The Promo Bullshit Is So Thick, I Can't Get Across the Publishing Pasture

I cannot believe the promo bullshit I see by some authors. "If you like Ray Bradbury, you'll love _________." I mean, come on. Really? If I LIKE Bradbury, I'll LOVE you? Because, of course, Bradbury tried his best, but you've kicked it up a notch. Bradbury is kind of like the watered down version of you. Bradbury is but the pupil, YOU are the master.

I mean, if I would dare to make such a comparison, in my case for instance, I would turn it around: "If you LOVE Gore Vidal, you'll LIKE Robert Szeles." I would probably even add, "you MIGHT like Robert Szeles."

I understand the desperation that comes with wanting to get attention for your book (especially if you think it's decent and had that validated by outside sources). But after awhile, all the phony 5 star reviews and exaggerated praise and complete lack of perspective turn even the valid claims into so much noise.

The bullshit's so thick I can't walk through the pasture. NONE of us can, anymore. And that's bad, because ALL THE GOOD BOOKS ARE ON THE OTHER SIDE!!!

Trying to deliver less bullshit and more good writing,
Robert Szeles
If You LOVE Gore Vidal, Terry Southern or Nicholson Baker, you MIGHT LIKE Robert Szeles.
Jack & Dora Do L.A. Paperback: http://www.amazon.com/dp/1468195808
For Kindle: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B006T3O40Y/
All other ebook formats: http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/119028 www.robertszeles.com

Reading is Pleasure: Genre or Literary Fiction

We read fiction books because they give us pleasure. Our minds are caressed by the splendid use of language, delighted by clever dialogue, seduced by intriguing stories and ideas.

One can come up with all kinds of rational-minded, literary and intellectual reasons for why we like books. But in the end, it is because they make us feel good or they make us think in a certain way, which makes us feel good. Some people like to read a book that makes them feel bad or sad or scared, but they read the book because they want to feel that way. They believe they will derive some pleasure from going into those emotional states or they believe that eventually they will feel better from having experienced those states.

“Genre” fiction is often said to have less value than “literary” fiction because it is supposedly written more for entertainment than for literary achievement. Michael Chabon doesn’t believe this and defends genre fiction in his essay, “Reading and Writing Along the Borderlands” from his non-fiction collection, Maps and Legends. There’s an interesting interview with Michael Chabon on the Los Angeles Times Hero Complex site written a few years ago about this subject. As Chabon says, the majority of genre fiction is lowbrow crap, but the majority of literary fiction is highbrow crap.

Chabon was greatly influenced by many genre writers, as was I, and I feel a kinship to him. I have had a hard time categorizing my novel, Jack & Dora Do L.A., partly because it has fanciful elements (partly because it has explicit sex, something else that is prejudiced against, which I will discuss in an upcoming post), yet is mostly a romantic comedy drama perhaps in a similar catogory to Breakfast At Tiffany’s. Chabon has ventured into this allegedly questionable area of genre fiction with some of his own work, such as Gentlemen of the Road and The Yiddish Policemen's Union.

Chabon also talks about how reading puts us into a certain pleasurable state that’s connected with our mindset in childhood and early adolescence. I couldn’t agree more. Like Chabon, my interest is in good books, no matter what the genre, that will give me the sort of free, dreamy pleasure that I remember from childhood summers.

I understand the suspicion toward much genre literature, which is badly written, with more emphasis on surface thrills and often a lack of care for language, style and meaning. But I have equal suspicion for books that are heavy on style or overwritten, with little regard for the reader. No matter how important a work is supposed to be, I have no interest in reading it if I derive no pleasure from the experience.

On the genre side, this is why I so love Fritz Leiber, one of the greatest fantasists of all time. His fantasy series of Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser is an incredibly imaginative series of tales with style, wit, humor and passion. I have derived countless hours of pleasure and joy from reading and re-reading them, and I would never consider them less important than any “literary” fiction. Another writer of incredible imagination, poetry and style was the science fiction writer Cordwainer Smith. Dashiell Hammett and Robert E. Howard were two of the most consummate storytellers to ever write. Within half a page, you are completely lost in the world and story they have created. The brilliance of their style was that you couldn’t detect any. There are, of course, many other great genre writers.

On the supposed “literary” side, Gore Vidal, Shirley Jackson, Michael Chabon and John Fowles come to mind as brilliant writers who entertain. And few novels are more readable than Lolita by Vladimir Nabakov. But some novels are very difficult to read, yet give much pleasure as well. A perfect example would be Justine by Lawrence Durrell. Again, there are many others great and entertaining “literary” writers.

What these writers all have in common is that they give us pleasure. They may also help us to find some comfort or meaning in our lives, make us feel less lonely, and perhaps help us better understand reality and our place in it. And that also gives us pleasure.

Robert Szeles

(pronounced saylesh)

www.robertszeles.com

Why Books Shouldn't Be Free

My favorite authors are all professionals, meaning they get paid for their work, some more, some less. Some worked other jobs (most did at some point, and it's a valuable experience), some didn't.

I hear many authors (and other artists) say that they don't mind giving away their work because they don't do it for the money, they do it out of love for the work and because they want people to read what they've written. But the idea that someone doesn't need to be or should be paid because they're not doing it for the money doesn't hold up. Only artists are taken advantage of that way, and we let it happen by the false sense of competition created and the devaluing of our work ("You should just be happy someone's reading your story.")

"Hi, I'm a doctor. I don't do this for the money, it's because I love healing people. So, no, you don't have to pay me." 
"Hi, I'm an architect. I love what I do, and heck, think how many people are going to see my building. No charge for my services of course." 
"Hi, I'm an inventor. I love dabbling and creating new things, so sure, you can have my patent. I don't do it for the money." 
"Hi, I'm a scientist. Science is my passion and my life. Of course I don't expect to be paid for what I love to do. I'm happy to help society." 
"Hi, I'm a teacher. I love children and helping them learn and become better grown-ups. You don't have to pay me for what I do, I do it out of love." (oops, that's just about true for teachers, who are also screwed!) 

Our society values what we teach it to value by our choices. Some of those choices are difficult and require courage. I don't think every author should be paid a large amount of money for their work. I think those whose work has value should be compensated financially in a reasonable way because THAT is how our present society expresses cultural value. As soon as tech gear and rent and food, etc. is free, I'll be happy to give away all my stories.

We all shape our society by the decisions we make. Whatever yours are, as a person who creates or as a person who enjoys the creative work of others, realize you're affecting more than just yourself.

Robert
http://www.robertszeles.com/
http://robertszeles.blogspot.com/

Stop Fighting and Start Creating

I've noticed an interesting phenomenon. People get caught up in causes that seem so dire and suddenly something changes: a scientific discovery, for instance, that makes the whole thing irrelevant.

For instance: stem cell research controversy. The "pro-life" crowd is up in arms about it and tries to stop it because they think there's some conspiracy to create abortion mills to harvest stem cells.

http://www.care2.com/causes/susan-g-komen-foundation-also-stops-funding-embryonic-stem-cell-research.html#ixzz1lJ1mazKr

What's hilarious is many of these controversial subjects would be irrelevant if people put their focus on finding solutions instead of championing the cause of the day. Guess what? The issue will soon be irrelevant and these kind of people will have to find some other witch to hunt.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16456136

Same thing with eating meat. I totally get why people are against it. But now, they're growing edible meat from cow cells. So, you'll be able to have a steak without killing a cow. Issue over. Time to lay down the picket signs and find something else to do. If humans stopped putting their efforts into justifying themselves and demonizing others to make themselves feel righteous and put their energy towards solving our mutual problems together, all this bullshit would go away and we'd live in a fucking Star Trek-like utopia.

I get so irritated with people and their self-righteous causes. Instead of looking at "the other side" as demons intent on eating your children, look at the core problem, the core human need and try to address that. Use some of that energy towards creative problem solving instead of demonizing others and championing your self-righteous cause. That is, do that if you REALLY are interested in improving the human condition for everyone.

If not, just keep on doing what you're doing. Feed your ego and let the suffering continue. It's up to you.

Being Right Won't Make You Happy

Reading opposing comments on an online article lately, I was struck by how these two supposed sides (which don't really exist, most people have mixed feelings and viewpoints on a variety of issues, and those viewpoints change over time) demonize each other and are so blind to their own erroneous reasoning. I easily took the word "Liberal" as used in one of the posts and replaced it with "Conservative" to get a sentence that was equally true (or equally false):

The original user's comment was:
"Liberals are so hypocritic­al when it comes to choice. It is choice until they disagree with it and then its a federal mandate."

Changing the word makes it this:
"Conservatives are so hypocritic­al when it comes to choice. It is choice until they disagree with it and then its a federal mandate."

So, this statement could be considered true of people labeled as "Liberals." But, if so, it's equally true of people labeled "Conservatives." Conservatives say they want small government, but not if it's for issues they support. They're fine with a bloated military and having the Federal government raid state-approved medical marijuana facilities, etc. So many of these statements can have right/left or Liberal /Conservative interchanged. People are being blinded by their erroneous sense of self-rightness and the erroneous sense of wrongness of "the other side."

I would suggest everyone calm down, get off your high horse, realize we all want very similar things in life and try this ego-busting, enlightening exercise: take "the other sides" point of view and argue for their case. Do it SINCERELY. Even if it's just in the privacy of your thoughts.

No doubt the thought of doing so brings up feelings of fear or resentment. All the more reason to do so. At the very least, you might find "the other side" are not a bunch of stupid/evil/corrupt/irresponsible troublemakers. (They are human beings, your fellow human beings, and in this case, your fellow Americans. They  love their families as you do. They want peace and an abundant life as you do.) At the most, you might find your concrete views softened enough to allow for real dialogue and you will stop being the source of the problem (unceasing conflict) and part of the solution (creative, cooperative thinking and communication) . If we don't stop this violent verbal barrage and fake polarizing of the country, things are going to get worse and worse.

The answer is not for one of these fictional sides to win, the answer is for us to learn to live together respectfully (if not lovingly) and create a brilliant society for all with the incredible human resources we have at our disposal. This begins with open minds and respectful, open dialogue. It begins with caring more about everyone's wellbeing than your own point of view. It begins with letting go the idea that you have to be right. Being right won't make you happy. Loving and being loved will.

Something Wonderful Is Coming

Tonight, I awoke and lay in bed in the darkness with a delicious expectant feeling, as if the happy memories of a thousand lifetimes flirted at the edges of my mind. It was a wonderful, mysterious longing, wholly devoid of any melancholy, full of blissful expectation. Not just a feeling, but an abstract vision within my mind implying space, place and experience.

I closed my eyes and tried to be still, to hold at bay the mundane wakeful thoughts that I knew would chase this apprehension away. It flitted at the edge of my thoughts and emotions before finally being replaced with a curious, questioning calm.

I have experienced this several times before. It was like the unfocused memory of a dream that was far more real than the reality into which I was again awakening. But I knew without doubt that it was not the memory of a pleasant dream. It was, in fact, the opposite: an awakening into some truth about reality that I could only remember as a vague feeling in that state of consciousness that lies towards the end of that short period that lies just between waking and sleeping.

This experience (I can think of no better word for it) was the lingering presence of something hidden within me that holds the answer to everything in this life, or something that makes all our questions irrelevant. If it can be called an answer, it is one without words. And so, even this vague intimation of "the answer", expressed with words, can only yield this unsatisfactory recollection. As soon as I got out of bed and began writing, I could feel the words and myself already getting in the way.

Perhaps, I have tried too hard. Perhaps I should only say:

"My friends, do not let your hearts be troubled and do not despair...

Something wonderful is coming."

Female Romantic Archetypes of 1960's Television Shows, Part 3 of 3: Julie Newmar's Catwoman, Kitten With Claws

Julie Newmar was beautiful as Catwoman. But beautiful does not mean sexy. What is sexy is partly a subjective perception, but also, I believe, partly an inherently archetypal recognition of someone that is sexually desirable in a primal way that almost transcends culture.

Why, as a child, I was able to perceive Julie Newmar's Catwoman as a captivating feminine sex symbol is beyond my understanding. But the point is, it was not preconditioned by something else. I was too young to have seen much anything else. In my story, "Cat and Canary," from The Romantic Adventures of Jack & Dora, Jack reveals something about himself that I drew straight from my life, concerning his memories of watching Julie Newmar on the Batman TV show. It bears quoting.

Jack:

"I think I had my first sexual stirrings from seeing her, possibly this very episode, as a child of six or seven. I actually remember sitting on the dark olive green carpet in the living room, or more specifically, lying on my stomach, face held in my hands with my elbows propping me up. I also remember the episode in color, but that's not right because we only had a black and white TV back then. Maybe it's partly an imagined memory, but mostly I think it's real. I don't remember specific feelings or thoughts, I just know that I was mesmerized by her, that there were stirrings. Mind you, they were very, very distant stirrings. Probably I was thinking,"I wish she was my mommy!”

If Mrs. Peel gave me an appreciation for strong women, Julie Newmar's Catwoman gave me an appreciation for seductive, crazy ones. Or maybe that appreciation came from somewhere else (my mother's own, occasionally, unpredictable, wild nature?). Either Catwoman embodied it or exacerbated it, or both. Catwoman goes beyond even Jeannie (from I Dream of Jeannie) as a completely moral-free character who promises a life free of society-created guilt and obligation.

Julie Newmar had a fresh, effortless, unpretentious sexiness that is rare. No other woman that has played the role has even come close to her performance. The honesty of both her passion and her callousness are well illustrated in perhaps the most wonderful scene of the series between Batman and Catwoman. Batman seems to finally be succumbing to Catwoman's charms. She suggests they go away together, just the two of them. Batman asks, "What about Robin?" Catwoman replies, completely without malice, "We'll kill him. Painlessly, of course."

One cannot call Catwoman evil or hate her for her cruelty any more than one can hate a cat that has caught a mouse. She is not evil. She is completely and totally self-interested. Somehow, this adds to her sexual allure. Perhaps it is the fact that she is completely undivided. She suffers no guilt. She knows completely who and what she is. We, with our guilt, mixed feelings, neuroses, fears and unfulfilled longings, envy such a state. I myself have stared at a cat, envying their self-sufficiency and self-completion.

Thus, even Catwoman's callousness makes her more attractive because it is naturally part of who she is. And that brings us back to the idea of what is sexy. Someone is sexy when they are self-assured, undivided, without malice, pretense, motive or intention, a being complete within themselves, sexual for the sake of being sexual, not even aware that they are sexy. Catwoman invites us into this undivided world of self-gratification, unhindered by the present mores of society or the psychological baggage of our past experience.

Julie Newmar as Catwoman represents uninhibited, uncomplicated, honest, passionate sexuality. Who doesn't want that?

She is the Puritan's nightmare. She was, and always will be, one of my heroes and one of my greatest desires.

Robert Szeles (saylesh)
www.robertszeles.com
http://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/RobertSzeles
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B006T8KFRK