Books read in 2014: No. 3 -- Magic of Thieves: Legends of Dimmingwood, Book I

by C. Greenwood

Started: Jan. 12
Finished: Jan. 15

Notes: For far too long have I been putting off my fantasy readings, so now is the time to correct that. I'm not planning to read nothing but fantasy, but I probably will for the next half dozen or so of my reads, and then I'll work in quite a bit of fantasy for at least the rest of the year. I was burnt out on the genre a couple of years ago, having just finished reading the 10-book series by Erikson and having spent a good amount of time writing several epic fantasy works, but now I'm ready for some more. I decided to begin with this particular author because I've noticed her works up and down the Amazon rankings during the last year and figured she must be doing something right. Plus, I always like discovering new authors.

Mini review: This was a damn fine story. The first chapter I found a bit jarring, but it was a jarring situation the main character found herself in, so it seemed appropriate, and often enough I feel out of my element when starting a new book. By the second chapter the story entered a flow that pretty much followed through the rest of the work, and what a flow it was. Those seeking philosophical fantasy akin to Steven Erikson or literary fantasy like that of Mervyn Peake might want to look elsewhere, but those who enjoy a romping good adventure story similar in style to Bob Salvatore or Weis and Hickman will find plenty here to love. The writing is solid without being overly complex, the characters are interesting, the editing is one of the best I've seen in an indie work, and the plot itself is entertaining. I'm looking forward to further books in the series.

Books read in 2014: No. 2 -- The Murder of King Tut

by James Patterson and Martin Dugard

Started: Jan. 9
Finished: Jan. 12

Notes: I'm a little skeptical of this supposed non-fiction book, in no small part because I'm no fan of Patterson's prose, but I'm also interested enough in the subject matter to want to give it a go. Was King Tut murdered?  I'd never really given it any thought until this book was published a few years ago, but I'll read it and come to my own conclusions.

Mini review: As I feared, Patterson's writing turned me off here. It's such a simplistic style, almost "Dick and Jane" material, that I found it nearly insulting. Perhaps worse than that were the speculative conclusions about King Tut's death. Was Tut murdered? Hell if I know. This book jumps to a number of conclusions, and none of them are backed up by anything other than what is written on its pages. There's not even a bibliogrpahy or index. No footnotes or anything, nothing pointing to where information was gleaned. There's no way this book can be considered serious scholarship from a historical point of view. At least it was easy to read, thus not taking up a lot of time, and perhaps it drew a few people into being interested in the actual history.

It's getting loooong over here

My current work in progress, the fantasy novel The Company of Seven, passed the 93,000 word mark a few hours ago, and there is no end in sight. My original thinking was that this novel would be about 160,000 words, but now I'm wondering if it won't end up being more like 180,000.

But that's all first draft material. Who knows? Upon re-read, I might end up chopping out a bunch of stuff. Still, I can't imaging cutting away more than a few thousand words, but time will tell.

Either way, this will be the longest single work I've written.

That thought is sort of exhilarating, but in no small part because I'm having fun writing this novel, my first novel in more than a year and my first Kron Darkbow novel in two years.

Initially I had wanted to publish this novel in December in time for Christmas. Then I got to thinking that maybe it would be February. Now? Truth be told, it's likely going to be Spring before this one is ready.

See, I've still got a bunch of writing to do. Then a few reads and re-reads and my own editing to. And I've got beta readers to line up, and one or two editors. Of course then comes the cover that needs to be done, and the blurb copy, the formatting for digital and for print, etc.

And that's not all. No, sir. The Company of Seven is a stand alone novel, but it does tie in with events and characters from my last two Darkbow novels, Ghosts of the Asylum and Demon Chains. So, I'm planning on making those three books into a trilogy, which means I'll have to go back and do some work on those earlier two books, including new covers and formatting.

Since I would like to release The Company of Seven at the same time I release the new versions of Ghosts of the Asylum and Demon Chains, allowing all three books to be tied together with trilogy labeling on their covers, I have a fair amount of work to do there. And I don't even have print versions yet of Ghosts of the Asylum and Demon Chains (I've been putting that off because I knew this whole trilogy thing was coming up).

Yikes! That seems like an awful lot of work. And I've a looooong way to go.

But I'm going to do it. Even if it means I can't publish The Company of Seven until Summer, I am going to get through all this.

Also, I think about some of the better known modern epic fantasy writers, such as George Martin and Steven Erikson. Those guys are penning novels 300,000 words in length and longer.

Sheesh!

There was a time not so long ago when I couldn't have imagined penning something so lengthy, though now I can. It would just take me at least a full year to write that first draft, maybe longer. Honestly, looking back, I couldn't have imagined writing something longer than 100,000 words, but I've broken that already with a few books.

The point of this post? Just that I'm busy, and that I hope to have some new work out this year. Even if it's just this one novel, at least it'll be something.

However, there are a few already finished works waiting in the wings for final approval by traditional editors and publishers, so maybe some of that material will be published later this year.

As always, time will tell.

Books read in 2014: No. 1 -- The Sicilian

by Mario Puzo

Started: January 1
Finished: January 9

Notes: I thoroughly enjoyed some Puzo reading not so long ago, so I thought I'd drop in on another of his works. This one has connections with The Godfather, apparently containing events involving Michael Corleone during his stay in Siciliy. I love Puzo's writing, especially in his later books, and I'm always interested in The Godfather, so this should be interesting.

Mini review: As always, Puzo does not disappoint. The writing here is top notch, and what's more interesting is that it's all based upon history involving the bandit Salvatore Giuliano who ran rampant in Sicily in the 1940s. If not for the inclusion of Michael Corleone and a few other familiar characters from The Godfather, this novel could have been historical fiction. On top of that, it seems from my recent historical studies that the more romantic and outlandish elements of this tale were actually toned down by Puzo, as the truth was much more intriguing. What I found most useful here, besides the great writing and the great story, was that it gave me all kinds of ideas for my own fiction writing, even allowing me to flesh out and/or reconsider a few future tales I'd been thinking over.

Books read in 2013: No. 59 -- An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge

by Amrose Bierce

Started: Dec. 31
Finished: Dec. 31

Notes: I've read this classic short story a couple of times before, once in grade school and again in high school, but that's been decades ago, so I thought I'd familiarize myself with it once more. If you're not familiar with the story or have forgotten its subject matter, I'll at least tell you it starts with a condemned man on a bridge getting ready to be hung by Union officers during the Civil War. To tell more would give too much away, but this has been a fairly famous story over the decades since it was written, and there have even been a few short films made concerning it.

Mini review: A strong story, but I'm thinking the writing would be too blunt and obtuse all at the same time for modern readers, the style it is written in being the blunt part, the ending being the obtuse part (since it leaves a fair amount to the imagination, something fewer and fewer readers seem to appreciate nowadays). Still, a commendable story that has had a lot of influence over the years. Was worth checking out again.

Books read in 2013: No. 58 -- Candyland

by Evan Hunter and Ed McBain

Started: Dec. 23
Finished: Dec. 31

Notes: For those who don't know, though there are two authors listed for this novel, they are actually one and the same person. "Ed McBain" was a pen name for author Evan Hunter, who was actually born under the name Salvatore Albert Lambino but legally changed his name in 1952. I've long been a fan of this author's work as McBain, though I've not stepped into his Evan Hunter works. Here I get that chance in a single book written by both men ... er, both characters ... uh, hell, well, they're written by the same guy but in different styles. Make sense? Maybe you have to be a writer to understand. Anyway, the first part of the novel is by Hunter and focuses upon a successful architect who lands himself in some hot water while traveling and searching for female companionship; the McBain portion of the novel apparently is about three detectives covering the case of a murdered prostitute, a woman who had some kind of link with the architect.

Mini review: As a reader, I was not awed by this one. The first half of the book, the Hunter half, was a bit slow for my taste. The second half, McBain's section, heated things up quite a bit, but as is always the case, I feel a little let down when reading McBain but not reading his 87th Precinct novels. As a writer, I was quite intrigued by the dichotomy between the two styles of writing, the first half being much more personal (which stings a bit as the protagonist is somewhat sleazy) and the second half which is fast-paced police detective work. The ending was a complete surprise to me, I can happily say.

Why fantasy and not science fiction?

When I was a kid, back in the 1970s, I was a science fiction fan. I loved me some early Star Trek, and then became a huge Dr. Who fan when it became available in the States. Of course Star Wars came along and blew my young mind, as it did for a whole generation. Battlestar Galactica and Space: 1999 were also favorite shows, though looking back neither holds up well, in my opinion.

As a teen in the 1980s, I read all the Asimov I could get my hands on, and went back to check out the early masters, Verne and Wells and the like. There always seemed to be a Heinlein novel somewhere around me. And comic books, though not considered serious reading material at the time, were still full of science fiction elements.

Then along about the mid-1980s, I slowly began to lose interest in science fiction. By the '90s, what interest I had had was pretty much dead. Today I rarely read the genre, though every once in a while I will check out a hot author or peruse an old favorite.

What changed? Why do I no longer read science fiction?

For that matter, since I write so much speculative fiction, why don't I write much science fiction?

I've thought about this a lot of late, in no small part due to various postings over at the Black Gate site, and I've come to something of a mixed conclusion, though I'm fairly sure it's one not a lot of science fiction fans will like to hear.

Here's part of my conclusion: I didn't change so much as the genre of science fiction changed, and not for the better, in my opinion. The things I looked for in great sci-fi back in the day are rarely present in modern science fiction, or at least I'm not seeing a lot of it.

This begs the question, well, Ty, what is it you look for in science fiction?

The same thing I look for in most fiction. Good stories. Quality characters. Decent dialogue. Convincing and interesting plots. Etc.

But also, specific to the genre, I look for boundaries to be crossed, and I look for a sense of wonder.

I'm sure all that can be found in today's science fiction literature, but I'm not seeing much of it.

What do I see?

I see lots of military science fiction, which there's nothing wrong with, but I've read enough of it to find it lacking, meaning less relevant and compelling, compared to earlier works, Heinlein's Starship Troopers being the obvious but not only choice. The modern military sci-fi I've perused feels more like a video game than an actual story, with high body counts but little humanity.

I see some hard science fiction that I simply find annoying, and this is someone who has read a fair amount of Asimov. The thing is, Asimov told actual stories amid all his hard science. As an author, he provided me with that sense of wonder by raising questions and proposing possibilities. I see little of this in modern hard sci-fi. I see overly analytical and pedantic texts that everyone wants to argue about, whether the science is factual or used correctly, etc. There is no sense of wonder here. If I want such material, I can always go check out a physics textbook. For the most part, I could really give a shit about whether an author's science is 100 percent accurate, at least if he or she is telling a good story and gives me something to think about.

And then there's the modern version of softer science fiction I see. Like a lot of the bad but hot-selling thrillers on the market, much of this material reads like a fast screenplay. The science is practically irrelevant. The characters blank. The plots thin. But there'll be a mystery and some explosions and lots of running around without much getting done, at least not until the very end when everything is tied up in a little ribbon.

Okay, here's where somebody always chimes in with the argument, "well, you say you're not reading much science fiction today, so your opinion is obviously invalidated since you don't know what you're talking about." Let me just say to such arguments, yes, as I said, I don't read a lot of today's science fiction, not from beginning to end, but that doesn't mean I don't read book blurbs, that doesn't mean I don't skim novels and such online or at bookstores in order to get a feel for the story and the author's style, that doesn't mean I don't check out reviews and read fan forums and the like, and that doesn't mean I'm completely out of the loop, regardless of one's fan boy snideness.

And let me add, before someone's panties get bunched up, that I'm not saying modern science fiction is necessarily awful, that you aren't allowed to enjoy it simply because I do not. This isn't junior high and I'm not saying your favorite band sucks.

What I am saying is that the genre has moved on, and that I have little interest in it today. I've outlined most of my reasons above, but the great big reason, the elephant in the room, the rhinoceros on the nightstand, the hippopotamus on the toilet, is that I simply no longer find any sense of wonder in modern science fiction.

Which is why I tend to fall back upon the masters when I want to read the genre.

And which is why I turn to fantasy so often for my reading and writing.

Actually, fantasy might be the only genre left that still instills in me any sense of wonder. I'll admit much of modern fantasy also falls under some of the faults I listed above, but not all of it, not enough of it to kill my complete interest. Some horror comes close to providing that sense of wonder, but so much of horror today is about the scare or the blood and gore, with little thought given to anything beyond.

I do want a good story, but I also want something that makes me think but does so without my having to go back to college to get a degree in one of the hard sciences, and this is coming from someone who gets most of the references and jokes on "The Big Bang Theory." Not everyone goes along with that line of thinking, and that's fine, not all books nor all genres are for everyone. I'm fine with that.

But once upon a time, science fiction was for me. And now it's not. And I kind of miss it.