Danielmedley.com

Sunday, February 25, 2007

John Wayne Is No Genghis Kahn

But someone should be.

One thing I’ve wondered for some time is why there has never been a big-budget film take on Genghis Kahn. I know, we have this gem, but for some reason I just can’t get too excited about John Wayne sporting a Fu Manchu. I’ll pass, thank you.

Nah, I’m talking of a real, honest to God, big budget flick that tries to adhere somewhat to historical fact. Personally, I think that Genghis Kahn was one of the most interesting people in history. 

John Scalzi Discusses His Writing Income

On his blog, science fiction writer John Scalzi discusses his writing income for 2006. It pretty interesting.

One thing of note is that he started his writing career in 1999 with a shareware novel. What this means is he published a novel on his website to be freely read by anyone who wished to do so.

Oh yeah, I’m still here.

Tuesday, February 06, 2007

Annie Proulx

A great quote by Annie Proulx:

I don’t think of stories around women. And that’s undoubtedly, in these days of political correctness, an enormous flaw in my character. But, baby, that’s how it is.

This was in response to a question about why she showed more sympathy with male characters than female characters. It just goes to show you that a silly question does not always produce a silly answer.

Friday, January 26, 2007

Sundance Subversive And West Coast Dreaming

This last weekend, Anna and I went to the Sundance Film Festival with Justin and his wife Julee. I kicked myself for failing to remember to bring my camera. Believe me, there are a lot of reasons to bring a camera to Sundance. I suppose I should qualify “Sundance Film Festival” with the fact that we didn’t go see any films, but rather, we went to Park City and traipsed around. Perhaps the most entertaining aspect of Park City during Sundance is the people watching, hence the need to take a camera.

Also, I know that Justin was armed and prepared to commit subversive acts, but I don’t think he got around to it. It may have been a waste of time, but looking back on it, I wish we would’ve made a way to make it happen. Anyway, I’m thinking that while wandering up the West Coast this July there will be plenty of opportunities for subversive activity. 

Don’t you think?

Sunday, January 21, 2007

University Literature Departments Have It All Wrong

Brian Boyd writes this scathing yet interesting article concerning the current state of Western university literature departments.

We love stories, and we will continue to love them. But for more than 30 years, as Theory has established itself as “the new hegemony in literary studies” (to echo the title of Tony Hilfer’s cogent critique), university literature departments in the English-speaking world have often done their best to stifle this thoroughly human emotion.

He is especially hard on Pulitzer Prize-winning author and Harvard English professor, Louis Menand, whose idea of reform for university literature departments draws this reaction from Professor Boyd:

The position you represent has neither the intellectual nor the moral high ground you are so sure it occupies. Until literature departments take into account that humans are not just cultural or textual phenomena but something more complex, English and related disciplines will continue to be the laughingstock of the academic world that they have been for years because of their obscurantist dogmatism and their coddled and preening pseudo-radicalism. Until they listen to searching criticism of their doctrine, rather than dismissing it as the language of the devil, literature will continue to be betrayed in academe, and academic literary departments will continue to lose students and to isolate themselves from the intellectual advances of our time.

Ouch.

I suppose his basic argument is that the literary elite believe that culture is separate from our biology; that somehow, human culture is beyond our natural, biological selves. They believe that empirical thinking somehow inhibits culture and creativity. It’s a common notion of anti-foundationalism. Boyd argues that culture is a product of our biology; nature if you will. That the empirical approach has enhanced culture and the humanities.

I, like others who think that humans need to be understood as more than cultural or textual entities, do not wish to affirm the status quo. But in the four decades since Menand’s “greatest generation,” science and technology have altered the status quo far more radically than anything literature professors have managed. By increasing the world’s food output dramatically, scientists have saved hundreds of millions of people from hunger.

Their labor-saving devices have freed scores of millions from domestic drudgery and allowed countless women into the paid work force. They have raised life expectancy around the world. And if knowledge is indeed power, as Michel Foucault says, then through the Internet, scientists have made possible the greatest democratization of power ever.

He’s right. In fact I’d go so far as to say that the current state of humanities could not exist without the empirical process; foundationalism if you will. Hell, you can believe all you want, but everything that we are, the universe in fact, does not operate on belief. How can one expect to fully realize and benefit from the life we live without an empirical approach? Those who espouse anti foundationalism are, in my opinion, simpletons who lack the imagination needed to view the world as it really is. Think about it, how silly and banal is I think, therefore I am? Yo, René, smoke another one ...

What strikes me is the sheer arrogance of some of the so-called culture elites.

Menand is sure that: (1) the “greatest generation” secured for its “disciples” (these are his terms) the intellectual and moral high ground; (2) the insights of anti-foundationalism would be accepted by all other disciplines, if only they would listen; and (3) the crusade made possible by an understanding of “difference” must continue.

Now, what kind of happy horse pucky is that?

And, alas, here is the money line:

The idea that there is no universal truth runs into crippling difficulties straightaway, since it claims to be a universal truth.

Yeah, this is a real shooting-war between science and the humanities.

Friday, January 19, 2007

Of Hemingway

Last night I read Ernest Hemingway’s story A Clean, Well-Lighted Place and was taken aback by this beautiful passage:

They sat together at a table that was close against the wall near the door of the café and looked at the terrace where the tables were all empty except where the old man sat in the shadow of the leaves of the tree that moved slightly in the wind. A girl and a soldier went by in the street. The street light shone on the brass number on his collar. The girl wore no head covering and hurried beside him.

Reading this made me smile. It’s not often you see such contrast as Hemingway was capable of producing. He starts out with this long run-on sentence that would make most writing gurus faint and then follows it up with three shorter—almost staccato—sentences that shift the focus of the scene, allowing for a smooth transition back to the two waiters having a conversation inside of the café.

“The guard will pick him up,” one waiter said.
“What does it matter if he gets what he’s after?”

To me, it’s dramatically cinematic in a modern sense, which is ironic in that the story was written over 70 years ago. 

Sundance Dreaming

My wife and I have managed to make to the Sundance Film Festival every year for the past five years or so. This year will be no exception and, as usual, I’m very much looking forward to it. We’ll meet at my house, Justin?

Thursday, January 18, 2007

Catching Up and 1018 Press

I’ve brought out some older projects and started revising them with a fresh set of eyes so to speak. One thing that I’ve been having trouble with is the location of markets appropriate for much of the material I have. This is my fault because I have not spent the time needed in searching the markets out.

On an unrelated note, I’m beginning to realize that the online writing community is amazingly robust and, for the most part, quite open and friendly. The one thing that I have heard (and I’m beginning to see it for myself) is that online forums can be problematic. I think that is the case with most online forums no matter what their subject matter is. One thing that is intolerable, though, is when those that run/moderate the forums resort to intellectually dishonest, ego-driven tactics. This is precisely why I’ve withdrawn my participation in the forum over at 1018 Press. I’ve received a number of e-mails from forum participants expressing their dismay at the editor’s behavior which leads me to wonder if the editor is aware of the beating his integrity is taking because of his own actions. Either way, I wish 1018 Press the best.

Friday, January 05, 2007

Here Is What Happened

I sent in a piece to an editor. He stated that he wouldn’t be able to read anything for the upcoming zine for several weeks. That’s ok. On an online forum, a discussion was taking place in which said editor made a goofy statement. I corrected him because, after all, I am the type that I just can’t let nonsense go unabated. It was akin to stating that 2+2=6 and being corrected. Keep in mind that I wasn’t rude about it. In fact, I was downright civil. He replied with a snide, childish remark fueled by ego rather than common sense, and within three minutes, yes three minutes I got an e-mail rejection for the piece I had sent in.

Coincidence? Perhaps. In fact, I’m going to go on the record with it was coincidence.

But, if I had a crystal ball that told me that had I not replied on the forum my story would be accepted, I’d still do it all exactly the same.

Therein is the beauty of doing this simply because you love it.

Genre Identity Crisis

It’s been some time since I last posted here. You know, the Holidays and such. Although I’ve not posted here, I have still been writing my guts out. I finished two short stories and I’ve also been opening up some old screenplays as well.

Looking over some of the stories I have been working on, I have attempted to find some kind of pattern concerning genre. I simply cannot find it. I’m jumping all over the place. One story is a western (try finding a market for that), one is a contemporary—for lack of a better word—literary piece, and another idea I have been kicking around is a small murder-mystery.

As far as screenplays are concerned, I have a post apocalyptic/plague (plawg for some of us) story, a 1920’s era western, and a contemporary small town drama.

The only consistent factor in all of these stories is that they all contain strong women. For some reason, strong women always find themselves in my stories, even if they are not the main protagonist. I suppose I would have to dig somewhere deep into my personal psyche to figure that one out. I’d rather not.

I started writing this one piece as a sort of screenwriting exercise in pacing and character development and I found myself really getting to like this character. She’s a gun-toting, scrappy, loan survivor in a world decimated by a plague—plawg? (inside joke) that has wiped out most of humanity. Hardly an original idea, but she’s just a cool character. I’m going to dabble with it and see if I can come up with a decent story.

I guess the gist of this is that I apparently have a genre identity crisis going on.

Tuesday, December 05, 2006

Handy Tools From Unexpected Places

For most writers, coming up with character names is always a challenge. If not a challenge, then a minor pain in the ass. Sure, one can always go to The Random Name Generator (link via this guy), but my favorite method is to open up an account at a free online web-mail service and then use that e-mail address to fill out every online form you come across. Use it in ways that you would never use your home-based account. After a few weeks copious amounts of spam will start rolling in and along with it, a goldmine of ideas for character names.

I know, you may think I’m joking, but I’m serious. Hell, just today I’ve received e-mails from:

Concetta Shook (sounds like a 60’s era Bond Girl)

Anastasia Roland

Rene Parsons

Niclolas Riddle

Sylvia Buckley

Ruby Segura

This is just from today. Really, for an almost endless supply of good name ideas to fit almost any story, open up that spam-mail account. Also, you can look at it this way: you’re actually using them for something you want.

Oh, wait. Lucinda Phelps just sent me some crap I won’t read, but I sure like that name. It’s going in my notebook. 

Sunday, November 12, 2006

I’d Like A Can Of Peas, Please

Justin, I’m telling you, it’s a great idea.

The Trailer Man, coming to a theater near you.

God, this just cracks me up.

. . .and a nation will cheer. 

Monday, November 06, 2006

Literary Vs Genre

I’ve often wondered what exactly separates so called genre fiction from so called literary fiction. Sure, you can read a novel and know that is decidedly one or the other, but just what is it exactly that separates the two? To use a cliché, I suppose it comes down to, I know it when I see it, but I can’t explain it.

Granted, the question that this essay asks is: Why are so many novelists in the modern age drawn to write about the ancient world, especially Rome but also, to a lesser extent, Greece?, but the following piqued my attention:

“Robert Harris may be one of Britain’s most popular novelists, but he remains a victim of literary snobbery, or so he thinks. Interviewed recently in the Observer, he complained that the kind of novels shortlisted for the Booker prize were as much works of genre as any other. Harris is considered to be a genre writer: a writer of the airport thriller and historical saga. As such he is never in contention for the main prizes, and his latest novel, Imperium, was predictably not among the 19 titles on this year’s Man Booker longlist.”

Of course, Harris’s publishers may not have entered it for the prize. But if they did, the novel had two things against it. First, the proof copy came with the boast that it had a publicity budget of £400,000, information guaranteed to offend high-minded judges. Second, it is indeed genre fiction ...

I tend to agree with Robert Harris to some degree, and I’ve often wondered why there exists this elitism, or “snobbery” if you will. I wonder if this phenomenon is—at least partly and perhaps inadvertently—perpetuated by the publishing industry. I’ve read accounts of Editors going to bat, kicking and screaming, to get a particular book published knowing that it will not make money and that it will be an economical bust, but because they feel the work is of such merit, they feel that it needs to be put out there. Doesn’t this attitude, in part, doom a book from the start? After such a book is in print and it’s “out there” do the publishers give it weak promotion, saving the big money for the Clancys and Grishams?

Personally, I read a broad spectrum of genres and styles. I’m as likely to pick up a Faulkner as I am a King. I can be as engrossed in one as much as the other as long as I’m reading a good story.

But, I suppose that most consumers are not like that. Or, perhaps they are, and book publishers are beginning to behave much the same Hollywood. I believe that Hollywood is vastly underestimating the average film viewer. But, that’s a whole other discussion.

I know that in my own work it would be difficult to pin down a specific genre. Sure, on the surface, much of what I write could be pigeon-holed, but I think that deeper down, it’s more broad than that. Perhaps that’s wishful thinking on my part.

Sunday, November 05, 2006

What’s Going On And The Dreaded Run-On Sentence

It’s been some time since I last posted. I’ve been busy with various things, including doing some writing of course. As stated a couple of posts down, I finished a fourth draft of The Breaks and decided to sit on it for awhile after giving to some readers for feedback. Well, that didn’t last long. I did give it to a couple of readers, and in the mean time I did some line editing on my own. I’m now on what could be easily considered a sixth draft.

Also, I got some very helpful feedback concerning Little Whiskey from someone. That is proving very useful.

Lately, I’ve been thinking about run-on sentences. I have an admittedly nasty habit of spewing out run-on sentences—especially in first or second drafts. I know people who absolutely hate run-on sentences, and I have no problem with them pointing them out to me. That said, I must admit that some of my favorite writers are heavy users of run-on sentences and, like most writers, I’m heavily influenced by writers I admire. The previous sentence is a perfect example of a run-on sentence by the way.

Personally, I don’t have a problem with well done run-on sentences; even heavy use of them. Take Ernest Hemingway for example. That guy could put down a run-sentence with the best of them. The thing that was interesting about Hemingway was that he’d put down a run-on sentence that was bordering on excessive, and then follow it up with a series of short, almost staccato-like, sentences.

Cormac McCarthy, one of the most stunning writers of our time, goes absolutely insane with run-ons. Of course, he’s Cormac McCarthy and can do any damn thing he wants. Read All The Pretty Horses, or No Country For Old Men, and you’ll see what I mean.

Another writer who comes to mind in this regard is Jim Harrison. One of his books—I believe it’s Wolf—starts out with a sentence that goes on for almost two pages.

I suppose the key concerning run-ons is doing it well. I’m not a good enough writer to do them well, but I still find myself drawn to them in certain situations. I think that some stories simply lend themselves to a particular style that includes the use of run-on sentences.

Or something like that.

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Good News For Chris Holm

I’ve never met him, but I do visit his site and you just can’t help but be excited for him with regards to this:

Yesterday, I received word that my short story The World Behind has been accepted for publication by Ellery Queen’s Mystery Magazine.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go and work on my happy dance, whilst simultaneously trying not to throw up.

Man, congratulations.