I have a new book review here. It's all about suicides and shit. And the other news of note is that I no longer work for M&C. I felt it was time to move on. Other things factored in, but I found it was making me far more unhappy than it should. I don't want to post about bad books I don't give a shit about--the less I know about the shitty books getting published and what is going on in that bullshit industry, the better.
So thus, a clean slate. It's in the past. I'm gonna focus on my Examiner stuff--I enjoy that more, and so I'll just do what I can with that. Make sure you're visiting, it helps when I get hits, and you can learn some tidbits about Texas culture to boot.
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
Thursday, July 02, 2009
Fredericksburg, TX.
If you'd like to know more about Fredericksburg, visit my Examiner post here. So far, I enjoy this gig, the labor of love that it is--people are nicer and appreciate when I tell them I'd like to write up about their business/event.
I will be writing up about this restaurant soon, but Ferdericksburg has both the Texas Americana and the German influence going on.
This restaurant offered German beer, but I cheated and had Texas beer instead. It was quite good. And the reason my hair looks like that is because I had been wearing a hat and there is a fan blowing on me.
Me: drinking an uber glass of Texas beer at a German restaurant. Photos courtesy of 'I-don't-have-good-hand-to-eye-coordination' Dan.
You can't escape the German influence in Fredericksburg, but more photos will be going up on my Examiner page in time. Don't believe me?
I will be writing up about this restaurant soon, but Ferdericksburg has both the Texas Americana and the German influence going on.
This restaurant offered German beer, but I cheated and had Texas beer instead. It was quite good. And the reason my hair looks like that is because I had been wearing a hat and there is a fan blowing on me.
Me: drinking an uber glass of Texas beer at a German restaurant. Photos courtesy of 'I-don't-have-good-hand-to-eye-coordination' Dan.You can't escape the German influence in Fredericksburg, but more photos will be going up on my Examiner page in time. Don't believe me?
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Austin Cultural Events Examiner.
I have a new writing gig, working for the Austin Examiner, in the Cultural Events section. Visit it here. I wanted to cover a variety of the arts within the Texas Hill Country area, the place I love most about the state I live.
I am sick of writing about bad books being published--I want to think about other things, so I'll be covering galleries, eateries, wineries, and a book on occasion, or a film. It just depends. Most of the photos I am gonna aim for using my own.
I've had some things happen as of late--heard back from a lit agency for a ms. I sent back in August who complimented it as some of the best writing they've seen, etc. Though they had this idea in mind that there needed to be more "anger" from the character (note: melodrama and cliches) and their revision suggestions were pieces of shit. Though the funny thing is they claimed it was a "fast and easy read" though the last press to reject it said it wasn't "plot driven" enough. So which is it?
Art isn't a democracy--the person who read the book I could tell was some MFA hack who needs everything explained, and the character in the book deals with some trauma yet does not suffer the obvious Dr. Phil-like crap you'd expect, notably because it is based upon real events and I don't act like that. Basically what they were looking for is Alice Sebold level trash, and my book is thematic. Their suggestions were akin to telling Kafka in "The Trial" how we need to know what Josef K is on trial for.
That is absolute horseshit, and it gets me the egos of these agents/readers who think they know more about art than a great writer like me. And the lame "suggestions" made were actually ones I thought of myself, as in, making sure to avoid, lest it becomes some brain dead Oprah pick.
There will be a publisher someday who will want it just how it is. And there will be readers who want it just how it is. And one day, when I am well known and published, I am going to write a memoir and print all these emails and terrible suggestions to show how dumb people in the business are, and how hard great artists have to struggle. They'll be the ones to look foolish, not me.
I am sick of writing about bad books being published--I want to think about other things, so I'll be covering galleries, eateries, wineries, and a book on occasion, or a film. It just depends. Most of the photos I am gonna aim for using my own.
I've had some things happen as of late--heard back from a lit agency for a ms. I sent back in August who complimented it as some of the best writing they've seen, etc. Though they had this idea in mind that there needed to be more "anger" from the character (note: melodrama and cliches) and their revision suggestions were pieces of shit. Though the funny thing is they claimed it was a "fast and easy read" though the last press to reject it said it wasn't "plot driven" enough. So which is it?
Art isn't a democracy--the person who read the book I could tell was some MFA hack who needs everything explained, and the character in the book deals with some trauma yet does not suffer the obvious Dr. Phil-like crap you'd expect, notably because it is based upon real events and I don't act like that. Basically what they were looking for is Alice Sebold level trash, and my book is thematic. Their suggestions were akin to telling Kafka in "The Trial" how we need to know what Josef K is on trial for.
That is absolute horseshit, and it gets me the egos of these agents/readers who think they know more about art than a great writer like me. And the lame "suggestions" made were actually ones I thought of myself, as in, making sure to avoid, lest it becomes some brain dead Oprah pick.
There will be a publisher someday who will want it just how it is. And there will be readers who want it just how it is. And one day, when I am well known and published, I am going to write a memoir and print all these emails and terrible suggestions to show how dumb people in the business are, and how hard great artists have to struggle. They'll be the ones to look foolish, not me.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Inks Lake.
Last week we went to Inks Lake State Park, and hiked and then swam. It has been so damn hot here--today it is 101, for example, but surprisingly it feels cool compared to yesterday, which was 110. This is not usual for June--it normally does not get that hot till August, and even when it does get hot like that, it generally only lasts a day or so. This heat spell has been for more than a week.
Found this skeleton and it made its way into my fiction! Great metaphor. That's my foot--my hiking shoes are boy sized 7 1/2.
This is the closest thing to a bikini shot you're gonna get. Dan got very hot while we were hiking, the high that day got up to 99, but on those rocks it's blazing. He had to stop because he felt nauseous. That's the heat for ya. But nothing like cooling off in a lake. Aahh! The heat doesn't bother me, I could have kept on going for hours.
I swam halfway to the other side. What kept me from going the full distance is the boat traffic, as I didn't want to be in the way. It's also further than it looks. I'm a very good swimmer. All my running definitely makes a difference!
Floating....
This little guy got into my trail mix. He bit a hole through the bag so we just gave it to him. He and another were enjoying their buffet.
Texas is far from the flat stereotype you see in movies...
There are cliffs too...
Found this skeleton and it made its way into my fiction! Great metaphor. That's my foot--my hiking shoes are boy sized 7 1/2.
This is the closest thing to a bikini shot you're gonna get. Dan got very hot while we were hiking, the high that day got up to 99, but on those rocks it's blazing. He had to stop because he felt nauseous. That's the heat for ya. But nothing like cooling off in a lake. Aahh! The heat doesn't bother me, I could have kept on going for hours.
I swam halfway to the other side. What kept me from going the full distance is the boat traffic, as I didn't want to be in the way. It's also further than it looks. I'm a very good swimmer. All my running definitely makes a difference!
Floating....
This little guy got into my trail mix. He bit a hole through the bag so we just gave it to him. He and another were enjoying their buffet.
Texas is far from the flat stereotype you see in movies...
There are cliffs too...
Friday, June 26, 2009
Some Fave MJ songs.
I think that Michael Jackson is the closest thing to a male Judy Garland. Both were super talents and great dancers, (though Judy could act) and both were not happy people. I was in 3rd grade when Thriller came out and that's what everyone talked about. This new album by Michael Jackson.
I first saw the Thriller video at my babysitter's house and I thought it was so cool. My friend and I used to play it and turn out all the lights and hide under the bed, pretending monsters were coming to get us. She had it on record--if that doesn't sound old school enough for ya!
So here are some of my fave Michael songs:
Billy Jean:
Beat It:
Dirty Diana:
They Don't Care About Us:
I Want You Back: (Jackson 5)
Many praise his videos, but with the exception of Thriller, I think a lot of his later vids were rather PC and preachy. And I'm not just jumping on the Michael bandwagon here, as I own both the J5 and MJ CDs. Dan grew up listening to the J5 so he loves that Greatest Hits CD (It kicks ass). But I grew up listening to Thriller. I only became interested in J5 later.
I first saw the Thriller video at my babysitter's house and I thought it was so cool. My friend and I used to play it and turn out all the lights and hide under the bed, pretending monsters were coming to get us. She had it on record--if that doesn't sound old school enough for ya!
So here are some of my fave Michael songs:
Billy Jean:
Beat It:
Dirty Diana:
They Don't Care About Us:
I Want You Back: (Jackson 5)
Many praise his videos, but with the exception of Thriller, I think a lot of his later vids were rather PC and preachy. And I'm not just jumping on the Michael bandwagon here, as I own both the J5 and MJ CDs. Dan grew up listening to the J5 so he loves that Greatest Hits CD (It kicks ass). But I grew up listening to Thriller. I only became interested in J5 later.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Michael Jackson R.I.P.
Michael, you were so talented yet so fucked up. You were actually good looking once, before you fucked up your face.
I saw Thriller the video for the 1st time at my babysitter's house. I remember everyone was talking about how weird and creepy it was.
He's got some great songs. Always will be the King of Pop. Hell, he married the daughter of the King of Rock n Roll.
I saw Thriller the video for the 1st time at my babysitter's house. I remember everyone was talking about how weird and creepy it was.
He's got some great songs. Always will be the King of Pop. Hell, he married the daughter of the King of Rock n Roll.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Friday, June 19, 2009
More DSI Comments.
Last week I did a post about Dan's recent interview with The Rude Pundit, aka The Rude Pussy. Jason also made a post about it, and from what I've heard from readers, several were pissed off by the comments and condescension made to Dan and Cosmoetica's readers.
First, a few things. In light of the last two interviews, which have both been shitty, Dan has decided to administer a rating system for the interviews. Because here is what usually happens: if the interviewee is an asshole or uninterested, online losers who hate Dan love to claim it is the fault of Dan, rather than the fault of the interviewee. As you can see from any number of the five, four and even three star interviews, when the interviewee is enthused, the interview comes across great. But when the interviewee is bored and views it as an imposition and gives the same shallow, canned answers, Dan ends up doing most of the talking. Well, who is to blame for that? The queries are all there--how one chooses to respond is not the fault of the interviewer but the interviewee. All Dan can do is throw them the bait. (And likewise, if you're gonna blame Dan for all of the bad responses then by that logic you have to credit him for all of the good ones too).
Also, he will no longer be putting shitty interviews on the front page. If the interviewee doesn't at least give some effort, then Dan is not going to bother. He figures he works damn hard assembling these questions, and they are very thoughtful and deep--not the usual puffery you'll find. Plain and simple: if you don't want to participate in an in-depth interview as this, then don't waste his time.
Dan ended up posting the entire email exchange where The Pussy claims he's not only read but LOVES the interviews. Thus, he agrees and keeps it for 5 months. Then his answers are shallow and at times insulting. My bet is that he didn't even look at the interview till only a couple days before. What I really loathe about this shithead is this:
the whole deferring to authority/majority really pisses me off and he has that kind of attitude. I didn't like his condescension either, implying that Dan should not say Cosmo will go down into history. He has this attitude, like many academics, who seem to think writers should "know their place" and Dan does not honor that. Why should he? All the advice we got as kids was to "believe in yourself" and all that shit, yet when we do, they don't like it. By his own definition, The Pussy too is a "failure" since he's not known.
Many would say, for example, that Dan should not rank himself above a writer like, say, Philip Roth. I'm just using Roth as an example because he's been published for 40 years and there is this unspoken rule that somehow, when one is unpublished or not as big in reputation as someone else, that one doesn't dare try to compare. In other words, "know your place."
Why should one do that? If you can back it up, the work will speak for itself. Whitman was not satisfied with "knowing his place" and Whitman is a far better poet than someone like Emerson, for example. Now, no one today is going to disagree with that. But in Whitman's Day, Emerson was like the Oprah of the time, and Whitman was unknown to the larger audiences. So the writers and critics then (and people like this Rude Pussy ass) think that is overstepping one's bounds. Well? Too bad. From what I gather, this guy is probably not a good playwright himself because anyone who has created anything of quality, in whatever art form, KNOWS the lazy claim "everything is subjective" is just that--a lazy, pussy-assed claim.
Few things really offend me. I'm not uptight like that, but to come to someone's website that is 20x the size of your own blog and mock Dan for claiming Cosmo will go down in history, ("Wook at duh widdle man, all gwowed up.") and then telling that person he is essentially a failed writer because he finds flaws in the horrid, corrupt system that is the publishing industry, is to basically piss in our faces. The utter arrogance, coupled with ass-liking attitude towards all things authority, did not inspire, it insulted. It is so sad that this is what is teaching young minds.
What a giant tool shed.
On a positive note, there are some future interviewees who seem excited and eager to participate in the series, so hopefully the rest of the year will be much better than the first half of it.
First, a few things. In light of the last two interviews, which have both been shitty, Dan has decided to administer a rating system for the interviews. Because here is what usually happens: if the interviewee is an asshole or uninterested, online losers who hate Dan love to claim it is the fault of Dan, rather than the fault of the interviewee. As you can see from any number of the five, four and even three star interviews, when the interviewee is enthused, the interview comes across great. But when the interviewee is bored and views it as an imposition and gives the same shallow, canned answers, Dan ends up doing most of the talking. Well, who is to blame for that? The queries are all there--how one chooses to respond is not the fault of the interviewer but the interviewee. All Dan can do is throw them the bait. (And likewise, if you're gonna blame Dan for all of the bad responses then by that logic you have to credit him for all of the good ones too).
Also, he will no longer be putting shitty interviews on the front page. If the interviewee doesn't at least give some effort, then Dan is not going to bother. He figures he works damn hard assembling these questions, and they are very thoughtful and deep--not the usual puffery you'll find. Plain and simple: if you don't want to participate in an in-depth interview as this, then don't waste his time.
Dan ended up posting the entire email exchange where The Pussy claims he's not only read but LOVES the interviews. Thus, he agrees and keeps it for 5 months. Then his answers are shallow and at times insulting. My bet is that he didn't even look at the interview till only a couple days before. What I really loathe about this shithead is this:
the whole deferring to authority/majority really pisses me off and he has that kind of attitude. I didn't like his condescension either, implying that Dan should not say Cosmo will go down into history. He has this attitude, like many academics, who seem to think writers should "know their place" and Dan does not honor that. Why should he? All the advice we got as kids was to "believe in yourself" and all that shit, yet when we do, they don't like it. By his own definition, The Pussy too is a "failure" since he's not known.
Many would say, for example, that Dan should not rank himself above a writer like, say, Philip Roth. I'm just using Roth as an example because he's been published for 40 years and there is this unspoken rule that somehow, when one is unpublished or not as big in reputation as someone else, that one doesn't dare try to compare. In other words, "know your place."
Why should one do that? If you can back it up, the work will speak for itself. Whitman was not satisfied with "knowing his place" and Whitman is a far better poet than someone like Emerson, for example. Now, no one today is going to disagree with that. But in Whitman's Day, Emerson was like the Oprah of the time, and Whitman was unknown to the larger audiences. So the writers and critics then (and people like this Rude Pussy ass) think that is overstepping one's bounds. Well? Too bad. From what I gather, this guy is probably not a good playwright himself because anyone who has created anything of quality, in whatever art form, KNOWS the lazy claim "everything is subjective" is just that--a lazy, pussy-assed claim.
Few things really offend me. I'm not uptight like that, but to come to someone's website that is 20x the size of your own blog and mock Dan for claiming Cosmo will go down in history, ("Wook at duh widdle man, all gwowed up.") and then telling that person he is essentially a failed writer because he finds flaws in the horrid, corrupt system that is the publishing industry, is to basically piss in our faces. The utter arrogance, coupled with ass-liking attitude towards all things authority, did not inspire, it insulted. It is so sad that this is what is teaching young minds.
What a giant tool shed.
On a positive note, there are some future interviewees who seem excited and eager to participate in the series, so hopefully the rest of the year will be much better than the first half of it.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Amazing Footage of Driver Capturing Tornado.
I know you see lots of this stuff, but this is the footage of a driver who is literally only a few hundred yards away from a twister that is tearing apart a building. I would not want to be in a car right about then! Hopefully the guy didn't die!
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Book Review: Seductive Poison: A Jonestown Survivor's Story of Life and Death in the People's Temple by Deborah Layton.
Kool-Aid! Cults! Jonestown! Mass-Suicide! Read my review here! Join us! Join us!
Monday, June 15, 2009
Vain & Shallow Post: Ode to the $13 Haircut.
Today I was pondering the importance of a good, affordable haircut. I've spent the past year and a half bobbing around to different places, trying to find a good, regular place to go. I don't like paying a lot of money for what I think is just a trim, or a touch up, since my hair is relatively easy to maintain. I used to go to this place that was nice, but I didn't want to drive all the distance and pay $40 plus tip.So I went to another place that was located next door to a Subway and the smell of bread mixed with hair products made me nauseous so I never went back. Then I've gone to this one lady who has her own private salon, and although she was ok terms of price, she talked my ear off. In the hour I was there I ended up telling her my entire work history, which I didn't really want to, but she thought she had to maintain conversation. I don't really want to become "pals" with my hair stylist.
Then I found this other really good place that was super-cheap, and the girl did a great job, but then they moved further away, and the girl left. So I've gone now to this walk in place the past 2 times that isn't particularly feminine or fashionable, but they seem to do good job. I have no complaints. What you're paying for, when you go to any salon, is the "atmosphere" and the "experience." They often offer you a bottle of water, or a cup of tea, "Can I get you anything...?" But this cheapo place, you're in and out with very little talking done.
Granted, if I wanted a real styling done, or a hair consultation, or a coloring, or whatever, I would not go to this place, but if you're just looking for a touch up when you're finding your hair breaks off at the tips when you pull it out of a ponytail, then it's not so bad.
It's not that I'm unfriendly and don't want to talk to hair stylists, but usually I'm in a zone mindset and I just want to relax, not get into some in depth discussion about trivia. Sometimes you just want to get in and out, and you don't need to feel that "salon" experience. Who cares?
I've gone to fancy places for a pedicure, for example, that will charge $50 plus tip. And then there is this place only minutes from me that gives them to you for half the price. It's not as fancy, but the result is the same. A pedicure, after all, isn't like a massage. I don't particularly enjoy them or find them that relaxing (unless my feet are in dire need of a soaking). But the fact that someone is picking at your nails and sawing away at your callouses you've acquired from running, not to mention that the touching can occasionally tickle, which I don't like, I look more forward to the end product--that my feet are once again soft and my toes don't look like I have talons.
These are the little things we women do to keep ourselves maintained, and as hard as it is to believe, (as Anthony once noted in an email to me) even a great poet like Rilke had to clip his toenails.
Friday, June 12, 2009
New DSI.
Dan has a new interview with The Rude Pundit. It's kind of a disappointment and made me depressed. I've always enjoyed TRP's blog, but his thoughts on writing and art are just so dull and conventional. He's the anti-Rowlands. Why? Because TRP makes the lazy and ill-informed claim that "art is subjective" when that is total bullshit. Again, were that true, then one could lump the plays of the VT gunman beside those of Ibsen and Shakespeare. Why not, if it's all subjective? Then he claims that "Harold Pinter is a great writer. Period." Again, why? If it's all subjective, then there is no such thing as good and bad let alone great. It's just lame, lazy shit and Dan rips him another asshole with that one. He reeks of academia and this is one of the reasons why I hate academics--they're just as elitist and PC as the shit they decry. TRP also regularly refers to Ann Coulter as a cunt, and while this may be true, it's hardly controversial amid a liberal English dept at a university.
Rowlands (another academic so it's not like I'm claiming they're all bad) makes the claim in his book Fame (which I reviewed) that the reason we're suffering this "Collapse of Enlightenment" as he calls it, is due to our "inability to distinguish quality from bullshit." Or objective standards, in other words. By claiming everything is subjective, it is like saying everyone is special because if everyone is special then no one is special. You see the paradox? People build self-esteem when they work for something and get better at it. If everything is subjective then there is nothing to improve and no reason to even get out of bed in the morning. Public approbation does not = quality, lest Danielle Steel is the greatest writer who has ever lived. And who wants to claim that? Or can't you, since it's all subjective?
We live in a sick fame and celebrity obsessed culture that does not value the quality of one's work, but how known the work is and what others say about it, without real individual thought. People have forgotten how to think. (But not how to network apparently!) Rowlands said it best when he offered his reason: "Thinking is hard." And any writer who has not gotten "recognition" according to society's standards, is thus a failed writer.
Which only leads me to say: Go Fuck Yourself.
Emily Dickinson: not published till way after her death. An obvious failure.
I can't think of a bigger failure and loser than Franz Kafka. Unpublished at the time of his death. I heard he couldn't even get a date! I mean just look at him!
Most of the critics of his day said Whitman was bad. They were clearly right. Failure.
And this guy was a failure too, since so many in his day thought he sucked. That's why he cut off his ear.
Sorry, Dan has no photos of himself to add, but someday I imagine his name will be lumped not too far away.
Rowlands (another academic so it's not like I'm claiming they're all bad) makes the claim in his book Fame (which I reviewed) that the reason we're suffering this "Collapse of Enlightenment" as he calls it, is due to our "inability to distinguish quality from bullshit." Or objective standards, in other words. By claiming everything is subjective, it is like saying everyone is special because if everyone is special then no one is special. You see the paradox? People build self-esteem when they work for something and get better at it. If everything is subjective then there is nothing to improve and no reason to even get out of bed in the morning. Public approbation does not = quality, lest Danielle Steel is the greatest writer who has ever lived. And who wants to claim that? Or can't you, since it's all subjective?
We live in a sick fame and celebrity obsessed culture that does not value the quality of one's work, but how known the work is and what others say about it, without real individual thought. People have forgotten how to think. (But not how to network apparently!) Rowlands said it best when he offered his reason: "Thinking is hard." And any writer who has not gotten "recognition" according to society's standards, is thus a failed writer.
Which only leads me to say: Go Fuck Yourself.
Emily Dickinson: not published till way after her death. An obvious failure.
I can't think of a bigger failure and loser than Franz Kafka. Unpublished at the time of his death. I heard he couldn't even get a date! I mean just look at him! Most of the critics of his day said Whitman was bad. They were clearly right. Failure.
And this guy was a failure too, since so many in his day thought he sucked. That's why he cut off his ear.Sorry, Dan has no photos of himself to add, but someday I imagine his name will be lumped not too far away.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
