March is a great month for basketball lovers, since the wonderful tournament to decide the NCAA basketball title gets underway. My Arizona team still can make the Big Dance (as it's also called, along with March Madness) if it wins tonight against Colorado. Go Cats!
Anyhow, the writing site Authonomy has long been a useful one for me, since I get some great feedback on my books. I've made many hundreds of corrections to my books using such feedback. This month, though, the site became even funner when one poster decided to put on a March Madness tournament for books. I entered both of my books in the 64-book field, and I'm thrilled that both made it to the second round. Each round is single elimination, so your nerves are jangling while you wait for judges to post their results. There were many great books entered, so the matches were thrilling to watch. Here is the link to the thread (see what you all are missing by not being on Authonomy?): http://www.authonomy.com/forums/threads/94088/march-madness/
Here are the postings of the judges for my two matches:
GAME # 18
Blue Diamonds - Antonio Marlowe
Versus
The Shard - Ted Cross
Here's how it went down:
Two wild novels appear!
Blue Diamonds uses Awesome Dialogue, it's super effective! The Shard is paralyzed!
The Shard is paralyzed, it can't move!
Blue Diamonds uses Motorbikes and romance! It's super effective.
The Shard uses ornate and skillful writing style, it's super effective!
Blue Diamonds uses ease and enjoyment of reading, it heals 5 points!
The Shard uses depth of plot! It deals some damage.
Blue Diamonds uses relatable characters! It deals some damage.
The Shard uses interesting use of magic, It's super effective! Blue Diamonds is confused!
In it's confusion, Blue Diamonds hit itself!
The Shard uses intrigue and mulit-plot lines! It's super effective!
Blue Diamonds fainted, The Shard wins!
Ha, I apologise for the pokemon visualisation, I thought they were both brilliant and almost too close to call. Both obviously had a lot of effort put into them, both prime examples of their genres and I didn't find a typo in each (as far through as I read). It eventually came down to a gut instinct and I just preferred the depth and scale of 'The Shard', it felt like a novel I could really sink my teeth into. But 'Blue Diamonds' was intriguing and It was definitely an easier and more lightly enjoyable read.
***********************
And the second match:
Game #31
[TIG] The Immortality Game - Ted Cross -versus- [OTB] The One True Bank - Dadoo
Referee- McRae by Nature (Carrie L McRae)
Both books open with mysterious undertones, an unfamiliar and futuristic world, and the delightful taste of conspiracy. However, from the start, they prove to drastically differ. While TIG eased us into the world, introducing unfamiliar things one at a time with such clarity that I almost instantly knew what was going on, OTB seemed to throw things at me one after another without giving me a chance to fully understand or appreciate what they are. That, ultimately, was OTB’s downfall.
The character development and approach became another defining difference. OTB introduces four different character’s points of view before the third chapter, and I had a hard time separating them out from one another. TIG only introduced two, and within the very first paragraph of each POV, I got a clear understanding of what sort of character Zoya and Marcus were. They both remained consistently defined throughout the first two chapters.
Plotwise, both are brilliant, unique and complicated, but again TIG’s execution was much cleaner and easier to comprehend. In the end, this was almost an unfair pairing. OTB was a very well crafted novel, but TIG outshined it.
My overall thought after finishing chapter two of both manuscripts: Robert, you are a very strong writer, but there were just too many characters for me to keep track of, and too much going on all at once. Ted, your book grabbed me by the horns and took me anywhere it decided to go. I’ll be picking it shortly.
Winner: The Immortality Game by Ted Cross
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Monday, March 5, 2012
Celebrity Sighting
London is a great city for running into celebrities. I've run into Johnnie Depp on two separate occasions here, the first time on the street in 1994 and the second time at the movie premier of Alice in Wonderland in 2010.
Today I stopped in at Hamley's toy store on Regent Street to buy a present for one of my sons. I was coming off the escalator and right in front of me was the very distinctive Brian May, guitarist for Queen. He and a woman, his wife I assume, got onto the next escalator with me directly behind them. Some woman called out, "Mr. May, could you..." but was cut off by Mr. May's companion with a, "No, please." Brian May glanced back at me for a couple moments, perhaps wondering if I was another stalker, so I politely looked away. It would be nice to get to chat with someone like him, but I'd never be rude enough to bother him out in public.
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
A Fair Way to Boost the US Economy
The US Congress seems to have issues with coming up with fair methods of repairing our ailing economy. They are more than happy to bail out those who actually caused the problem so that they can go back to rewarding themselves with massive bonuses. Why not pass a bill that would boost our economy by helping those who did not cause the problem and have been most hurt by it?
I think it's a no-brainier -- allow anyone not tied to the financial industry and whose income is below a certain amount and who has not missed any mortgage payments to refinance their homes to today's historically low rates while the federal government covers the closing costs of the refinancing. This would be far more inclusive than the weak HARP program, and thus would be more fair and do more to help our economy. It would increase tax revenue by allowing middle-class Americans to have more money in their pockets and, perhaps even more importantly, it would increase consumer confidence. The only people to lose would be the banks who would get lower interest on their loans, but hey, it was these banks who caused the problem in the first place and have been bailed out by us.
A second idea is to improve the manner in which we dole out foreign aid so that it helps other countries, as intended, but also helps America. Do some basic research of particular areas that need our help, such as infrastructure projects, and offer to fund these projects, but rather than giving the money to the country for the project, we would use US companies to produce the work. Yes, this would cause the projects to cost more than if produced locally, but being efficient is not the point here. The project gets completed, benefitting the foreign country, but the vast majority of our tax-payer dollars gets reinjected back into our own economy rather than vanishing overseas.
I think it's a no-brainier -- allow anyone not tied to the financial industry and whose income is below a certain amount and who has not missed any mortgage payments to refinance their homes to today's historically low rates while the federal government covers the closing costs of the refinancing. This would be far more inclusive than the weak HARP program, and thus would be more fair and do more to help our economy. It would increase tax revenue by allowing middle-class Americans to have more money in their pockets and, perhaps even more importantly, it would increase consumer confidence. The only people to lose would be the banks who would get lower interest on their loans, but hey, it was these banks who caused the problem in the first place and have been bailed out by us.
A second idea is to improve the manner in which we dole out foreign aid so that it helps other countries, as intended, but also helps America. Do some basic research of particular areas that need our help, such as infrastructure projects, and offer to fund these projects, but rather than giving the money to the country for the project, we would use US companies to produce the work. Yes, this would cause the projects to cost more than if produced locally, but being efficient is not the point here. The project gets completed, benefitting the foreign country, but the vast majority of our tax-payer dollars gets reinjected back into our own economy rather than vanishing overseas.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Describing Characters -- Close 3rd vs Omniscient
Long ago I purposely chose to use close 3rd rather than omniscient POV in my writing, because it gives the reader a sense of intimacy with the character. The reader will feel almost as if he or she is the character. However, the one trouble I have had because of this decision lies with learning how and when to describe characters in the story.
I was reading today and came across this character description that struck me as being so much better than anything I do (bonus points to anyone who can tell us where this is from without having to Google it!):
"Her pretty little upper lip, shadowed with a barely perceptible down, was too short for her teeth and, charming as it was when lifted, it was even more charming when drawn down to meet her lower lip. As always with extremely attractive women, her defect--the shortness of her upper lip and her half-open mouth--seemed to be her own distinctive kind of beauty. Everyone took delight in watching this pretty little woman, brimming with health and vitality, who, soon to become a mother, bore her burden so lightly. After being in her company and talking to her for a while, old men and somber, apathetic young men felt themselves becoming, like her, more animated. Talking to her, and seeing at every word her bright smile and flashing white teeth, made a man feel that he was in a particularly amiable humor that evening. And this was true of everyone."
Never mind that part of the reason I was struck by this description was that it reminded me in a fashion of how I feel about my wife, this passage showed the advantage that omniscient has over close 3rd. In close 3rd when you already know someone well, especially if it is a spouse or one of your children, you have no realistic reason to be thinking about them in such descriptive terms, and after all close 3rd is supposed to be strictly about what the POV character is thinking or seeing or sensing at any given moment. A husband is more likely to focus only on something that stands out, such as if his wife had a smear of blood on her cheek or something of the sort. He's unlikely to give a full-on description of someone he sees every day of his life.
So, I tend not to describe in much detail, but I am trying to learn how to do better. I am trying to keep this in mind while reading close 3rd stories, looking for brilliant passages that can give me clues as to how to do better. What are your thoughts?
I was reading today and came across this character description that struck me as being so much better than anything I do (bonus points to anyone who can tell us where this is from without having to Google it!):
"Her pretty little upper lip, shadowed with a barely perceptible down, was too short for her teeth and, charming as it was when lifted, it was even more charming when drawn down to meet her lower lip. As always with extremely attractive women, her defect--the shortness of her upper lip and her half-open mouth--seemed to be her own distinctive kind of beauty. Everyone took delight in watching this pretty little woman, brimming with health and vitality, who, soon to become a mother, bore her burden so lightly. After being in her company and talking to her for a while, old men and somber, apathetic young men felt themselves becoming, like her, more animated. Talking to her, and seeing at every word her bright smile and flashing white teeth, made a man feel that he was in a particularly amiable humor that evening. And this was true of everyone."
Never mind that part of the reason I was struck by this description was that it reminded me in a fashion of how I feel about my wife, this passage showed the advantage that omniscient has over close 3rd. In close 3rd when you already know someone well, especially if it is a spouse or one of your children, you have no realistic reason to be thinking about them in such descriptive terms, and after all close 3rd is supposed to be strictly about what the POV character is thinking or seeing or sensing at any given moment. A husband is more likely to focus only on something that stands out, such as if his wife had a smear of blood on her cheek or something of the sort. He's unlikely to give a full-on description of someone he sees every day of his life.
 |
| My lovely wife--who lights up any room she enters--preparing for a dinner party in Beijing |
So, I tend not to describe in much detail, but I am trying to learn how to do better. I am trying to keep this in mind while reading close 3rd stories, looking for brilliant passages that can give me clues as to how to do better. What are your thoughts?
Sunday, February 5, 2012
More Great Modern Music
Sorry I'm on a music kick, but I'm stuck in Washington far from home, so I can't do any writing. I have to have the comfort of my own desk in order to write. So, here's another modern rocker that very few people ever hear -- Buckethead. There's a good reason for this, as he plays some truly strange music. However, hidden deep within the haypile are a few needles. My favorite is Killing Cone, which I bet none of you have heard. Sometimes I daydream that I bring my guitar to a street corner and play this song, just so I can see peoples' jaws hit the pavement.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Insanely Great Music
Once upon a time there was musical genius in the world and bands wrote and performed their own music. Life was good. We had Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, The Beatles, The Who, Donovan, Simon & Garfunkel, The Stones, and so many more.
Well, time went on and newer generations of kids decided they didn't like talented musicians anymore. They wanted choreographed pretty boys and girls lip-synching to throbbing beats that they couldn't write or perform themselves in a million years. Yeah, music pretty much sucks these days.
Genius is still out there, however, even if you have to search for it long and hard. I've got lots of it in my collection, but I'll just give a sampling from one great singer/songwriter -- Maynard James Keenan. If you haven't heard of him, well he sings for Tool and A Perfect Circle (and some other bands when he feels like it). He's one odd duck, but he has an amazing voice and writes some of the best modern songs around. I dare you to listen to these five or six times and tell me he's not a genius.
Well, time went on and newer generations of kids decided they didn't like talented musicians anymore. They wanted choreographed pretty boys and girls lip-synching to throbbing beats that they couldn't write or perform themselves in a million years. Yeah, music pretty much sucks these days.
Genius is still out there, however, even if you have to search for it long and hard. I've got lots of it in my collection, but I'll just give a sampling from one great singer/songwriter -- Maynard James Keenan. If you haven't heard of him, well he sings for Tool and A Perfect Circle (and some other bands when he feels like it). He's one odd duck, but he has an amazing voice and writes some of the best modern songs around. I dare you to listen to these five or six times and tell me he's not a genius.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Given it's huge international success, I felt it necessary to read Stieg Larsson's book The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. It was better than I expected. I wouldn't read it again, but then only my very favorite books fall into the reread category.
Naturally, having read the book, I decided to see the movies. I started with the original Swedish version, not just because it was released first but also because I tend to enjoy the original foreign versions of such films better than the American remakes. I thought the Swedish version was fairly well done, and given the shortcomings of filmmaking, I don't think it was a big deal that they changed so many details. I didn't like the movie as much as the book, but that is to be expected.
What really surprised me was how much I liked the American remake. Other than the lame opening credits, overlaid with an odd mangling of Led Zeppelin's classic Immigrant Song, I really enjoyed this version far more than the Swedish one. Each film had elements done better than the other, but the overall movie-watching experience was better in the US version for me.
Especially impressive was the acting of Rooney Mara as Lisbeth Salander. She won't win the Academy Award for which she is nominated, but she should, in my opinion. I think the voting members are a bit too staid and stuffy to let a newcomer like Ms. Mara win, but she embodies this role almost perfectly. I enjoyed seeing her work far more than the other nominees that I have so far seen.
Once I return home to Budapest (I'm stuck in Washington DC for work for a month), I'll read the other two of Larssen's books, at least once I finish the ones I am currently reading. This may take awhile, since one of them is War and Peace!
And for something completely different, my Patriots are playing in the Super Bowl for the fifth time in the past decade. This is a repeat of the matchup four years ago when the Patriots had a chance to be the first 19-0 team ever but were upset by the Giants. I hope the Patsies get revenge, but I have this odd feeling that they won't. I keep reading about how Patriot running back Green-Ellis has never once fumbled in his five years in the NFL, so I can't help but feel that this is the perfect setup -- my Patriots losing due to his first fumble.
Naturally, having read the book, I decided to see the movies. I started with the original Swedish version, not just because it was released first but also because I tend to enjoy the original foreign versions of such films better than the American remakes. I thought the Swedish version was fairly well done, and given the shortcomings of filmmaking, I don't think it was a big deal that they changed so many details. I didn't like the movie as much as the book, but that is to be expected.
What really surprised me was how much I liked the American remake. Other than the lame opening credits, overlaid with an odd mangling of Led Zeppelin's classic Immigrant Song, I really enjoyed this version far more than the Swedish one. Each film had elements done better than the other, but the overall movie-watching experience was better in the US version for me.
Once I return home to Budapest (I'm stuck in Washington DC for work for a month), I'll read the other two of Larssen's books, at least once I finish the ones I am currently reading. This may take awhile, since one of them is War and Peace!
And for something completely different, my Patriots are playing in the Super Bowl for the fifth time in the past decade. This is a repeat of the matchup four years ago when the Patriots had a chance to be the first 19-0 team ever but were upset by the Giants. I hope the Patsies get revenge, but I have this odd feeling that they won't. I keep reading about how Patriot running back Green-Ellis has never once fumbled in his five years in the NFL, so I can't help but feel that this is the perfect setup -- my Patriots losing due to his first fumble.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
