indeed the norm in that location at that period of time. You can tell she's done her research.

If anything, what's she's giving us is a very G-rated version. For those who bother with their history homework, the actual Civil War South was much worse, so there would have been fouler language and harder-to-stomach brutality if Mitchell told it like it really was. 

As awful as the life of a slave was, some slaves honestly didn't know any other way to live. Where else would they go? What else could they possibly be good for? 

Therefore, liberation was easier said than done. Some slaves didn't even want to be free. 

So, I think today's criticism of Abraham Lincoln is more than a little unfair. He was walking a super-fine line between wanting to keep slavery from spreading further and being prudent enough not to get rid of slavery all at once. Even when he was assassinated, plenty of Southerners felt John Wilkes Booth only made everything worse. 

Anyway, as I was saying, Gone With the Wind is a nice read for history buffs, once you get over the racist undertone. Mitchell makes you feel like you're actually there.

And while the characters are far from the most likable, there's an undeniable charm about them. They feel like real people, and regardless of the author or genre, that takes real talent. 

One way or another, Mitchell does a vastly better job than Stephenie Meyer does. Give me Scarlett O'Hara over Isabella Swann any day.

That's all for now, friends. 

Goodnight, sweet dreams, and don't be afraid to pick up a book every once in a blue moon. It's good nourishment for your brain, and you just might like what you see!

My First (Almost Completed) Story

For years, I've talked about writing and expressed great hopes that I would finish (and publish) something one of these days.

Now such a dream is on the brink of coming true.

Tonight, I completed my first story that I plan to put in the public's eye. 

It's about my Beowulf, and it's called The Wolf at the Door. 

It started out as a short story. Then I found I had a lot more to say, so now it's a novella, just a little shy of 20,000 words. 

It's about a young girl named Mavie, about 11 years old, who runs away from home after a bad fight with her family. Naturally, she regrets this almost right away, and now she's all alone, hopelessly lost, and scared to death.

Beowulf finds her (or she finds him) and helps her get home in one piece. 

Not a terribly complex story, but I believe this will be a great way to introduce Beowulf as well as put my writing chops to the real test. 

Of course, there's still a lot of proofreading and editing to do, and that's not including the tedious publishing process. I'm going to self-publish this because I'm an unknown author, and traditional companies tend to favor people who are bit more guaranteed to make them a profit. Besides, traditional companies give you a lot less creative freedom; I hear they even choose your title for you. 

So, while fortune and fame are always nice, I'd much rather tell my story my way.

And yes, I'm going to try to illustrate this, too. Kel has already agreed to help me. 

But right now, I just want to bask in the fact that I've actually got a full-length story you can read from start to finish.

I haven't been this thrilled since FanX. I just gotta say:

Classic (and Not So Classic) Reading

They say anyone who wants to write well must read well. If you want to be a decent writer, you should (quite literally) take a few leaves out of other writers' books, both good and bad. 

I most certainly agree with that advice. After all, how else would I be inspired to (try to) write a few books all my own?

(All images property of their respective owners.)

I find it utterly ridiculous that many aspiring authors these days refuse to read because they "don't have the time" or they're "too scared of being a copycat" and blah, blah, blah. 

In my opinion, not reading a book is the absolute worst kind of insult. Even a bad review signifies someone at least took the time to look at your work. 

Not to mention it's grossly hypocritical, since this kind of logic suggests nobody should bother to read you, either.

As for being a copycat, there's a fine line between being inspired by another writer and making a deliberate carbon copy with a few minor tweaks at best. It's a safe bet that every imaginable story has long since been told, but the real difference is in how unique your voice is. 

Take Disney, for instance. Just about all of their most famous works are based on fairy tales and classic literature, but it was the way they (re)told those stories that won the audience over. 

Opinions vary drastically on how well Disney does this. All the same, I give Disney some credit for giving me a "taste test" and introducing me to these classic stories in a way I might not have otherwise, or else I wouldn't have been quite as receptive. 

So, today, I'm going to do a sort of review of the classic (and not so classic) stories I'm reading right now. By "sort of" I mean I'm not waiting until I'm at the very end, and I'm juggling multiple stories at the same time: a chapter for this story, a chapter for that story. 

I'll try to refrain from spoilers but I'm just letting you know how well I've been hooked thus far. Some of these stories I already know quite well, while others I'm exploring for the very first time.

For starters: Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell.

This one's a doozy because it's huge; the movie alone lasts nearly four hours. 

Then again, they had a lot more time and patience for longer books (and longer movies) in the old days. For some people, reading was the only entertainment they had at all, and the writers definitely got paid more if they put more words on paper.

At my current job, I often like to compare the names of my customers with the names of famous people. Like, for someone named Josh, I say, "As in, Josh Groban!" 

Or for someone named Julie, I say, "Like Julie Andrews!"

It's all in good clean fun and my customers find it amusing enough. 

A little while ago, a customer gave me the name Rhett and I just had to say, "As in, Rhett Butler!" The funny bit was he assumed I was "too young" to be familiar with Gone With the Wind, like there's some kind of age restriction to know or even like certain books, movies, and music. I prefer to think of myself as having good taste. 

Heck, most of what was popular back then is so much better than most of what's popular today. At least, I think so. 

So, I will admit the book's prose is rather heavy. There's a lot of detail ("info dumps," to quote some of my college professors) and you have to be a little patient wading through the pool of words. 

Because this takes place in the Deep South in the Civil War era (chapter 1 happens in 1861, right after the attack on Fort Sumter), there are a few descriptions of black people and the "normalcy" of owning slaves, as well as the style of black characters' dialogue, that may not sit too well with modern audiences. 

However, once you get over all that stuff, it's quite an engaging story. At any rate, my interest has been snared. 

For all their wordiness, the descriptions, especially those of the landscapes, are very lush and I get a crystal-clear picture in my head straightaway.  

The characters aren't particularly likable but they still have a certain charm about them, almost like a character you "love to hate." 

Scarlett O'Hara makes me think of my own Adela Buchanan Wiles: plenty pretty on the outside but completely spoiled and empty-headed on the inside. Neither of them can stand to not be the center of attention, nor do they like to dwell for long on anything serious. 

One of these days, I just might be brave enough to watch the movie all the way through. 

Another story I'm tackling for the first time is Redwall by Brian Jacques.

I heard a great deal about this series, but as to reading it for myself, I dragged my feet for the longest time. Though I'm a skeptic by nature, my biggest reason for dodging this book is a lot more personal, even downright painful: two close friends with whom I'd had an ugly falling-out (we haven't spoken for several years now and I've long since abandoned hope) loved Redwall to pieces.

Ultimately, I decided I'm not going to let the past stand in my way anymore. Whether I'll check out the rest of the series is still up in the air, but I'm finally giving book 1 a try. 

So far, I really like it. It does have a tiny bit of a Disney vibe, since it features animals that walk, talk, and wear clothes like humans, but it's not at all "cartoony" or "cutesy." It's very exciting, with a sort of Lewis/Tolkien-like narrative of which I'm quite fond. 

The characters are engaging, too. Cluny sounds legitimately dangerous while Matthias is both relatable and adorable.

Small word of caution: don't read the descriptions of the food on an empty stomach! 

Next book: The Magician's Nephew by C.S. Lewis. 

As aforementioned, I positively adore C.S. Lewis. He's the author I try to emanate the most, to the point where I'd consider it one of the greatest honors if anybody ever compared me to him. I'd be much more flattered to be compared to him than to J.K. Rowling, though a Rowling comparison would be nothing to sneeze at.

Granted, most people are most familiar with The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe and like it best, myself included. Even so, it's wonderful to read the other Narnia books and sort of "connect the dots." 

While Lewis can get a little sparse with the details, I appreciate how he subtly encourages you to use your own imagination, to fill in the blanks your own way. 

I like Digory and Polly and how well they get along almost instantly, something that was almost unheard of in their era. I'm a softie for Christian fantasy, too, and there's a definite "Adam and Eve" moment when the kids are first introduced to those magic rings. Uncle Andrew is both intriguing and aggravating, a truly morally ambiguous character to whom you can neither get too attached nor stray too far away. 

Sure would be nice to see a story like this in movie format. 

Next book: The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien. 

This is an interesting example because I already know how the general story goes. 

While I've yet to see any of the live-action movies all the way through, I did watch the 1977 version a few times and Rankin-Bass is known to be fairly faithful in their film adaptations. For that matter, it was through Rankin-Bass that I knew Tolkien's story existed in the first place.

Now I'm endeavoring to read Tolkien's official text with my own eyes, from start to finish. 

Fun fact: Tolkien and C.S. Lewis were good friends and writing buddies, so they often "borrowed" from each other and you'll find quite a few similarities in their books. 

While Lewis goes very light on the details (almost too light in some cases), Tolkien is much more descriptive, though I'll say The Hobbit is nowhere near as verbose as Gone With the Wind, at least not now. All the same, I don't mind some verbosity on occasion as long as it's done well; I only hate when the author takes far too long to get to the point and the details are barely interesting to begin with. 

Opinions also vary on how necessary Tolkien's songs and poems are. One online reviewer said he idolizes Tolkien but always skips the songs because he just can't stand them. 

Personally, I like them. I love a catchy poem here and there, you can tell Tolkien's poems were written with great care, and in some cases, those "musical numbers" are the story. 

And now I'll finish this with a novel that may be a bit less of a classic but it still holds a special place in my heart: Don't Die, My Love by Lurlene McDaniel. 

This is probably Lurlene McDaniel's best-known novel. It most definitely introduced me to her work. 

Admittedly, her books can be a bit predictable and more than a bit schmaltzy, especially with the teenage romance and how sure the teens are that what they're experiencing is "true love." I believe her best books are the ones that focus more on the loss of a parent, a sibling, or a best friend, where the romance takes more of a backseat. 

That said, I can't bash McDaniel all that much, either. At least her teen love stories are vastly superior to most of the ridiculous, nauseating, utterly fake crap out there, like Twilight. 

Besides the semi-believable romance between Luke and Julie, McDaniel also keeps the story interesting with plenty of impressive research on cancer (I learned enough about cancer through McDaniel's work to do quite well on a couple of crucial tests in school) and the overall pace is fairly brisk. 

So, she at least cuts to the chase and the readers are never bogged down, which is nice. 

That's all for now, folks. Wish me happy reading and happy writing!

NaNoWriMo 2021

I did it! I completed NaNoWriMo (National Novel Writing Month) for the eighth year in a row!

Granted, the book itself is far from complete, and completing it will be true cause for celebration, and I'm gonna keep doing this for the remainder of the month...but all the same, YAY!