Tis the season for returning from the dead.Goodreads is one of the few websites that I allow to send me notices.I try to check them daily, and I even read their monthly updates of new books by authors I’ve read.I was a bit surprised when November’s newsletter began with The Andromeda Evolution by Michael Crichton.I really enjoyed The Andromeda Strain when I was in high school.The fact that I was in high school four decades ago made me wonder about the robustness of Dr. Crichton, especially since I knew that he had died over a decade ago himself.I don’t know about you, but the writing industry feels crowded enough without dead people keeping in the competition.It’s like those professors who refuse to retire, but also refuse to teach or do research.Some people, apparently, can never get enough.
We live in an era of extreme longevity.In the scope of human history, people haven’t lived so long since before the flood.Some of us—not a few, mind you—work in fields with limited job openings.We are the sort who don’t really get the tech craze, intelligent Luddites who’d rather curl up in the corner with an actual book.There are very few professorates available.Even fewer editorships.And anyone who’s tried to get an agent without being one of the former knows that there are far too many writers out there.Now the dead keep cranking ‘em out.I’ve got half-a-dozen unpublished novels sitting right here on my lap.Crichton’s gone the way of all flesh, but with an active bank account.
The end result of this Novemberish turn of events is that I want to read The Andromeda Strain again.I haven’t posted it to Goodreads since when I read it the internet itself wasn’t even a pipe dream, except perhaps in the teenage fantasies of some sci-fi fans.Since you can’t rate a book twice on Goodreads, and because paper books don’t disappear when you upgrade your device, I can do it.I can actually walk to the shelf and pull a vintage mass-market paperback off it.Even if the Earth passes through the tail of some comet and all networks are down.And I seem to recall that the original strain came from outer space.As did the strange radiation that brought the ghouls back to life on The Night of the Living Dead.Now if only some of the rest of us might get in on the action.
“You can’t” Heraclitus said, “step into the same river twice.”The same also applies to reviewing books on Goodreads.I met my official pledge of 60 books “officially” a couple weeks back, but I had re-read two books already reviewed during the course of the previous month, so I’m actually up to 65 at the moment.Not that this is a contest.Well, it sorta is.But the one thing that keeps coming back to me is that my reviews of the same book change after a couple of years.In general I’m not a re-reader.There are lots of books I want to read for the first time, and there are few, historically, that I’ve gone back and read again.Right now, however, I’m working on a couple of books that require some going back and checking facts.Whenever you write “X does not” you need to make sure X doesn’t.
Reading is a self-rewarding enterprise.I’ve not stopped reading when I don’t post about books, but I’ve been reading bigger books.Despite my academic background and current job as an editor, I’m a slow reader.I always have been.I set my Goodreads goal based on the fact that without commuting I hope to read five books a month.I have to throw in some short ones to make such a goal, and I never count the children’s books (I read The Lorax several times this year) and I can’t count the books I read for work that haven’t yet been published.Nevertheless I keep making my Goodreads pledge—it gives me a goal I can attain—and in a life where meeting goals is becoming more difficult all the time, I appreciate those I enjoy reaching.Enjoy reading.
Goodreads is a community.Some of my friends there comment on my blog posts, which is really neat because almost nobody comments on my blog itself.It’s nice to have that little extra extension.I skim through the reviews that come to my email inbox every day.I like to know what others are reading and I get tips for future goals from the books my Goodreads’ buddies post.And now that November looms—and over its shoulder I can see December—I think of the Modern Mrs. Darcy’s reading challenge.I generally meet that goal by about September.Reading books is like meeting new friends.And some of them, unlike Heraclitus’ river, you can meet twice.
I risk being seen as even more of a book nerd by addressing the topic of International Standard Book Numbers, or ISBNs.For those who’ve purchased a book in the past several decades, you’ve seen ISBNs, but perhaps unwittingly.They’re represented by a barcode, often on the back cover in the lower left corner, or sometimes the middle.The ISBN is the edition’s unique identifier, but it isn’t necessarily a guarantee that the contents will be exactly the same since typos corrected for new printings may use the same ISBN already purchased.Yes, you read right.Publishers have to purchase ISBNs.Without them listings on many websites and distributors’ lists would be impossible.The ISBN is what fulfillers use to order books since neither author nor title is necessarily unique.Many book titles have been used to the point of dullness.
A typical ISBN
A colleague recently complained to me about being able to request permission to reuse something from a book without an ISBN.Rights vendors often require them.The ISBN came into usage, however, only in 1970.As I’ve learned from trying to load older books into my Goodreads list, there are all kinds of complications and potential confusions if you don’t have the unique identifier for your source.Titles cannot be copyrighted, and many are consequently overused.The ISBN is your guide to a specific book.If the book came before the ISBN system it’s going to take some extra work to ensure that you find the correct way to identify what you’re talking about.This is only one of the many ways in which the book industry differs from most others.It’s also the reason that I generally object to corrected printings.
Perhaps it’s odd to see a publishing professional take a hard line on book content.The fact is almost always an author is given the opportunity to proofread, well proofs.The copyedited, typeset book is given to them.Yes, errors may creep in after this stage, but that’s not very common.If an author didn’t catch mistakes, then a corrected edition ought to be published with a new ISBN. But that’s not how it works.Each ISBN should indicate the exact same content.Although an ISBN must be purchased, just one isn’t expensive (witness all the self-publishing going on these days and that should be obvious).Publishers that have to buy many thousands of them, however, are disinclined to waste them.I’m not a fan of all technology, but the ISBN seems like a good concept to me.Even if it’s not a guarantee that things are what they seem.
So how much time is there?I mean all together.I suppose there’s no way to know that because we have no idea what came before the Big Bang.Those who invent technology, however, seem not to have received the memo.New tech requires more time and most of us don’t have enough seconds as it is.Perhaps in the height of folly (for if you read me you know I admit to that possibility) I’ve begun uploading material to my YouTube channel (I hope I got that link right!). These are cut-rate productions; when you’re a single-person operation you can’t fire the help.I figured if those who don’t like reading prefer watching perhaps I could generate a little interest in Holy Horror visually.(I like my other books too, but I know they’re not likely to sell.)
The question, as always, is where to find the time for this.My nights are generally less than eight hours, but work is generally more.What else is necessary in life, since there are still, averaged out, eight more left?Writing has its reserved slot daily.And reading.Then there are the things you must do: pay taxes, get physical exercise, perhaps prepare a meal or two.Soon, mow the lawn.It may be foolishness to enter into yet another form of social media when I can’t keep up with those I already have.What you have to do to drive interest in books these days!I think of it as taking one for the tribe.Readers trying to get the attention of watchers.
There’s an old academic trick I tried a time or two: double-dipping.It works like this: you write an article, and another one, and another one.Then you make them into a book.I did pre-publish one chapter of a book once, but getting permission to republish convinced me that all my work should be original.That applies to reviews on Goodreads—they’re never the same as my reviews on this blog—as well as to my YouTube videos.There’ll be some overlap, sure.But the content is new each time around.So you can see why I’m wondering about time.Who has some to spare?Brother, can you spare some time?I’ve been shooting footage (which really involves only electrons instead of actual linear imperial measures) for some time now.I’ve got three pieces posted and more are planned to follow.If only I can find the time.
The thing about reading is that it’s a lifestyle.I record books both here and on Goodreads, but I read a lot more than books.Although I don’t have much time for magazines or even newspapers, I read a lot on the web.And billboards.And sidewalks.I’m quite content doing it.One thing I’ve noticed in all this reading is that fiction writers tend to be more often cited as experts and intellectuals than do non-fiction writers.Oh the non-fic practitioners get their footnotes, and other specialists mention them, but fiction writers get analyzed, probed, and explored.Literary types wonder what they meant by some obscure doggerel they wrote.When’s the last time a non-fiction writer drew that kind of attention?It makes me wonder about all the time I’ve been spending on non-fiction lately.
I suffer from graphomania.There’s no cure.The other day I went looking for an old, pre-electric typewriter to get my fix in case the power goes out.I have notebooks, zibaldones, commonplace books.I carry one in my pocket.I have one on my bedside stand.And the thing I’ve noticed is that the ideas that come to me unbidden are often fictional.You see, I have a hidden life as a fiction writer.That persona is very poor since he’s never made any money from his writing.He was nominated for a Pushcart Prize some years ago, but he never won.That fiction writer has been suffering cabin fever because I’ve been finding publishers for my non-fiction work.I wonder, however, if maybe I shouldn’t be spending my time on fiction.It’ll never get me to the point I can make a living on it, but it might get quoted after I’m gone.
Writing, after all, is a stab at immortality.Those of us who do it are legacy builders.Even as the web has moved us more and more toward visual, iconic forms of entertainment, it has still left a few dusty corners for the written word.When I pass the sometimes impressive graffiti on the way into New York I think I know what the vandals are feeling. We’re kindred spirits. We don’t want to be forgotten.Whether with spray can, fingers on a keyboard, or fountain pen (or maybe even an old-fashioned typewriter) we are trying to say, “I was here.”I used to print out all my blog posts in case the web failed.It grew to thousands of pages.I had to stop.I was beginning to act like a fictional character.
While this blog ranges over an outdated map of my mind, one of the two common elements that hold it together is books.I don’t have many bibliophile followers, but for any who happen upon my pages, welcome.Each year at this time I look back over the year in books.I started doing this when I joined Goodreads.I don’t put every single book in Goodreads, but it’s a fair register of what I’ve been up to.This year I set a reduced goal of 65 books (I knew I’d be moving and commuting less, and I do most of my reading on the bus).Happily I ended the year with 83 officially read, but then the first five months of the year were still spent in daily commutes.
Three years ago my wife discovered the Modern Mrs. Darcy’s reading challenge.I can’t say just how much I look forward to the new year just to begin reading the books I select to meet that challenge.The reason I do this is to force myself into reading things I might not feel like reading, or often, books I’ve been putting off for some reason or another.It only amounts to a dozen books and if I can’t get through twelve in a year, something’s terribly wrong.Margaret Atwood once said something like “Show me a person who’s read a thousand books and I’ll show you an interesting person.”I didn’t really need that quote to set a goal, and I don’t think of it as bragging for readers to share their experience with books.I started getting into books in middle school, and although I didn’t keep track in those days I likely read a thousand books before I graduated from high school.Branches begin to bend to the light early on.
So, were there memorable books this year?My reading, due to contractual obligations (I brought them on myself), has tended to be dark.There were, nevertheless, spots of light.Thomas Hardy’s Jude the Obscure and Paul Bogard’s The Ground Beneath Us were early favorites.I managed to stop my ears enough to miss spoilers from Jeff Vandermeer’s wonderful Annihilation.Carl Sagan’s The Demon-Haunted World was artfully done, and Gregory Alan Thornbury’s Why Should the Devil Have All the Good Music? was a saunter down memory lane.Selections from my reading challenge fiction that I really enjoyed were Anne Tyler’s Vinegar Girl, and Emily Fridlund’s History of Wolves. And Lee Irby’s Unreliable.And and Carlos Ruiz Zafón’s The Shadow of the Wind.The last inspired non-fiction title I read was Susan Fair’s American Witches.I always appreciate suggestions, just sayin’.Reading is the balm in my personal Gilead, and I look forward to a 2019 full of books, even if I can’t keep the pace of years past.
It seems that Holy Horror is now available, although I haven’t seen it yet.According to the McFarland website it’s in stock just in time for the holidays.Those of you who know me (few, admittedly) know that I dabble in other social media.One of my connections on Goodreads (friend requests are welcome) recently noted that he does not like or watch horror.Indeed, many people fall into that category.His follow-up comments, however, led me to a reverie.He mentioned that reading the lives of the saints and martyrs was horrific enough.One of the claims I make in Holy Horror is that Mel Gibson’s Passion of the Christ is a horror film.My friend’s comment about martyrs got me to thinking more about this and my own revisionist history.
Traditionally horror is traced to the gothic novel of the Romantic Period.Late in the eighteenth century authors began to experiment with tales of weirdly horrific events often set in lonely castles and monasteries.From there grew the more conventional horror of vampire and revenant tales up into the modern slasher and splatter genres.I contest, however, that horror goes back much further and that it has its origins in religious writing.Modern historians doubt that the mass martyrdoms of early Christianity were as widespread as reported.Yes, horrible things did happen, but it wasn’t as prevalent as many of us were taught.The stories, nevertheless, were written.Often with gruesome details.The purpose of these stories was roughly the same as the modern horror film—to advocate for what might be called conservative social values.The connection is there, if you can sit through the screening.
Holy Horror focuses on movies from 1960 onward.It isn’t comprehensive, but rather it is exploratory.I’ve read a great number of histories of the horror genre—a new one is on my reading stack even as I type—and few have traced this phenomenon back to its religious roots.Funnily, like horror religion will quickly get you tagged as a weirdo.Perhaps it’s no coincidence that both goths and priests wear black.As I’ve noted before on this blog, Stephen King’s horror novels often involve religious elements.This isn’t something King made up; the connection has been there from the beginning.We may have moved into lives largely insulated from the horrors of the world.Protestants may have taken the corpus from the crucifix for theological reasons, but for those who’ve taken a moment to ponder the implications, what I’m saying should make sense.Holy and horror go severed hand in bloody glove.