Category Archives: Books

More Thoughts on Frankenstein

Leave a reply

.

Not so much about del Toro’s recent and lush production but more thoughts about the source text and the way people interpret it.

It is a common thought that the creature is a sad and pitiable character, his pain understandable, and perceives Victor Frankenstein as the true villain. The vain and self-centered scientist abandons his creation the moment he lays eyes on its unconventional appearance, leaving the poor creation in a monstrous body to suffer the indignities of a cruel and heartless society.

And as far as that analysis goes, it is correct, but it elides several aspects of the text and the horrific events that spring forth from it.

The creature, after finding shelter and hiding amongst a family, teaches itself to read and eventually becomes quite well-read and self-educated, skilled in understanding complex philosophical texts and arguments. This element is often deployed to portray the creature as sympathetic. To me, it is an element that renders him even more evil.

It is after the creature has obtained such mental heights as having read philosophy and advanced texts that it plans and executes the murder of a young child, framing an innocent girl as the murderer so that she is killed by a lynch mob. Neither the child William Frankenstein nor the young woman Justine mistreated the creature in any manner. Their lives were mere tools to be wielded in the creature’s quest for vengeance. They were not people with lives and emotions to be considered but things to be manipulated and abused for the creature’s self-important goals. These were not mad, spur-of-the-moment killings, but actions that were cold, calculating, and utterly indifferent to the pain they inflicted except that they troubled Victor.

Yes, Victor is horrible as well. Once freed from the grips of his obsession, he abandons all responsibility, but honestly, his sins are far less than the monster’s.

Share

I Hate Cliffhangers

.

Now, I am not talking about chapters that end in cliffhangers or individual episodes that leaving you on tenterhooks until the next week. I am talking about the end of novels and the end of season crap where the story is not completed and the reader or audience has to wait for the next book or season, which sometimes never arrives, to see resolution of the character’s current crisis.

I am of the firm belief that a novel or a movie or even a season of a television show should present a complete story. The Discworld or Hornblower novels are great examples of a series that executes this flawlessly. Each book is its own tale, complete with establishment, conflict, and resolution but leaves enough in the air, enough unwoven threads that new stories can arise from them.

A Season for Slaughter the fourth book in an SF series by David Gerrold left the main character stranded in the jungle in dire danger and the fifth book, some 32 years later, still has not been released.

Severance, the Apple TV+ series, appears to be telling a complete story over multiple seasons but ended the first on a cliffhanger and I suspect that they are going to do so with the second. (I know the second has concluded but I haven’t reached it yet.) I do not expect all the answers to be presented by the end of the second season, but I want more than one or two. If the series is going to present mystery upon mystery without resolution, then I am going to drop it.

Share

Querying; the Bad and the Good

.

Querying, for those who do not know, is the process of sending an introductory letter along with samples pages from a project and often a full synopsis of the novel to agents seeking representation. Agent representation is pretty much essential if one is pursuing traditional publication versus going the self-published route. (Nothing wrong with self-published, a number of terrific novels have come out that way, but it is far more work as the writer adds graphic design and other jobs to their already full plate. It is not for everyone.)

I have two novels that I am currently in the query process, both horror stories, one folk/cosmic, the other a take on werewolves in an isolated Rocky Mountain town. The querying process is quite a test of endurance.

Agents, when they are open to queries, receive hundreds per month and as such their passes when they decline to explore representation further are fast form letters sent impersonally. I hold no ill-will over such procedures, reading and passing on submissions is work that generates zero income, they do it for the same reason the writer is submitting it, the hope, the dream, of finding that perfect match that leads to a great and wonderful future.

The standard form nature of an agent passing leads writers to engage in ‘rejectomancy,’ trying to divine meaning from the impersonal response. It is possible but of a very limited scope.

I mentioned that agents get hundreds of submissions. Far more than they would desire but it is the nature of the beast. They have absolutely no need, inclination, or motivation to invite even more, so if the form actually does invite further submissions, that does tell you something. Sadly, it doesn’t tell you why that particular work got the pass, if it was the concept, it the agent has something close to it already out to publishers, or if the subject just didn’t ‘click’ with the agent. What I can surmise is that it was not the actual writing competence. They have no time to waste hoping someone shows improvement. So, if you get one of those, though the pass hurts, rejoice that your writing did not actually suck.

Share

My Two Unpopular Takes on Frankenstein

.

rankenstein is not science-fiction.

The Creature/Creation is not sympathetic.

There is not a small number of people and fans who want to count Mary Wollstonecraft Shelly’s 1816 novel as one of the first if not the first work of science-fiction. I disagree, but not because I want to dismiss such an influenceable work. Frankenstein is one of the most important works of literature. Two hundred years plus after its publication we still not only debate and adapt the work itself, but the theme of irresponsible creation echoes in so many works it would be futile to list them all. Both HAL9000 and the Terminator owe a debt to Shelly’s vision. But the fact that so much science-fiction mines that productive vein that she uncovered doesn’t make the original science-fiction as well.

In a work of SF, the method of the fantastic is vitally important to genre. Taking a Pegasus to the moon is not science fiction, but using a cannon to shoot myself there is. Method defines the genre. While Shelly may have been inspired by Galvanism it is absent from the text. In fact, in the text of the novel Shelly doesn’t just hand-wave her way past how Frankenstein created life, she leaves out the method entirely. She leaves it out because the method is unimportant to her theme and her subject. She wasn’t interested in how he created life only the ethical issues that raised. Verne’s trip to the moon is built upon the method of getting there and far less interested in what that means. Shelly’s creation of life ignores the ‘how’ but explores the why and the consequences. Frankenstein is one of the most important works ever created but it is not science-fiction.

The Creature is not sympathetic to me because it comes off to me as a dangerous, murderous, narcissist. Much has been made about how the doctor abandoned the creature, leaving it to suffer torment in isolation. That’s fair enough and is Shelly’s point, but the creature’s actions following that are impossible to justify.

While I think we can agree that vengeance is at best a questionable course of action, and had the creature’s vengeance been directed solely at Frankenstein it would be far less reprehensible but that it is not how the text unfolds.

To make his creator suffer the creature not only murders a child only because the boy is a relation to his creator but then frames an innocent woman to suffer the mob justice for his own crime.

When the creature confronts his creator in the ice caves of Switzerland, he proclaims that no being could love as greatly as himself but hurt and abused he swore to hate as greatly. He betrays the classic profile of a narcissist, his own feelings are paramount and those of others, such a murdered child, grieving parents, or those unjustly lynched for his crimes are of no consequence. There is precious little difference between the creature taking his violent vengeance on innocent bystanders and the mass murders of American murdering strangers.

Share

Blood is Magic, Not Food

.

With last month’s release of Robert Eggers’ stunning remake Nosferatu vampires and vampires media has been on my mind.

In Nosferatu Count Orlok is presented pretty much as the traditional folk tales describe an undead vampire, a walking corpse, decaying and revolting, that feeds upon the blood of the living. Orlok is much closer in appearance to the post Romero ‘zombie’ than to the urbane European nobleman displayed in my adaptations of Dracula.

With Dracula, both the original novel and the nearly endless adaptations, the vampire moved away from that walking corpse towards a more romantic figure. Anne Rice’s Interview with the Vampire proved instrumental in moving the image of the vampire into one that was more tragic and a figure to be pitied rather than feared. Over the decades the vampire continued to transform into tragic romantic heroes slowly becoming not monsters of the night but simply life-impaired individuals, comic-book characters with tremendous powers and a few unsavory quirks.

A trope that emerged from this transformation that has always rankled me is the habit of treating blood as merely another nutrient. A process that gave us the character Angel buying blood from Sunnydale’s local slaughterhouse to sustain his dietary requirements.

Even just typing that out annoys me to no end. The vampire feeding on the blood of living humans was not the same as someone has a nice bowl of soup. It was not about calories and essential elements it was about life. Blood, to the pre-scientific world, was that strange substance that meant life itself. Blood was always at the center of the most powerful magics. Turning it into just another meal product that can be ordered from your local distributor cheapens that entire symbolism of the myth and robs it of most of its horror.

I will admit that this is just part of a larger issue I have with ‘scientific’ and rational approaches to supernatural horrors. It seems logical to treat the vampire’s feeding on blood the same as out feeding on plants and animals, just as it ‘logical’ to treat werewolf transformations as bound by the conservation of mass laws. Both are violations of the magical, wonderous, and inexplicable nature of the supernatural. Vampires are the dead. They are not just different kinds of people and I am thankful that Eggers bucked the slick modern trend of making them cool and sexy returning the monster to is terrifying and revolting roots.

Share

Quick Thoughts on Prologs

.

Prologs are a never ending source of debate and contention in the writing community with some saying always avoid and other loving them. The truth, as usual, I think lies in-between.

They are far too often used as a place to dump exposition and world building which is usually a sign that an author doesn’t have confidence in their ability to weave that vital information into the narrative itself.

I have often listened to prologs in critique session and advised cutting them and yet my published novel has one so I cannot be described as a rabid anti-prolog writer.

Here are a few quick guidelines I have for effective prologs.

1) It shouldn’t involve the protagonist. If it does, then it should be part of the main narrative.

2) It should contain information that the protagonist doesn’t know at the start of the story. That is, it is information that primes the reader for what is coming but the characters remain blindsided.

3) It should not be resolved. It’s not its own little short story it is a building block of the larger tale. If everything in the prolog is resolved than the reader has no pull to turn the page. The prolog is a harbinger of things to come, not a neat little package complete and finished.

Share

Not Every Aspect of a Franchise Should be Mined

.

In May, Variety reported that Warner Brothers Studios had announced a new The Lord of the Rings live-action feature to be released in 2026 The Lord of the Rings: The Hunt For Gollum.

To be produced by Peter Jackson and directed by Andy Serkis very little is known about the plot or details of the feature but there are reasonable guesses that can be made.

In the first book of the series The Fellowship of the Ring Gandalf tells Frodo that he and Aragorn had searched for the creature Gollum but that the enemy found him first. In both the film adaptation and the novel this is entirely an off-screen second bit of exposition, but it is a hunt for Gollum and likely the source of the new film. (Though I suppose it is possible that you might build an entire movie around the River folk hunting for Gollum the murderer.)

Making a story work around Gandalf and Aragorn’s search is a tall and tough task. We know they fail; we know they are unharmed and any new or side characters introduced will be treated with life expectancy of a Trek Red Shirt.

I can tell you one thing from Gandalf’s recounting of the hunt that will not make it into this feature, the evidence that Gollum ate babies will be excised.

This is an image, empty cribs left in Gollum’s wake, that haunts me from the novel and one of the reasons why Gollum never achieved any sympathy from me. The wanton murder of children strips any character of any slim hope of redemption. (Yes, I am looking at you Frankenstein’s monster. Life is tough and you were treated horribly but nothing excuses the murder of children.)

Share

Gaiman, Hero Worship, and Human Frailty

.

Numerous people throughout fandom are shaken to their cores as allegations are leveled at yet another beloved icon this time Neil Gaiman. I will not be going into the accusations as I have too little knowledge of what is precisely asserted to have an educated opinion.

Neil Gaiman has been a beloved writer in the genre spaces for some time. There have been numerous stories of his kindness and repeated examples of how he has brightened the darkness for other, often with wise comments on this mad industry and its often heavy psychological toll.

However, I am reminded of a bit from the MCU series Loki when the titular character comments that ‘No one good is truly good and no one bad is truly bad.’

We are all shades of gray. Darkness and light lives in every person’s heart. We all have an impulse to be compassionate and caring and we all have impulses to hurt and dominate.

It is now likely that Gaiman will join a terrible list of former artistic talents such Joss Whedon, Roman Polanski, or Kevin Spacey. What are we to learn from this?

I think Frank Herbert, a beloved writer in his own right may have already tried to teach us something about this with Paul Atriedes. Heroes are dangerous to your health.

There is a school of criticism where it is considered critical to separate the artists from the art. Buffy the Vampire Slayer remains an outstanding example of writing with an empowering message about feminine strength told through the lens of superheroes and monsters. Gaiman’s writing about love and the fantastic remain unchanged, the text of the stories and novels are precisely the same as they were last month before this knowledge came to light. Polanski’s adaptation of Macbeth or his cinematic genius directing in Chinatown still speaks truth the corrupting nature of power despite the man’s vile actions as a rapist.

I am not here to tell you to not read or consume any particular artists work because of their reprehensible personal nature. That is a decision each person must make for themselves. It is the personal moral quandary of the audience. What I can say is that the work does not change.

What we should strive to do always with the artistic products we adore because they speak to our very souls is to never forget that all artists are human. All humans are flawed and never construct fantasies of perfect for the flawed people of this planet.

Share

The Importance of the Denouement

.

Once the story and plot have concluded all that remains for your prose or film is the denouement. This is a vital element of storytelling and one that if missing can seriously unsettle a reader or audience.

The purpose of the denouement is that it provides the space and time for the emotional climax of the tale to flower. If the story is a tragedy, it allows the audience to feel the weight of the loss or the futility of the character’s resistance to their fate. If the story has a conventionally ‘happy’ ending, then the denouement allows the audience to bask in the victory and empathize with the characters journey.

A denouement can be extremely short, sometimes in film a single freeze-frame can provide the emotional closure a story requires. Most are short segments that simply allow the reader or audience to cool down from the heat of the climax. An excellent example of this in film is Ripley’s recorded message in the original Alien. After igniting the engines, she has defeated the monster and there is no more plot to complete. However, ending the film with her watching the Zeta Reticulian parasite ejected in the void would have been unsatisfying. Our hearts were beating too fast to end it there, the denouement was absolutely essential.

Of course, a denouement can be overdone, creating a sense that a story or film never ends. The best example of that is the conclusion of The Return of the King where it felt as if the film had ended several times because the director was insistent on getting to the novel’s final line. That extended denouement did not work for everyone.

And when the denouement is all together missing the ending feels abrupt often leaving a reader or audience confused and shocked.

An American Werewolf in London has no denouement and nearly everyone the first time that view it are stunned by the unexpected and nearly slap in the face manner in which the film goes to credits and end song.

Think about your denouement and what you need it to do and how you will achieve it.

Share

It Has Begun

.

Last week and continuing for the rest of the calendar year I have begun writing my next novel. No, the werewolf book hasn’t found a home or an agent but in the game you cannot wait. Anyway, the best way to keep my mind off the waiting is to throw myself into the newest project.

This is my untitled American Folk Horror set on an island commune established at the height of the counterculture in the late 1960s and one that harbors a dark secret.

My earlier novels have nearly all been carefully outlined and plotted before I began writing. That is until The Wolves of Wallace Point which quite by accident became my first book written without a preplanned outline. I will admit that after a few thousand words I stopped and sketched an act breakdown but not a full outline, just enough to know what events ended each act.

This book is looking to be a hybrid creation process. I have carefully crafted the core characters with their backstories and motivations, and I have fully plotted and outline act 1 of 5 but not the rest. I know my acts and I think what I will do is outline each act when I complete the previous one.

I have in mind a character death/murder that I have hopes will be the most unsettling and terrifying thing I have ever written, and I can’t wait to get there.

5500 words have already been committed to the first two chapters and a modest production rate of 800 words per weekday should see the first draft completed before the new year. Only the final product will let me know if this has been a worthy experiment or an utter failure.

Fear of failure cannot be allowed to stop you, or one will never get anything of value completed.

Share