Thursday, May 16, 2013

Oregon Road



Excerpted from Kristine Kathryn Rusch, Shifting Sands

I live on the beach. Here the sand shifts daily. We expect it. We watch it. The tide comes in; the tide goes out; the sand moves.
But I grew up in the Midwest. The land is firm there, solid. When someone builds a road it remains a recognizable road. Frigid winters and hot summers may buckle the pavement, but the road beneath remains something you can trust.
I love explaining Oregon road signs to Midwesterners. “Do you know what ‘sunken grade’ means?” I ask.
“No,” they say, looking at me distrustfully. After all, if they drove to my house, they saw several yellow signs warning about sunken grades.
“It means,” I say, “the road can fall away at any minute.”
The Midwesterners reel in shock. Roads are permanent, some say to me. That’s not possible, others say. You’re kidding! most of them exclaim. They look up the terminology, and learn that I’m right.
Roads out here, built on cliff faces, or over mountains, or on ground composed mostly of sandy soil, fall away on bright clear sunny days with no storms on the horizon. And no storms in the recent past. The ground slowly crumbles. The road sinks, or it doesn’t. But one day—preferably when no car is on it—the road will dissolve.
In fact, there are two stretches of highway near my hometown—one to the east, and one to the south—that the road crews have tried for decades to stabilize and cannot. Every time I cross one of those bits of road, the ground beneath me is different than the time before even if my crossings are only hours apart.
For fifty, maybe sixty years, certainly for the bulk of my lifetime as a writer, the publishing industry has been a Midwestern road. Occasionally a flood or a massive tornado will take out a section, but honestly, if a road disappears, that disappearance was something traumatic, an Act of God.
[T]he publishing industry has [become] an Oregon road.
(Read the rest at kriswrites.com.)

     I used to live on the California Coast. I commuted fifteen miles to work. One year, the rains came and stayed. And stayed. And stayed. One day the four-lane on which I drove to work slid down the mountainside. A span of half a mile disappeared and the rest became unstable.
     Years later, as I was driving the PCH to Eureka, I looked to my left at a spot where it looked like a Great White shark had taken a bite out of the road. Part of the southbound lane had washed out and fallen onto the beach a hundred feet below.
     I grew up in Texas. Traces of roads that had not been used in decades were still visible and often passable. The idea that a road could just disappear unsettled me. 
     But I got used to it.
     KKR's analogy hit me with great force because of my history. I feel in my bones that she is right:

The publishing industry has become an Oregon road.

     That's the way the world is. Get used to it.

Monday, May 13, 2013

eBook Review: A Short History of England




G K Chesterton, A Short History of England

Product Details

  • File Size: 256 KB
  • Print Length: 122 pages
  • Page Numbers Source ISBN: 1463722087
  • Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
  • Sold by: Amazon Digital Services, Inc.
  • Language: English
  • ASIN: B0082X012E
  • Text-to-Speech: Enabled
  • Lending: Enabled
  • Average Customer Review: 3.3 out of 5 stars (9 customer reviews) 
  • Price: $0.00 (Only the Kindle version is free. All DTB versions cost money.)
1. Short review:  (Amazon rating: 4 out of 5 stars -- I like it.)

2. Long review:
2.1. What I liked:  IMO if I get one new idea from a book I consider it a worthwhile read. A Short History of England met that criterion.
Roller-coaster or walk-in-the-park? Walk in the park. Sometimes informative, sometimes oblique.
Worth the download.

2.2. What I did not like: GKC assumed the reader to be well-versed in English history. Enough so that he used offhand references that hid the point he tried to make.

2.3. Who I think is the audience: English historians.

2.4. Is the book appropriate for children to read?  Yeah, if they are English historians.

2.5. On the basis of reading this book, will I buy the author's next book? Yes.

2.6. The plot in a nutshell.

     No plot. History and commentary.

 2.7. Other:
     As a scholarly history, A Short History of England is a success. As an accessible history for the masses, it is a failure. 
     As an American, I am ignorant of much of English history. I got this book to educate myself and relieve that ignorance. Sadly, it did not do so.
     GKC wrote A Short History of England more as a commentary on English history than as a chronicle. I did not know much English history when I began to read this work, and, after reading, I still do not know much English history. 
     Nevertheless, A Short History of England did meet my criterion as a worthwhile read. GKC articulated the idea that the English aristocracy of the 18th century opposed the two republics they came into contact with -- the American republic and the French republic. This is an interesting point. There were two other republics extant at the time -- the Swiss and the Venetian -- that England did not oppose, but I can see his point. I also see arguments against it.
     The English aristocracy of the 18th century was not so much one of titles as of landed gentry. William Pitt the Elder and William Pitt the Younger are the exemplars of this aristocracy. WP the Elder's position vis-a-vis the American colonies in revolt does not support GKC's thesis. I do not know enough about WP the Younger's position on the United States to draw any conclusions, but his position on France is clear. Is his position on France identical to his position on republics? I do not think so.
     GKC published A Short History of England in 1917 and concludes with an argument that the alliance with France is natural for the English and a call for Englishmen to support the alliance. The weight of history is against that notion. France was the enemy of England until the 20th century. German states were the allies of England until the 20th century (except Bavaria which, in truth, is not a German state).
     GKC made me think. IMO that makes the book worthwhile.
     YMMV.

2.8. Links: Gilbert Keith Chesterton

2.9. Buy the book: A Short History of England

Sunday, May 12, 2013

eBook Review: The Unpleasant Profession of Jonathan Hoag




Robert Heinlein, The Unpleasant Profession of Jonathan Hoag

Product Details

  • File Size: 257 KB
  • Print Length: 130 pages
  • Sold by: Amazon Digital Services, Inc.
  • Language: English
  • ASIN: B008AL0EFW
  • Text-to-Speech: Enabled
  • Lending: Enabled
  • Average Customer Review: 4.5 out of 5 stars (8 customer reviews) 
  • Price: $4.75
1. Short review:  (Amazon rating: 3 out of 5 stars -- It's okay.)

2. Long review:
2.1. What I liked:  Heinlein's name. The line level writing.
Roller-coaster or walk-in-the-park? Walk in the park trying to be a scary roller coaster.

2.2. What I did not like: The nebulous conclusion. The ludicrous cover.

2.3. Who I think is the audience: Serious RAH fans. Rod Serling's Night Gallery fans.

2.4. Is the book appropriate for children to read?  No. No blood, no violence, no foul language; but the story does not resolve its issues in a way that is satisfying to children. I think of it as Little Red Riding Hood had that story ended with "What big teeth you have."

2.5. On the basis of reading this book, will I buy the author's next book? No, but on the basis of reading RAH's other works, I shall.

2.6. The plot in a nutshell (click here).

 2.7. Other:
     First, I am a big fan of RAH and his works. Big fan.
     I heard about The Unpleasant Profession of Jonathan Hoag many years ago and searched for it without success. When I found it as an ebook on Amazon, I bought it immediately.
     The Unpleasant Profession of Jonathan Hoag is a novella, not a novel (130 pages = 32,500 words). It is not science fiction; it is fantasy. Not even science fantasy like Ray Bradbury's The Martian Chronicles. If you ever read RAH's Magic, Inc., it is in that vein. RAH's version of fantasy. Dark and not promising.
     RAH published his beloved science fiction under his own name and pseudonyms. RAH published in second-tier markets under the pseudonym Lyle Monroe so as not to tarnish the brand of Robert A Heinlein. The Unpleasant Profession of Jonathan Hoag is the only story he published under the pseudonym John Riverside. That he chose another one-off pseudonym for The Unpleasant Profession of Jonathan Hoag should tell you something.
     RAH did the mechanics well even when the story was weak. The Unpleasant Profession of Jonathan Hoag is a weak story with good mechanics.
     YMMV.

2.8. Links: The Heinlein Society

2.9. Buy the book: The Unpleasant Profession of Jonathan Hoag

Saturday, May 11, 2013

The Greatest Movie Stunts

     These are the two movie stunts that I consider to be the greatest ever filmed.

     From It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad WorldFrank Tallman flies a Twin Beech through a billboard:


     Mr Tallman lost an engine flying this stunt. Pieces of the billboard stuck in the engine intake.
     Pilots appreciate the skill it took to put that plane precisely through that billboard.

     The other great stunt is The Descent from The Man from Snowy River.


     Horsemen appreciate just how amazing this stunt is.
     Tom Burlinson, the lead actor, performed this stunt. He had not ridden before making this film. If he had, likely he would not have done this stunt. He did not know enough to know how dangerous this was.

     Any stunts you admire? Please share them in the comments.

Friday, May 10, 2013

eBook Review: Origin


J A Konrath, Origin

Product Details

  • File Size: 803 KB
  • Print Length: 306 pages
  • Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
  • Publisher: Joe Konrath (April 8, 2009)
  • Sold by: Amazon Digital Services, Inc.
  • Language: English
  • ASIN: B00264FT0Y
  • Text-to-Speech: Enabled
  • Lending: Enabled
  • Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars (450 customer reviews)
  • Price: $3.99 (If I recall correctly, I downloaded my copy for free during a promotional event.)
1. Short review:  (Amazon rating: 4 out of 5 stars -- I like it.)

2. Long review:
2.1. What I liked:  The premise and the pace. 
Roller-coaster or walk-in-the-park? Roller coaster.
Worth the money. 

2.2. What I did not like: The hanging ending. It cries for a sequel. And Dr Frank Belgium.

2.3. Who I think is the audience: Science fiction fans. Horror fans. Techno-thriller fans. 

2.4. Is the book appropriate for children to read?  Regarding language and sex, yes. Regarding the scenes of feeding and killing, no. Your call.

2.5. On the basis of reading this book, will I buy the author's next book? Yes.

2.6. The plot in a nutshell:
     Suppose the gov't found Satan unconscious and hid him away in an underground facility in New Mexico to study him. And he just woke up.

     Andrew 'Andy' Dennison, a linguist, is spirited away to Samhain -- a TOP SECRET facility in the New Mexico desert -- to aid a veterinarian, two scientists, a rabbi, a priest, and an army general study an alien being. The alien being looks like Satan: wings, hooves, all the stuff you expect from viewing the work of Hieronymous Bosch. But they call him Bub. Short for Beelzebub.
     All the people in the facility are brilliant at what they do. They are also flawed. So what happens?
     Satan tempts them.
     Satan gains his freedom from his cell. Kills the people in ways I had never imagined. Fights like a demon to escape Samhaim before the President nukes it.
     Andy, Sun (the veterinarian and now Andy's girlfriend), and Dr Frank Belgium escape. Bub drags his radiation-burned body to the surface, confronts them, and expires. Sort of. I mean, how do you kill the Devil?
 2.7. Other:
     First thing I gotta say is that I wanted Frank Belgium dead, and I was disappointed that he did not die horribly. Had Konrath killed him, I would have rated Origin five stars.
     Stuart Woods is a master of pacing. By line and by chapter, nobody does pacing better. I now believe that Konrath is his equal. The pacing of this work is fast enough that it kept me from thinking, "Hey, what about this?"
     I may be mistaken, but I recall Konrath wrote that he is an atheist. Thus, I was surprised at the heroism of the rabbi and the priest.
     Speaking of dead bodies, why is Satan commonly portrayed as an ugly monster? He was a fallen archangel, right? So he should be strikingly attractive, should he not?

     YMMV.

2.8. Links:  J A Konrath

2.9. Buy the book:  Origin