POD Critic

The Fire Has Gone Out!

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 18:29:00 +0000

I have hit a wall of sorts where blogging is concerned. For one thing, my time is extremely limited at the moment, and for another, the fire has gone out, if you get my meaning. I have sort of lost the desire to come up with new material for the few readers that frequent this site. So, I’m either going to have to try to build up interest again, some how, some way, and post when the time is available to me, or I will have to put the blog on hiatus until such time as the well of inspiration is filled once more—either that or kill the blog altogether, which is the very last thing I wanted to do, as many are waiting on reviews that have not yet materialized.

I can’t tell you how many times I have attempted to write a post, in addition to completing the book I’m currently reading, but the inspiration just isn’t there anymore. This quandary is regrettable, but it is, unfortunately, the position I’m in at the moment, and I relay this solely because I owe it to you all to keep you informed. So there you have it!

Antarktos Rising - A Review

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 04:45:00 +0000

Author: Jeremy Robinson
Publisher: Breakneck Books
ISBN: 978-0-9796-9290-1
Pages: 300

Much better! Jeremy Robinson has learned a few new tricks since last I read his work, and all of those tricks are on display in this particular title. There are deeper character sketches than usual; better scene building; and dialogue flows much more naturally this time around. The plot itself is far more complex and layered than the one in his previous work, with the usual science-speak and religious overtones seasoning the book’s broth.

Many will compare this to the glut of Christian fiction that delivers stories concerned with end times, à al Tim LaHaye, but that idea couldn’t be farther from the truth. Robinson’s tale is epic, well-written, and thought-provoking. While at times heavy on biblical concepts, the book tackles them in a way that holds interest, rather than inciting disdain; this is mainly due to the uncharted territory Robinson decides to sail into, what with the expansion of the theory surrounding the Nephilim (or “fallen ones”), a race of beings—thought to be fallen angels by some—that is granted a brief mention in the Scriptures. Robinson holds—or, that is his plot holds—that Noah and his family weren’t the only survivors of the great flood. Some of the Nephilim made it through unscathed as well. That little fact alone should assure you that this book wasn’t intended for average Christians, as many of them would balk at these very notions.

Robinson, in a note to his readers, urges as follows:

Antarktos Rising is a work of fiction. All of the characters in the novel are fictional, as are their beliefs. For your own enjoyment, don’t take fiction seriously. Authors, for the most part, aren’t trying to convert you to their personal beliefs; we’re trying to entertain you. If I accomplish that, I’ve done my job.

Funny how some of his words tie in perfectly with a previous post on this blog, the one dealing with the purpose of a novel.

Robinson also rehashes a bit of history as well, causing his characters to reenact, in a way, the Old West land claims that resulted from a race for new land—in this case, a freshly thawed Antarctica, or—to use the ancient designation, as the title of the book suggests—Antarktos. Crustal displacement, we are told, shifts the earth forty degrees, killing 2.5 billion people, and Antarctica in turn becomes “a tropical rain forest the size of the United States.” The book commences with a series of disasters that effectively set things in motion, not least the tsunami featured in chapter six, which is written so effectively it recalls the devastating events of December 2004, which were touched off, of course, by the historic Sumatra-Andaman earthquake.

Antarktos Rising, in short, is one of those rare thrillers that will keep readers turning pages, because the story doesn’t really let up, and that’s bad if one decides to crack the pages of this thing just before going to bed.

The Purpose of A Novel

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:15:00 +0000

Now I know I’ve touched on this particular subject in previous posts, but I have to ask the question again, “What is the purpose of a novel?” This is not necessarily related to another question, “Why have you decided to write a novel?” The second question can have various answers, many, if not all of them involving some personal agenda on the part of the writer or writers in question. But the answer to the first question, and in all truth, there really is only one answer (which I’ve supplied in this particular post already) is to entertain. Keeping this in mind, that a novel’s main—and in most cases nowadays—sole purpose, is to entertain, a writer should be able to approach a book with this decidedly singular agenda, abutting it and supplementing it with experimentation, lofty artistic objectives, or other personal goals, so long as the primary agenda remains in full frontal view.

A lot of writers lose sight of this “decidedly singular agenda,” placing everything before it, thus leaving their readers scratching their heads at the ridiculousness they’ve been mercilessly beset by. In a recent review, I criticized one writer for having written a few stories that were “absolutely vapid” and lacking plots. His best and only defense was that James Joyce was more or less accused of similar literary crimes—particularly those that concern stories without plots. This could have led to a lot of heavy-handed rebuttals on my part, not least the “how dare you compare yourself to . . . blah, blah, blah . . . albeit inadvertently?” line, yet I decided to digress, because I have no intention of belittling struggling writers. It’s neither my desire nor place to.

I said that to say this: Joyce, Faulkner, Nabokov, Pynchon . . . contemporary writers can use them as an excuse to apply their own brand of experimentation to literature all they want—as though these souls, by so doing, gave contemporary authors license to do so as well—but bear in mind that all of them experimented in various novels with the goal of entertaining their readers. And I believe all of them succeeded.

All of the aforementioned authors understood story dynamics, character, and language; they attempted to make every detail of their narratives interesting, despite the sometimes mundane nature of the action being described. Take Joyce’s Ulysses for instance. During a carriage ride—what could have easily been a dull, uninteresting narrative block—is pumped full with lyrical prose and vivid imagery, even with terse clauses and seeming half-phrases applied:

The carriage steered left for Finglas road.

The stonecutter’s yard on the right. Last lap. Crowded on the spit of land silent shapes appeared, white, sorrowful, holding out calm hands, knelt in grief, pointing. Fragments of shapes, hewn. In white silence: appealing. The best obtainable. Thos. H. Dennany, monumental builder and sculptor.

Passed.

On the curbstone before Jimmy Geary the sexton’s an old tramp sat, grumbling, emptying the dirt and stones out of his huge dustbrown yawning boot. After life’s journey.

Gloomy gardens then went by, one by one: gloomy houses.

Mr. Power pointed.

—That is where Childs was murdered, he said. The last house.

Joyce sets the scene for us, perfectly. Two words are used to paint an interesting picture: “Gloomy gardens,” what is essentially an antipode to our usual view of gardens. And gloomy houses follow; “gloomy” because we are to believe that someone could be murdered in one of them. And we do believe, because the imagery allows us to.

Much of the above language is almost poetic, and could stand to be read over and over again. One isn’t really concerned with plot when one is presented with language the likes of this. The beauty is in the details, and following a reading of Joyce’s work, I come away not only satisfied, but also entertained!

Films I Took in This Weekend

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:25:00 +0000

Shooter (Fair)

The movie revolves around a retired marksman who is seduced into a role that will supposedly prevent the assassination of a sitting President. The film, a political thriller of sorts, stars Mark Wahlberg, who is in rare form here—a string of scenes, which I’m sure took weeks to film, has him displaying a labored kind of breathing following a failed attempt on his life. Walhberg, having been shot twice, is seen hobbling about in dire pain, wincing and breathing in short, quick breaths, and this his character does over the course of an evening, night, and following morning. The consistency in this portrayal was highly convincing. The antithesis of this performance has to come from Danny Glover, who, for the first half of the film is speaking in a seeming whisper that attempts to recall a raspy tough-guy act from ages past, but comes across as woefully inadequate. He only keeps it up, as I said, for half of the film, then abandons the voice for his usual speech tones and patterns.

The movie’s plot itself, which begins well enough, soon plunges into a pool of absurdity, so much so that an FBI agent, fresh out of the academy (this doesn’t stop him from having unbelievably keen instincts that would more befit a veteran fed), is seen running around alongside Walhberg’s character as his new “spotter,” while Walhberg is shooting at bad guys and blowing things up with great relish. What I did love about the film, however, besides Walhberg’s performance (his best being his role in The Departed) are the portions of dialogue that Walhberg’s character dispenses, the ones that have him talking shop, and doling out marksman lingo like Senators dole out political rhetoric.

I was disappointed with everything else in this film, particularly the ending, and the direction the film took when the conflict began to take shape in the Second Act.

POD Critic . . . After the 4th

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Mon, 09 Jul 2007 18:40:00 +0000

The week of the 4^th had me running around like a madman, what with the family outings and so forth. I attempted to write a post several times, but you all know what resulted from my attempts—absolutely nothing! This is a new week, but not necessarily a smoother one. I have to get caught up on a few things, work wise, but other than that, it is business as usual with the blog—for the most part. I’m currently reading Dan Morris’s Wealth of Deception (a longish read) but I’ll be interrupting my progress on that title to read and review an upcoming book I promised to tackle before its release in a recent post—Antarktos Rising.

This is just to keep everyone apprised as to the happenings at POD Critic. Until I’m somewhat caught up with my neglected projects, I’ll probably not be posting as often as usual, but I will make every attempt to. No fears, however, as I am not abandoning the blog. Look for more reviews, editorials, and other tidbits soon.

Thanks for your continued presence.

Big Love

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 14:25:00 +0000

I just watched the first season of Big Love on DVD, the HBO drama about a polygamous family in Utah trying to cope with the demands of such a life, while attempting to keep their polygamous ways hidden from the public. Bill Henrickson runs Henrickson Home Plus, an up-and-coming Utah-based competitor to giants such as Lowe’s, Home Depot, and Wal-Mart. He has three wives, but only the first, Barbara Henrickson, is legally wed to him, while the other two are wives through religious practice. The wives take turns . . . uh, servicing Bill, with rotating shifts, so to speak (each wife shares a bed with Bill every third night, and the nights begin at 9:00 a.m.—it gets complicated).

There are various rules associated with this lifestyle, including adherence to almost complete isolation from neighbors, co-workers who exist outside of the “Principle,” and anyone else for that matter. Bill has spread his wives and children out in three separate and abutting houses, and there is one big backyard shared between them. Every evening, Bill enters the same house, the one shared by him and his first wife, Barbara, despite whose shift it is. He will then head over to the house of one of the other two wives via the back entrance, if it is either of their shifts—this is done to avert suspicion. As the show progresses, the layers of the Henrickson household are slowly pealed away, allowing viewers to enter into the inner chambers of their unique belief system and practices. By the middle of the season, one will find oneself completely familiar with the characters, being privy to their secrets, their desires, and their fears.

Bill’s protagonist is wonderfully opposed by the sinister Roman Grant, a said to be “prophet” and the apparent head of the United Effort Brotherhood (UEB), a fundamentalist offshoot of the LDS church. Bill and Grant are bitter enemies, and the surprising ties between them, which are revealed as intriguing and important plot points throughout the season, help to keep things interesting, as these ties only lock them closer in combat. Both men go to various extremes to stick it to each other. Grant, meanwhile, has somehow managed to acquire a stake in Bill’s two stores, earning 15% on each of them (what he believes is his due, in the form of “tithes” and “offerings”). Bill intends to open up a third store, but his expansion is hampered by Grant’s outstretched hand, as he aims to get a piece of that pie as well.

The most appealing feature this show has going for it is its uniqueness. In a time when dramas and situation comedies have grown stale by repeating what has gone before, and in remarkably poor taste, Big Love seems to have captured lightning in a bottle, delivering a fresh, entertaining, and highly engrossing story about a family the likes of which has never been seen in this medium before.

Definitely worth a look.

Jeremy Robinson: Pioneer

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 12:35:00 +0000

Jeremy Robinson hath a new book out—well, the book is forthcoming, with a release date set down for August 1, 2007. He intends to land atop Amazon.com’s bestseller list for August. To that end, he has launched an Amazon.com Bestseller Campaign, which, according to him, is a marketing blitz that seeks to “have everyone [. . .] buy [his] book from Amazon.com on August 1, 2007 (the book's official release date).” At the heart of this campaign is a series of low-budget viral videos that has the author so engrossed in a Breakneck Books title that he is impervious to the ill treatment he receives from those around him. The first four videos can be accessed here.

What interests me most is Mr. Robinson’s pioneering vision, as he has single-handedly opened up a new area of thought when it comes to POD book marketing. His efforts are obviously paying off, because his previous title, Raising the Past, which was reviewed on this site, sold 664 copies online this year alone (as of this writing), and 1,167 copies during a mere four months of its initial release last year, according to Ingram Book Company’s database (neither Jeremy Robinson nor Breakneck Books supplied this information). Now this only accounts for online sales. There’s no telling how much books he offloaded at book signings and other events, or via other avenues.

This astonishes me, to say the least, but only because it is so far above average for a POD title. Many traditionally published books perform in much the same way within the same time frame. And stellar fiction sales for many small publishers result in 7,000 to 12,000 copies sold for a single title, give or take—and I’m talking the life of the book. This was the case at the first small press I worked for. After all is said and done, Raising the Past will probably come close to hitting the conventional small press mark for stellar book sales—at least at the low end.

Robinson’s latest title, Antarktos Rising, may do even better than Raising the Past, as far as book sales go; and, seeing I have a digital ARC sitting here on my computer, I can say that the interior is the best I’ve seen for a POD title thus far, hands down. We’re talking excellence in font choice and size, elegant headers, exquisite section titles, correct spacing on leads, tabs, and ellipses points, beautiful watermarks, the whole kitten caboodle—and the cover isn't too shabby either. I expect to receive the hard copy ARC in two weeks, according to Robinson. Look for a review on this site prior to the release date. My impartial assessment should precede the fireworks.

I will say this: I am very excited for Mr. Robinson, and find that his efforts are important to the furtherance of the POD cause. And I report these facts to highlight some of those efforts and successes, and thus bring awareness to those who are not exactly in the loop.

Moments - A Review

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 18:40:00 +0000

Author: Ali Al Saeed
Publisher: Al Maseerah Publishing House/Lulu.com
ISBN: 978-9-9901-1213-9
Pages: 249

The stories in Moments—like the stories in another book of short stories I reviewed not too long ago—are not really stories, per se, but a collection of, well, moments . . . in the lives of the book’s central characters (and these characters vary, let me tell you). While the book’s characters lack the usual purpose and drive of conventional protagonists, what is delivered in lieu of this is raw emotion. We get to delve into the psyches of all of the narrators, and what we find there is at times gut wrenching, at times sad, and at times absurd.

In his query to me, Saeed wrote: “My stories are never about a place, or even an individual, they are about the states of mind we sometimes find ourselves in, and the moments that lead us to those states, how we react to them, accept them, deny them, refuse them.” I had forgotten these words when I began reading the book, but then something prompted me to return to his email, and when I reread these words, the form his stories took made all the more sense to me. (One story is even ethereal.)

What I like about the book is this: we never lose interest in some (and I should stress the word “some”) of the narrators, even though a plot is not in place, and we are not taken on a quest that starts out at point A and ends at point R. Revelations abound, however, and the thought processes of these characters act as windows into a unique set of human consciousnesses. I found one character of Arab descent, Sammy, to be nicely fleshed, mainly because of the way the author paints him—as a wounded outsider with a past. He takes center stage in Goodbye, Humanity, a story that is framed by a thin, wiry plot. Goodbye, Humanity, which is full of interesting social commentary, ends with what purports to be a shocking scene that follows a routine trip to the grocery store, but, despite a decent initial setup within the first few pages, and the seemingly spontaneous flow of events that play out, this particular ending still feels contrived.

Then there are times, such as in the very next story following . . . Humanity, that there seems to be too much spontaneity in the narrative, as nothing really relevant is said in many of the passages, especially the ones in a certain section that involve fruit. I am almost certain that Saeed wanted to capture a kind a immediacy of consciousness with his unique narrative style, intending to give us the drop on what characters were feeling and thinking then and there (or here and now, given one’s perspective). The experiment’s success, however, slipped out of his grasp like an anxious eel. There are also moments in the book, and particularly in the story of which I now speak, Empty Spaces, where the author employs a repetitious word style that recalls the great Gertrude Stein, but with far less effectiveness. What is very effective, however, is that story’s ending, despite the sluggish text and the almost vacuous details that precede it.

In short, a lot of the story elements contained in this book would be considered “filler” for more full-bodied stories with structured plots, purpose-driven characters, and arcs of some sort. In my view, there are too many peas on this book’s plate, and not enough steak and potatoes, if you get my meaning. Some of the stories are pure time-wasters, like the one that has a central character locked in conversation with a white ceiling—a ceiling, if you must know, that does our protagonist in at the end.

In a book like this, some of the author’s experimentation works, but a lot of it doesn’t, and that is to the reader’s detriment. Many of you might get much more out of this title than I did, and that certainly isn’t impossible.

POD Critic Sees Print

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 13:33:00 +0000

Well, despite those of you who disagree with my views on print-on-demand—and you’re entitled to—it looks like I’m steadily emerging as an authority on this side of the industry. Back in early April, I was approached by the editor of Writing Queensland, a monthly publication of the Queensland Writers Centre, said to be “the leading provider of specialized services to the writing community of Queensland.” (The magazine itself reaches some 2,200 writers.) This editor visited the blog and read some of my editorials on print-on-demand, which she says she found to be informative, and she later congratulated me on them. She then fired off an email to me asking whether I’d be interested in whipping up something on POD for one of their upcoming issues, as I was, in her view, “the perfect person for the job”—flattery will get you everywhere.

I happily agreed to this paying gig, and I pretty much told her that I would be “happy to further the cause of POD publishing, as well as aid both self-published authors and aspiring writers by writing an article for [her] magazine.” Long story short, I managed to whip something up, and, after the signing and exchange of contracts, I delivered the piece to them, and it appears as a feature article in their July issue. You can view the cover and my two-page contribution to the magazine by clicking on the following links:

WQ Cover

Page 10

Page 11

We are on the move, folks.
_____________

The Benefits and Pitfalls of Print-On-Demand*

By POD Critic

With all of the technological advancements made in the entertainment industry, it is not surprising that the publishing world has been graced with print-on-demand (POD), a relatively new, albeit imperfect approach to the production of books. Traditionally, the offset press was the sole and primary method of book production, and publishers would place orders with their printer of choice for short run or long run prints of a given title. (Consequently, this is still the preferred printing method for the vast majority of trade publishers in existence today.) Enter POD, a method of book production that allows a given title to be printed one book at a time from a digital file, rather than in multiples of a hundred or a thousand, which involves the expensive requisite warehousing of books.

It is evident that POD technology has leveled the field in book production, but this comes with unfavorable consequences. The average writer now has his or her pick of various subsidy presses that have been scrambling to fill the ever growing need of hungry authors looking to self-publish. What results is a glut of bad books flooding the market; books that are available mainly through online booksellers, such as Amazon.com and BN.com (Barnes & Noble’s official website). Shoddy production values usually accompany POD produced books, and this is often due to limited design and editorial input from employees at these subsidy presses, or the do-it-yourself efforts of self-published authors.

As a printing method, POD technology is being employed, somewhat as an aside, by various university presses and large publishing houses—the latter for backlist titles. The struggling writer, on the other hand, having exhausted all avenues leading to commercial publication—and who lacks the kind of resources these majors are afforded—has no choice, it seems, but to settle for the POD services offered by the subsidy presses; services that, more often than not, amount to inexperienced self-publishing efforts on the part of the author; hence the aforementioned glut.

Trade magazines and journals tend to shun POD books submitted to them for review, and chain bookstores seldom stock them. The stigma that surrounds most POD produced books is ostensibly warranted, especially when one considers the quality of many of these books, with their garish or unimaginative covers, sloppy interior layouts, and substandard writing. I have long said that some measure of regulation needs to be established, else the glut of bad books would continue unimpeded. To this end, I decided to launch a review blog concerned solely with POD produced books, wherein I dissect, via a thorough critique, the books submitted to me by various authors and micropresses. I also dispense—through the occasional editorial—a good deal of advice on writing, the POD industry, and publishing in general. The blog is called POD Critic, and can be accessed at: www.podbookreview.blogspot.com.

It has been my experience that not all POD books are low in quality; in fact, some deserve to be picked up by major publishers effective immediately. That said, going POD does not always guarantee recognition by large publishers. The ratio concerning POD books that eventually find their way into the hands of large trade publishers is quite low (Xlibris once accounted for 20 in 10,000 books) and this further highlights the associated stigma. Bearing this in mind, authors should not venture into the world of POD with the intention of publishing a book solely to gain recognition from large publishers—in the hope of landing a fat contract. The truth is: it doesn’t quite work that way.

Print-on-demand, as a technology, is great for keeping books in print, and large publishers have been wise to this very idea for some time now. But as a service, such as those offered by Xlibris, Lulu, BookSurge, and others, I believe its purpose is best served when the books produced are those of a particular type, such as personal journals that could use a more professional look, or travel and family photo books, cook books, manuals, and the like. When we get down to genre fare, however—sci-fi, literary, thriller, and so forth—that’s when things get a bit dicey.

Almost everyone knows that self-published fiction, despite the quality of the work, usually ends up on the worst-seller lists of this vast book world. Fiction titles produced via POD will stand even less of a chance of making it, so why would one even think to go there? Certainly not for the money, because there’s hardly any of that in print-on-demand, unless you’re a successful small press or major publisher—and even then we’re sometimes talking pennies on the dollar. So is it for the sake of fame? No way. Recognition is the last thing you’ll get going POD. The truth is, many writers go POD simply because they want to see their work in print—many are eager to, in fact—and realizing that all other avenues are closed to them regarding this dream, print-on-demand is usually the most simple and cost-effective alternative.

If you are truly desirous to see your work in print, and are not concerned with a huge monetary return on your initial investment (made on behalf of your literary endeavor), and if fame is not on your agenda, then you’re the perfect candidate for this revolutionary technology. In addition, one should seek to reach a niche audience, rather than a large mainstream one. Since your books won’t be stocked by the national chains, reaching a large audience will be virtually impossible anyway, and even publishers at POD micropresses understand this.

The Internet should also be your main focus, and if you’re game, target your local community as well. But a niche audience is the ticket. You should target your material to those who are your—and I use the term loosely—“guaranteed market.” You have to fill an area where a demand for your product exists. Is that area Vampire fiction? Not likely, because there’s plenty of that being offered by the large trade presses out there. If you want to self-publish Vampire fiction using POD, you’ll be doing so for your own pleasure, and that of maybe fifty other people, if you’re lucky. But to fill a real demand would be to offer a book that is rare, and will yield little to no competition from similar titles.

Nonfiction is usually a good fit for POD, especially when a title targets a good niche market. But all that aside, if you truly have a love for writing, and literature on a whole, and are convinced that you can deliver a good product to the public, be it fiction or nonfiction—I’m talking quality writing, editing, and book design—and you’re not delusional about making a success of it, by all means, go POD. At the end of the day, everyone deserves a moment in the sun. There’s no better way to achieve this than to have your book lauded by an established POD reviewer and purchased by complete strangers who celebrate your efforts with a few choice remarks on your Amazon Product Overview page. I have witnessed firsthand the joy that writers derive from these two things; and the sense of achievement on their part is, in a word, priceless. There is almost no greater benefit in going POD than this.
_____________

*This article may not be cited or republished electronically or in print without permission from the author.

Professional Book Layout

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 14:50:00 +0000

A big thank you to everyone who responded to the recent post with a positive attitude. Over a third of the submissions in the current queue will now be read from hard copy books, which will certainly help matters. I think this is a good change for the blog, and it will certainly keep things moving at a steady pace. The submission guidelines have been updated to reflect the inclusion—and preference—of hard copy books.
_____________

Professional Book Layout

Now to the meat of this post. I have stressed the importance of the look of a book’s interior in the past, but I have to reiterate here for those who missed it. There is nothing worse than a sloppy, unprofessional interior book layout. NOTHING. Oh, “sloppy editing is worse” you say? Believe me, the layout is the first thing that will give away the quality of your book, and the editing, if it is substandard, will only be the next thing in line (perhaps behind the writing, if that proves to be bad also). A decent cover is usually easy to slap together, if you limit the graphics, license an attractive image, and keep the text neat and elegant, or appropriately stylish, depending on the overall design aspect.

A few self-published authors have submitted books to me that had covers that were designed by them—decent looking covers at that—but the interiors of each of these books had certain deficiencies, owing to the authors’ inexperience in this area. Of note, there were too many spaces between the words of many of the lines, because text wrapping breaks weren’t applied (see image below), or else tabs were off, and ellipses points were spaced incorrectly or placed inappropriately (they should be spaced like . . . that, and not like… that). Sometimes the font was poorly chosen or oversized to artificially enlarge the page count (for shame).

I will, in future, address any new problems that arise in layout and interior design within a given review, if that problem hasn’t been covered already (I do hate to repeat myself, even though I tend to do so at times). The same goes for any editorial or writing errors that will eventually crop up. I’ll try to address the ones that haven’t been belabored already.

My advice on an interior layout is always: hire a professional. They're usually cheap. Book covers can fly if they’re done properly enough, but interior layouts should be handled by professionals, as a reader will spend more time in the book’s interior, going line by line through your story. Their reading experience should be a smooth one, unimpeded by niggling design flaws. There are certain publishing standards that should be met when laying out a book, and if you want people to take you seriously, you will, as I like to say, give them a few good reasons to.

Hard Copy Submissions

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 02:15:00 +0000

I’m considering an alteration in the submission guidelines that would allow for hard copy submissions to be sent to an address I would supply via email to anyone willing to pony up the dough for snail mail deliveries of their books. This would probably speed up my reading of POD books, because getting to the computer is proving more and more difficult with my current schedule. With a hard copy book in my hand I could read pretty much anywhere, and as often as possible. I have received a couple of books from authors this way and I have to say: I actually prefer it.

I know that the savings writers and publishers experience by sending PDF files is a welcome one, but that will have to be curtailed as much as possible in the future. This is standard procedure on the other side of this industry anyway, and I can see why. Though I’m almost always on the computer when it comes to work, I find that I’m not spending as much time at it reading POD books, because my workload has increased over the past few weeks (and much of my free time at home is set aside for family). Therefore, a hard copy book makes all the sense in the world at this point.

I’ll keep going through the current queue of PDFs and MS Word files as is, unless some of you are willing to resubmit a hard copy book that was sent via email already. None of you are obligated to, of course, but it would smooth things out considerably. The sooner I get through much of the books in the current queue (or backlog), the sooner I can reopen submissions to other writers and publishers.

Well, these are my thoughts on this subject. I welcome any and all feedback from as many of you as are willing to grace me with your comments.

The Truth, It Lies - A Review

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 12:30:00 +0000

Author: Eoin Hennigan
Publisher: Lulu.com
ISBN: 978-1-8472-8540-9
Pages: 252

The Truth, It Lies is a curious thing: it is a PI novel with no PI, and therein lies the first problem. It has the tone of a PI novel, as well as the basic structure and overall intentions of one, but the ultimate lack of an actual PI (we instead get a desperate lawyer who stumbles around completely out of his element) is immediately disappointing. This is one of those experimental books that acts as a case in point for one or two editorials I’ve written of late. While experimentation is good, bucking an established system isn’t always good.

For one thing, the author inexpertly utilizes more than one grammatical person (third and first) to tell his story, and this makes a reader feel like he or she is reading two separate works. If your narrative voice starts out omniscient and ends up inside the mind of a single character, the author, more often than not, will come across as an inexperienced writer, wielding the reins of a book that wasn’t well thought out to begin with. After all, who is actually telling the story here?

Also, both the third- and first-person narratives are plagued with too much “tell” and not enough “show”—further evidence of the author’s inexperience. I actually found myself growing tired of the narration at certain points, as the lack of action at these points didn’t quite compel me to keep up with the story itself. It rather bogs things down. Your story should feel like it’s happening NOW, so that a reader feels like they’re getting fresh news; better yet, they should feel like they’re a part of that news. Things should be happening to and around your main character, and that character shouldn’t be wasted recounting past conversations and events.

Examples of “telling” rather than “showing” follow below (taken from pages 82 and 83):

Monk was about to leave the studio when Bloom came to him with yet another ‘request’. He wanted Monk to take the film reels home for safe keeping. Bloom told him that he suspected someone might take them, and that he’d feel better if they were off the premises over the weekend. Monk disagreed and expressed unease at the notion. He reminded Bloom that it was against studio protocol. He asked the director why he didn’t take them with him to his own house, but Bloom brushed this off, saying he didn’t have his car that day. It worried Monk that Bloom was adamant that the reels had to be taken off site immediately.

The two men argued about it for some time before Monk relented. His decision to give in to the director’s whim was primarily to get some peace. Monk said he’d take them on condition that he’d be returning them in 48 hours. Monk told Bloom he could take that time to sort out whatever was on his mind. But then Bloom’s next request worried Monk even more: he was asked not to tell anyone that he had the reels of film or where they were.

Now here Monk was, standing on the pier, running these events through his mind, trying to make sense of this irrational man’s actions. He had no idea what Michael Bloom was up to and he didn’t want to know either. With his closest friend at the studio, Morgan, dead he didn’t think there was anyone else he trusted enough to confide in about Bloom’s behavior.

What’s more, I didn’t really get a ’50s vibe when reading this book; the language fails to evoke the time period the author has decided to set his story in.

And aside from the usual spelling errors and inverted words, there is also poor phrasing in this book:

He felt the trip to the cinema had achieved nothing except pile on more unnecessary paperwork.

My advice to authors having trouble with sentence construction is to take the bare bones of your thought and break it down to its smallest component. In this case, considering the above passage, breaking this down to its bare bones would allow even the most inexperienced writer to note awkward phrasing here. Reword the sentence to drive home your point in the simplest form possible: “All that the trip to the cinema achieved was pile on more unnecessary paperwork”? Does this sound right? Of course not, and the simplest fix to the problem would be to eliminate and replace the problem word or words. In this case, the problem is caused by the phrasal verb “pile on.” One could also question the presence of the adjective “achieved.”

Now I don’t like to spoon-feed writers with suggestions when it comes to rewording sentences, because that would result in a change in voice, and my job as an editor is to leave an author’s work without as many kinks as it started out with (no editor can remove every single kink), while retaining the author’s voice and vision.

With more books under his belt, I’m sure Eoin Hennigan will begin to show vast improvements in the areas touched on in this review. (And there will be more books, as this is the first in a planned trilogy.)

The Potential of Literary Novels

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:30:00 +0000

Some have said that literary novels don’t sell as they once did, and that is certainly true. But to say that they don’t sell at all, and one shouldn’t waste time attempting to write them (except for a sense of personal achievement or gratification) I would have to counter that. A recent USA Today list of 150 best sellers, despite the reality that surrounds literary works, has Khaled Hosseini’s sophomore effort, A Thousands Splendid Suns, at the top of the list.

While his debut novel, The Kite Runner, offered millions of readers a view into what life is really like in Afghanistan, A Thousand Splendid Suns—a multigenerational novel that may eventually be classed as literature—seeks to plumb even greater depths, recounting three decades of Afghan history, from the communist revolution to the Soviet invasion and the subsequent U.S.-led war against the Taliban—this through the eyes of two Afghan women.

Hosseini’s Kite Runner has even received the Hollywood treatment, as the book has since been adapted for the screen and actually wrapped production in December 2006—principal photography, as I hear it, was shot in China, and the film is now in post-production and may hit theaters by November 2007. Coincidentally, Hosseini’s Kite Runner landed at number 15 on the USA Today list, no doubt a result of the surge in interest in his latest effort.

This just goes to show that there is still great potential for the success of literary novels in the book world; readers still clamor for them, and reviewers and booksellers still salivate over them. Like all other genres, however, not every single book that can be classed as literary will be received in the same way, despite the quality of the work. The success of any book will depend of various factors: subject matter, timing, current tastes, and so many other things. It is up to the writer to write his or her story without worrying about these things, however, because no one can say for sure what will eventually become a best seller or not.

Busy, Busy, Busy

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 19:00:00 +0000

Well, first thing’s first. I was supposed to post a review for a POD title today, but due to certain elements contained in that book, I was unable to complete the reading, as I felt the book, on a whole, wasn’t in keeping with my submission guidelines; therefore, I couldn’t write a review for it. The author was apprized and I have since moved on.

That said, while I’m currently reading the next book in my queue, and working a demanding day job, I’ve just received a couple of emails from an acquaintance of mine, an associate producer of two yet-to-be-made films (one of them a big budget project). I have both screenplays on my computer and have yet to read them. This acquaintance of mine is putting the pressure on me to deliver my assessment of both scripts. We had a wonderful conversation about filmmaking while boating with our wives one weekend, and he got the bright idea that it would be ideal if I could give him some feedback on the scripts he had recently optioned.

I told him that I had helped to beef up and improve certain stories in the past, and he sensed, from the conversation, that I could spot weak areas of the scripts and suggest certain changes for his writers, which would improve the screenplays. Long story short, if this works out, he wants to work with me on a regular basis (for which I would be paid, of course), since we seem to have a good rapport. But I’m not getting any hopes up, as this isn’t something I’m pining after. If it happens, it happens, but I relate it only to let everyone know just how busy I’ve been lately.

Oh, and the book I’m currently reading is Eoin Hennigan’s The Truth, It Lies.

Dedication to the Writing Life

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 23:20:00 +0000

I have a great deal of respect for anyone who sits down to write a novel and actually completes one, whether the time it takes them to do so amounts to a few weeks, months, or (incredibly) years. I know how daunting it can be—hey, editing the darn things is a chore I deign to speak of at times (though I’ve been editing mostly non-fiction for some time now). And when I say I have respect for someone who completes a novel, I don’t mean a good novel. I have respect for people, in general, who see things through to the end; people who aren’t quitters, despite the odds against them—and concerning literature, those odds could come in the form of a lack of literary skills, but don’t let that stop you; in fact, don’t let anything stop you.

One writer I know of stopped emailing me on a daily basis due to his desire to concentrate on finishing a trilogy; a fellow POD book reviewer recently called it quits as far as blogging goes because his writing career started taking off, and the time he needs to dedicate to the writing life suddenly took precedence; ditto another writer, Sonya Bateman, who I mentioned on this blog not too long ago—she landed a literary agent recently—well, she quit blogging for the same reason. This type of dedication has to be applauded; and it goes to show that perseverance does indeed pay off after a while—in some cases anyway.

If you ever want to become good at what you do, giving it up or neglecting to set aside a good amount of time to concentrate on that endeavor in question won’t help. What’s more, you have to write a few bad books before you can write a good one, but just because POD technology is where it is at the moment—convenient and affordable though it is—doesn’t mean you have to publish your first two attempts, which, for most writers, end up being misses rather than hits. Time, study, and practice will eventually pay off, however, and you should begin to show improvements in various areas, but you first have to recognize your weaknesses in order to correct them. Writers who are either blind, or simply close their eyes, when it comes to the areas in which they are particularly weak—or who refuse to accept criticism regarding their weaknesses—will suffer for it in the end. This I don’t respect.

So, while I might slam your book for the sake of bad writing, don’t think I’m slamming you for having written it. I admire your dedication, and I encourage you to persevere until you begin to show improvement. And once you’ve improved to the point of actually seeming to know what you’re doing, then may all the success in the world fall into your lap, because you’ve shown what you are made of, and you deserve something for your hard work. These are the kinds of people whose work will garner praise, and a few of them have had their books reviewed right here on this blog.

Films I took in This Weekend

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 12:30:00 +0000

The Painted Veil (Excellent)

For what it’s worth, I wish the film could live up to my designation of it, that being: “instant classic.” I found the film to be a rich and rewarding experience, in that it demonstrated, and quite efficiently, redemptive love and forgiveness—and this after extreme betrayal was effected within the bonds of marriage. Without giving too much of the plot away (for those who haven’t read the novel by W. Somerset Maugham) the film opens in 1920s China, in a rural province—the movie was filmed on location, thanks to the efforts of the filmmakers, who took it upon themselves to jump through various hoops to obtain all of the permits necessary to film in the country (a feat not achieved for an American-funded film in many years, as far as I know). A seemingly unhappy couple fills the first few frames, and we immediately get their back-story.

Dr. Walter Fane (Edward Norton) is enamored with Kitty (Naomi Watts), the daughter of an affluent family, by all appearances, who he meets at a gala. Not much time passes before he asks the young beauty to marry him and return with him to Shanghai, where he holds a civil position as a scientist. Kitty is taken aback by his sudden boldness and is initially reluctant, until she overhears a telephone conversation her mother has with a friend, wherein she says—regarding Kitty’s marriage prospects—“Oh, I gave up on Kitty long ago.” To escape the clutches of her overbearing mother, Kitty sets off to Shanghai with her new hubby, but as blissful as the marriage seems in the beginning, things immediately go wrong.

For reasons I will not divulge, the naïve Kitty is forced to travel with her husband to a remote region of China, where he has decided to volunteer his services in the fight against a cholera outbreak, as the disease has wreaked havoc and devastation on this part of the country. It is here that the film explores the deepest aspects of the two lead characters, and it is here that the healing process begins. We learn, along with the unhappy couple, that they were expecting things of each other that neither of them possessed in the first place; and each desired something in the other that that person couldn’t supply. But eventually, the two learn to accept each other for who they are; and the connection between them soon becomes solid, and unmistakable. I should say that there is one crucial plot point—which carries us into the Third Act—that will conveniently upset the calm and keep us riveted until the final moments play out.

The performances are brilliant and highly believable, but this is more of an art house film than anything, so the average moviegoer will be sorely disappointed if he or she is expecting otherwise. The cinematography is breathtaking, and exquisite views of actual mainland China, with its distinctive misty mountain ranges, fill the background of many establishing shots. The set designers decided on various muted earth tones for many of the interior settings, and this causes the viewer to focus on the players moving about in the foreground, but whether this is in keeping with the period or not, I do not know. What I can say is that it works. I only mention this because many films that are set in the Orient tend to be extremely colorful, and this film is not, which is refreshing, as the subject matter and themes do not call for it.

Don’t Let All the Pretty Days Get By - A Review

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Thu, 31 May 2007 22:05:00 +0000

Author: Bruce Hoppe
Publisher: Back-To-One Books
ISBN: 978-0-9777-6110-4
Pages: 216

Having decided to put the brakes on a promising career in L.A., Teddy Gibbs returns to her family’s New Mexico ranch to care for her ailing mother, but she soon discovers that her mother’s health isn’t her only concern. The book opens with a vivid scene that has a few members of the New Mexico chapter of COHAB (Clothing Optional Hot Air Ballooning) pulling an unscheduled balloon landing on her family’s horse pasture, and the balloon’s passengers emerge in the buff, to Teddy’s disdain. This awkward moment not only sets the book’s tone, it also provides us with a taste of the author’s expert hand, as he writes with a gentle, lyrical style that is both fitting and engrossing.

Things quickly come to a head, and Teddy, trying her hand at local politics, eventually challenges a proposed amendment that stands to benefit the Balloon Lollapalooza Committee—and, “If passed, the revision would tweak an obscure state law regulating hot air balloon flights. A clause would be added reducing the liability for damages resulting from balloon landings made on private property.” Teddy is also ready to act as amateur defense counsel in a pending criminal suit brought on by the nudist balloonists, which will determine the fate of the Gibbs’ two part-time ranch hands, nicknamed Song and Dance—then there is the threat of a possible civil suit that may eventually decide the fate of the family’s ranch altogether.

A lot happens in the book, and over the course of it, we, like the central character herself, are taken through the exquisite New West, with its “browning countryside” and “[t]he rolling swales of pale short-grass” that give “way to the mesa cliffs in the distance, their rusty iron-laden rock ledges carved in relief by the low-angled rays of morning sun.” We are given a tour of this vast landscape, where politicos with shady ambitions run amuck, and Indian gaming casinos take center stage. We are greeted with colorful characters, and we hear tell of others, like the scientist who had “been testing the use of electro magnetic force fields to power medical equipment at a teaching hospital when patients mysteriously began levitating above the examination table during MRI scans.” Yes, the book, on a whole, makes for a delightful and interesting reading experience.

Hoppe’s descriptions are cinematic; his dialogue, etched from life, as characters talk like real people, their speech patterns, vernaculars, and argots delivered with surprising authenticity. And though the book is slow going at the outset, Hoppe picks up the pace before long, successfully blending action, humor, political rhetoric, and unique insights. He delivers a Neo-Western with aplomb, affording his readers a ringside seat at a thrilling prize fight that pits a gaming magnate against a brave little alliance of anarchistic locals bent on exposing political subterfuge and restoring a semblance of order to their community.

Reciprocation and The Three-Day-A-Week Rule

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Tue, 29 May 2007 13:50:00 +0000

Well, the long weekend is over, and for most of us it is back to work, back to the grind. I have a few big projects on my plate that I must attend to, as a deadline is looming, so my attention will be divided for the most part—that, unfortunately, means less time on the blog. The next review will be posted soon enough, and more editorials will pour forth when they formulate in my head, but the posts will come three days a week now, instead of five (we’re aiming for Monday, Wednesday, and Friday), and if multiple posts occur on any of these days, then so be it, but the three-day-a-week rule will be enforced, if I can help it.

I appreciate all those who are regulars on this blog; your frequent visits and comments keep me going. I thrive on reciprocal action—that includes feedback by way of comments from visitors to the site. If the interaction bar begins to slide toward zero, I will, in effect, begin a steady slide in the same direction where my interest is concerned. Editing is already a thankless job, but at least it pays; blogging, on the other hand, should be fun, and rewarding. The gratitude expressed by some of you writers and readers out there has meant a lot to me, and that is better than monetary payment as far as I’m concerned.

The reciprocation I’m referring to, however, isn’t limited to expressed gratitude, nor is it demanded. You can shake your fist at me for giving you an unfavorable review (but do get over it); or you can disagree with any or all points of a given post until you’re blue in the face—we’re only human, and entitled to our own opinions. But reciprocation, however it comes, is welcome here. This by no means implies that you have to force a response to a given post; if you have nothing to say, don’t say anything—I prefer silence to drivel, as much as you prefer engaging and stimulating posts to fodder.

Literary Voices

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Wed, 23 May 2007 16:30:00 +0000

I know many of you out there have your favorites when it comes to established authors. I have my own, of course. One thing is certain though, of the many beloved authors out there, quite a few of them have garnered the large followings they currently enjoy because of their exceptional skill at delivering tales, whether fictional or not. If you can’t deliver a good story, your career is pretty much cooked (even some authors who can deliver the goods have a hard time catching on, for varying reasons).

One thing an author needs to establish him or herself in the literary arena, and thus attract a following, is a unique voice, and a consistent one if he or she can manage it. Now there have been many articles and such written on this subject—the “How to Find Your Literary Voice” items—which I’m sure you can Google if you’re game, but I won’t be getting into that sort of thing on this blog, as this, as I’ve said in times past, is not a workshop.

At any rate, any good and dedicated author will eventually, by way of accident or design, acquire a voice, a literary style that is unique to him or her, and by which that author can be readily identified by their current flock of readers. That voice will also be the signature of that author—his or her distinctive characteristic or mark, if you will—which a reader will come to expect. For instance, after reading one Raymond Chandler book, realizing that his was a voice unique to him—a voice that I found refreshing and appealing—I didn’t bother to read the blurbs or reviews of his books anymore, but bought them on spec, partly knowing what I was in for based solely on the man’s voice. The same goes for Kerouac, Fitzgerald, Hammett, and even many contemporaries.

The reclusive J. D. Salinger, though he published one book and too few short stories and novellas, displayed a unique and timeless voice himself. With Salinger in mind, the one thing that has to be associated with your voice is theme. Recurring themes must accompany your tales; themes that readers will view as little threads running through all your works, as we will also come to expect these things. Chandler had them, Kerouac had them, Hammett had them, and Salinger certainly had them. These themes can involve bravery, friendship, betrayal, redemption, or anything you desire, or can identify with, so long as it is executed well. A theme is best delivered when it is something you strongly identify with, or else believe in (again, write what you know).

I know that some of you writers out there like to experiment, and some of you will even attempt to write a new unexplored work each time you publish, but bear this in mind: you will attract a different set of readers with each of those works. Writing with a distinctive voice, however, and offering recurring themes in your various works will not cause you to alienate your current fan base. If readers really respond to your writing in one novel, why abandon them by jettisoning everything that made that book work? If you must experiment, however, do so under a pen name, or names, like every wise writer. But continue writing your signature material under one name. That way everyone wins.

Films I took in This Weekend

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Mon, 21 May 2007 12:30:00 +0000

Birth (Good)

After a boy sneaks into a birthday party held in a ritzy Manhattan duplex, he convinces a pretty woman named Anna to step aside for a private conversation. The boy tells Anna that he is Sean, implying that this is not only in the name he bears, but also in the sense that he is in fact her dead husband come back to life. This bizarre revelation is explored through the duration of the film.

An experiment in what some would consider “the ridiculous,” Birth forces one to suspend disbelief early on, and when the moviegoer finally fails to keep his or her disbelief fully suspended, which he or she will fail to do, eventually, and inevitably—and this before the first act is even over—the only thing that will maintain interest in the film is plain ol’ curiosity—in this case, to see where the film will go, and what will become of the characters. This is a major credit to the filmmakers, especially director Jonathan Glazer, whose eye toward atmosphere and pacing is particularly keen. In lesser hands the film would have fallen apart, but Glazer, despite the movie’s farfetched premise, manages to hold our interest by delivering on suspense. Each of his scenes moves the story marginally closer to what we long for: to learn whether the 10-year-old boy, named Sean, is truly the Sean who was married to Anna (Nicole Kidman) before dying during a routine jog in Central Park 10 years earlier; and, if it is him, what will become of the relationship between him and Anna?

We’re essentially talking about reincarnation here. Sean certainly gives us enough to go on, revealing intimate knowledge of past experiences only the real Sean could know, but when the film decides to take a sharp turn towards the end, everything that led up to “the truth” we’d decided to embrace is suddenly thrown into confusion, allowing our doubt to resurface—as well as Anna’s.

Beyond this, there are moments in the film that will cause some audience members to literally cringe, given the awkward pairing of a boy and a woman, and the adult situations they are placed in (situations that are handled tastefully, I might add). For instance, there is a scene in the film that has the supposedly reincarnated Sean (Cameron Bright) stripping down to his briefs in Anna’s bathroom, while Anna is waiting in her bathtub, watching him. Sean eventually climbs in, and the tense moment of silence between them reverberates well beyond the screen.

There is another scene prior to the one above that places the pair in what appears to be a café, and they hold an interesting discussion over two cups of ice cream. “A man has to support his wife,” Anna says. “He has to feed her, defend her, take care of her. How’re you gonna feed me, defend me . . . take care of me? How’re you gonna do that?” Without hesitating, Sean replies: “I’ll get a job.” And after a long pause, Anna asks: “How’re you gonna fulfill my needs?” Sean swallows, and, without returning her gaze, he says, “I know what you’re talking about.” Anna continues: “You ready for them?” When Sean offers no response, Anna continues: “You ever made love to a girl?” At this, he finally sets eyes on her, and licking his spoon for the umpteenth time, he says, in all seriousness, “You’d be the first.”

This awkward relationship, and the brilliant performances by Kidman and Bright that give rise to it, is what makes the film work for the most part. And it is also why I would recommend that you give the movie a try, if your sensibilities will allow you to stomach a few demanding scenes.

View the trailer now.

The Good Earth by Pearl S. Buck

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Fri, 18 May 2007 16:05:00 +0000

Author: Pearl S. Buck
Publisher: Washington Square Press
ISBN: 978-0-7432-7293-3
Pages: 368

With the POD Critic blog going, along with the added demands of work—not to mention the wonderful time I spend with my family—I haven’t been able to read very many traditionally published books of late. The few I do read have to be rather spectacular then to absorb the little time I can spare to devote to them. One of those books, which was mentioned somewhere on this blog—albeit in passing—is The Good Earth, by Pearl S. Buck (the first in a spectacular trilogy). The book affected me in ways that I will not go into on this blog, though my wife and I have had protracted discussions surrounding the book’s theme and overall message.

Buck wrote with a complex simplicity, in that her prose was undemanding to the reader, yet it conveyed a wealth of insight and was concerned with various spheres of knowledge. The book delves into business, traditional mores, Chinese philosophy; it explores life in pre-revolutionary China and successfully exposes the culture to the Western mind, eschewing the familiar stereotypes and misconceptions of the day, which Hollywood had already made prevalent. I cannot express my love and appreciation for this book in words, and how it opened up my eyes to things I was not previously aware of. To read it is to experience the magnum opus of a writer working at the insurmountable height of her creativity—and this was among the first of her many works.

To fully experience the novel, one would have to read it with purpose, for the author wrote it thus. There is wisdom contained in the book that will resonate with the right reader, and that reader will appreciate every word, every phrase, and each disclosure—those that are concerned with the plot, as well as those that are concerned with the broader scope of pre-revolutionary China and its colorful, wonderful people.

The language of the book should be familiar to many, as it is surprisingly biblical. Parts of the prose read like they were culled from the King James Bible itself. Note the following, taken from the first paragraph of Chapter 5:

The New Year approached and in every house in the village there were preparations. Wang Lung went into the town to the candlemaker's shop and he bought squares of red paper on which were brushed in gilt ink the letter for happiness and some with the letter for riches, and these squares he pasted upon his farm utensils to bring him luck in the new year. Upon his plow and upon the ox's yoke and upon the two buckets in which he carried his fertilizer and his water, upon each of these things he pasted a square. And then upon the doors of his house he pasted long strips of red paper brushed with mottoes of good luck, and over his doorway he pasted a fringe of red paper cunningly cut into a flower pattern and very finely cut. And he bought red paper to make new dresses for the gods, and this the old man did cleverly enough for his old shaking hands, and Wang Lung took them and put them upon the two small gods in the temple to the earth and he burned a little incense before them for the sake of the New Year. And for his house he bought also two red candles to burn on the eve of the year upon the table under the picture of a god, which was pasted on the wall of the middle room above where the table stood.

Now consider the following, taken from Haggai Chapter 1:

¹⁰Therefore the heaven over you is stayed from dew, and the earth is stayed from her fruit. ¹¹And I called for a drought upon the land, and upon the mountains, and upon the corn, and upon the new wine, and upon the oil, and upon that which the ground bringeth forth, and upon men, and upon cattle, and upon all the labour of the hands.

The book also explores something that every culture experiences: the sharp divide between rich and poor, and this it does from both sides of that spectrum, through the eyes of the same man at that, Wang Lung—who we meet as a peasant farmer on his “marriage day.” Though the story is told mainly from Wang Lung’s perspective, we do get a little bit of the omniscient voice, as we are privy to everything each character is thinking. The book also gives us some of the greatest character arcs I have every witnessed; and the plot contains elements that result in a full-circle sweep, especially as concerns the destiny of the great House of Hwang. (You’ll notice that I’m giving very little away here, as I intend to guard the intricacies of the plot with care.)

The characters and situations detailed in the book are unforgettable; the imagery is among the richest and most vivid I have ever experienced in literature; and the language is altogether brilliant. The book was also awarded the Pulitzer Prize for the Novel in 1932; but that, as far as I’m concerned, is no great surprise.

Ciao! Miami - A Review

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Thu, 17 May 2007 17:15:00 +0000

Author: Fawzy Zablah
Publisher: Little Havana Press/Lulu.com
ISBN: 978-1-8472-8732-8
Pages: 98

Ciao! Miami is many things, but what it is not is a winning collection of short stories. The author attempts to draw his characters from life, particularly, life in the seedy sections of Miami, Florida. By the author’s own account, the book is “[a]n uncompromising look at lower class Miami in the late 90s,” and in this he or she succeeds, as all Fawzy Zablah affords us is “a look,” and nothing more. We are presented with mere situations, where characters engage each other in everyday dialogue—and we’re talking drug addicts, dealers, whores, gang bangers, transsexuals, you name it—but these situations are not full-blown stories, which would involve some measure of plotting.

After completing some of the stories, I came away empty, having gained nothing by reading them, as a few are absolutely vapid. The characters are true to life perhaps, in the sense that they are not fluffed to fit a literary paradigm, but they are also inevitably one-dimensional, and they experience no real arcs. Though the type of characters featured in this book haven’t seen much light of day in the larger literary world, Fawzy Zablah could have presented us with more in the way of story; more layers, more dimensions, just . . . more!

There is a story in the book that is a wonderful case in point. It is called Juanito Valenzuela’s Crack Rocks, and it is all of four pages long. The story recounts the first-time experience of a young man experimenting with crack. It starts out with him and a crack whore sitting on a blue couch in a studio in Coral Gables, and the two are gabbing about crack and other mundane issues, and meanwhile, expletives are flying around like so many cave-roosting bats. Eventually, more friends show up, and the five of them sit in a circle while passing around a crack pipe. When the pipe gets to the first-timer, he is instructed on how to smoke it—like “a regular bong” in this case. Three hours into the crackfest, the group is out of it, all of them laid out on the floor with music blaring in the background, “loud and incoherent” we are told. A little gibberish ensues before a character launches into a discussion on another mutual acquaintance, Juanito Valenzuela, of the story’s title. We are told about the beating he received from a few cops, and a rumor that suggests he lost an eye in the ordeal. But before all is said and done, quite frankly, nothing of any relevance is really said or done. And that is the problem with a lot of these stories.

Beyond this, there are a few issues with the typesetting, and one issue with the misuse of a certain punctuation mark. On page 5 of the book, a character says: “It’s too; I don’t know. It’s just a little too much for tonight.” The break in speech in the first sentence is punctuated by a semi-colon. In lieu of this, the sentence should have been broken by ellipsis points, like this: “It’s too . . . I don’t know.” I’m glad this opportunity presented itself here, because I’ve been meaning to address this issue ever since I read and reviewed James Somers’s The Chronicles of Soone: Heir to the King. Semicolons should never be used in dialogue, unless the person the dialogue is streaming from is a university professor, or a scholar. In other words, unless your character speaks like a scholarly journal article, or other formal piece, you can punctuate dialogue with less formal punctuation marks. In fact, this is strongly advised.

Other common errors come in the form of the following, which need no commentary:

The 2007 Lulu Blooker Prize

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Tue, 15 May 2007 18:25:00 +0000

Now, I had no idea what a “blook” was before I became aware of this prize. It appears that a blook is a book based on a blog. Lulu has organized an award system around this new literary form (the first of its kind, in actuality), and according to them, “The prize will reward the best blooks in three categories: Fiction, Non-Fiction and Comic-Blooks (based on web-comics), but with one overall winner. It is open to blooks published anywhere by anyone, provided they are in English.” I found this interesting; one doesn’t even have to publish through Lulu to enter the contest—as a side note, the first place winner receives $10,000 in prize money.

I was also not aware that Andrew Losowsky’s book, The Doorbells of Florence—which received the POD Critic Special Selection seal for excellence—was shortlisted for the blooker prize before Mr. Losowsky informed me of this following his review. In an email to me, Mr. Losowsky wrote: “The book is up for the Blooker Prize, announced on Monday. I only hope the judges agree with your assessment!” He was referring to the assessments in the actual review, and my response to him was: “If they don't agree, then the competition had better be fierce, otherwise somebody is greasing somebody’s palm.” Well, it turns out that the panel of judges did agree with my overall assessment, because the book won the blooker prize for fiction, which put $2,500 extra bucks in Mr. Losowsky’s pocket. That makes for a successful POD book if you ask me.

Congratulations are in order!

*Raises champagne glass*

Here’s to more success.

Films I Took in This Weekend

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Mon, 14 May 2007 12:39:00 +0000

Since I’ve opened up a discussion on films recently (a big love of mine), I’ve decided to add a recurring theme to the POD Critic posts. It will be called Films I Took in This Weekend. Self explanatory, yeah? In these recurring posts, which won’t necessarily come every week, I’ll be giving my brief assessment of whatever films I happened to catch over the weekend. Since films involve storytelling, and you all are storytellers, I figured it wouldn’t hurt. If anything, it will spark discussion, or it will inspire. But you will not be bored—I hope! Anyway, feel free to chime in with your further thoughts on these films, or comment on the films you took in this weekend. The first of my assessments follow below:

Dreamgirls (Fair)

I happened to catch Dreamgirls on DVD, as I do not go to the movies, and I absolutely hated the film! But let me explain. The film was supposed to be a period drama or musical of some sort (it was based on a play), but instead of evoking the ’60s with its musical renditions, the female trio that forms the movie’s singing group sounds more like a recent R&B act. This shatters any nostalgia one can hope to have, and it makes the movie seem unbelievable in spots. The only song that sounds remotely ’60s-era is the one sung by James “Thunder” Early (Eddie Murphy), “Steppin’ to the Bad Side.”

Beyond that, the movie goes all over the place, not really establishing a solid, focused storyline. The film is loosely based on The Supremes, but since it isn’t a full-blown biopic, in the vein of Ray or Walk the Line, the film heads out in every direction it can without settling on a good one. The performances are okay, if you can stomach the awkward scenes where dialogue is sung—beginning about a third of the way in—and I say awkward because Dreamgirls, unlike Chicago, or any popular film based on a musical, does not start out like a musical at all, but it eventually ends up being one (we can probably blame that on the play it is borrowed from).

Eddie Murphy, though in rare form, couldn’t save this film, and Jamie Foxx is wasted here—he even seems bored with the role. In short, Dreamgirls goes down like hard medicine; the really nasty tasting stuff that leaves your face all twisted in disgust long after you’ve swallowed and chased it down with a spoon full of sugar.

.45 (Poor)

My wife and I watched all of twelve or so seconds of this film before we ejected it. The film actually isn’t even worth mentioning, but I’m trying to include everything I even attempted to get through this weekend.

Smokin’ Aces (Good)

Interesting and stylized film with an original plot and a few good characters; but it dies the death because of a really forced and incredulous ending—not that the film itself was any more believable, but at least it was palatable. The resolution killed this one for me so I won’t even labor over the plot. See it if you want, don’t see it . . . who cares?

Notes on a Scandal (Excellent)

The movie explores the secret world of illicit student/teacher amours that have gained popularity in America in recent years. But this is told from a UK perspective. Cate Blanchett plays a teacher who begins a dalliance that eventually wins her a full-blown underage paramour, and the relationship escalates to the point of white hot fervor, until recklessness exposes it to the eyes of another teacher, played by Dame Judi Dench. The plot unfolds with expert cadence, with revelations and complications coming at appropriate intervals, but it is the subplot that reveals Dench as the film’s antagonist. Her reactions are almost as nefarious as the actions of Blanchett’s protagonist, and the ballet of events that develop only intensify, making for a mesmeric overall experience; one that shouldn’t be missed if you have an appreciation for film, or are hankering for a good story.

Online Book Clubs

noreply@blogger.com (POD Critic) — Fri, 11 May 2007 12:30:00 +0000

The power of popular book clubs is obvious nowadays, and that power is even recognized by the big publishers, who have since been supplying readers’ guides among the back matter of various titles (classics mostly). Many books have seen a million copies added to the number of units sold, thanks to the mere mention of them by Oprah Winfrey.

Now some would argue that an online book club is too impersonal; that a face-to-face group discussion is much more inviting, and, in effect, rewarding. Granted, but an online book club has many advantages over the monthly face-to-face meetings. For one, there is a little thing known to us as convenience. One can log on any time of day and join in a lively discussion about a chosen book. That kind of convenience can lead to many things—a much larger community, for one; a broader set of ideas and opinions on a particular title that can expand the discussion, for another.

What’s more, if your online community eventually commands any kind of respect (usually afforded by acquiring a good amount of active members) you can usually establish relationships with publishers and self-published authors, so that books can be purchased at deep discounts. (Hey, if you have a hundred members buying the same book at a moment’s notice, what author or publisher would balk at, say, 40 to 50% off the cover price of each copy purchased; especially when those copies are coming directly from the author or publisher, who bought them on the cheap to begin with.)

If you are already a member of an online book club, try suggesting a good POD title if you are afforded that privilege at some point. If, on the other hand, you would like to launch your own online book club, I would suggest you peruse this page first.

O, would that someone among you would launch an online book club solely concerned with POD books! That would be revolutionary indeed.