http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm Mon, 21 May 2012 05:03:00 GMT http://bandzoogle.com http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=2098210 <a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-DUDRvjLLrNE/T7mFT77HSEI/AAAAAAAAAv4/QfEFdH8blvs/s1600/003442.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">This novel was released a year before Bret Easton Ellis's "Less Than Zero" and its success is what actually made Ellis's novel possible. It was considered an "unexpected" success, but having read it now for the first time, again nearly thirty years after the fact, it's easy to look back on it and see what it was that made this novel the success that it was at the time. Both McInerney and Ellis are often lumped together, both being given the accolade of having produced a "novel of their generation" but the two writers couldn't be more different from one another. Whereas Ellis's style in his debut was more minimalistic and its theme more nihilistic, "Bright Lights, Big City" is a more stylized effort, not as nihilistic but more existential in tone. I imagine that the two writers are often lumped together because they both cover the same ground: young urbanites in the mid-1980s. In Ellis's case it was Los Angeles. McInerney's tale is set in New York City.&nbsp;From page one the novel was not at all what I was expecting it to be. It's style - written in the second person - was very interesting to me and not at all "distracting" as some who have read this novel before had warned be about. But more importantly, McInerney's overall style was not what I was expecting to read. It reads more traditional than Ellis's debut, and there's a flow to it which mimics the popular culture of the day: fast, short, to the point - echoing an almost "MTV-Like" experience (that is, when MTV was actually a music channel). It is definitely a novel of its time and again, may seem a little dated to some. The New York City in which the nameless protagonist moves is a New York City that no longer exists; but it is a New York City that I remember well, being that I had just entered the workforce at the very time this novel takes place and it is a picture perfect representation of how the city was at that time.&nbsp;The story is essentially a "slice of life" story. The nameless narrator and protagonist works at a prestigious magazine as a fact checker, barely holding onto his job due to his daily and nightly carousing, most of the time amped up on coke. His wife, a fashion model, had recently left him and his ambitions as a writer have stalled. Throughout it all he tries to put on a brave face to others, coming off like nothing is wrong but internally he is struggling with his failures and his sense of loss - not only losing his wife, but also his mother, who passed away the year before. He spends his time with his friends, jumping from club to club, thinking that this would be a way to avoid the unhappiness he feels. The irony is that he doesn't find happiness and doesn't enjoy himself and it only makes him more miserable. There is this constant feeling that he and his peers must keep moving but none of them ever actually "arrive." He moves in a world where the idea of being in the "right" club is equated with being the most important thing one can do in life. It is a world where celebrities and fashion models are asked for their opinions about the world. It is a world where most people you encounter are bombed out of their minds on drugs, looking for the next person to bring home at night. Meanwhile, the real America is circulating all around them: the army of homeless people, the merchants selling stolen merchandise on the street, an older generation that had long lost its idealism and drown their perceived failures in alcohol, a world in which one mistake can put you out on the street in a heartbeat. It was "Morning in America" for some but not for everyone.&nbsp;All in all I really enjoyed this novel. It is a portrait of a time and place in which I could easily relate to - and again not necessarily the characters in the story, who are essentially "Yuppies" - but being that I was working in the "belly of the beast" at the time this was enjoying its success, it brought back just how different the city was in those days and most importantly, after thirty years, how little, fundamentally, things have changed. Definitely recommended. If you haven't read this, you should. A fine novel overall.&nbsp;Rating: * * * * *&nbsp;

This novel was released a year before Bret Easton Ellis?s ?Less Than Zero? and its success is what actually made Ellis?s novel possible. It was considered an ?unexpected? success, but having read it now for the first time, again nearly thirty years after the fact, it?s easy to look back on it and see what it was that made this novel the success that it was at the time. Both McInerney and Ellis are often lumped together, both being given the accolade of having produced a ?novel of their generation? but the two writers couldn?t be more different from one another. Whereas Ellis?s style in his debut was more minimalistic and its theme more nihilistic, ?Bright Lights, Big City? is a more stylized effort, not as nihilistic but more existential in tone. I imagine that the two writers are often lumped together because they both cover the same ground: young urbanites in the mid-1980s. In Ellis?s case it was Los Angeles. McInerney?s tale is set in New York City. 

From page one the novel was not at all what I was expecting it to be. It?s style - written in the second person - was very interesting to me and not at all ?distracting? as some who have read this novel before had warned be about. But more importantly, McInerney?s overall style was not what I was expecting to read. It reads more traditional than Ellis?s debut, and there?s a flow to it which mimics the popular culture of the day: fast, short, to the point - echoing an almost ?MTV-Like? experience (that is, when MTV was actually a music channel). It is definitely a novel of its time and again, may seem a little dated to some. The New York City in which the nameless protagonist moves is a New York City that no longer exists; but it is a New York City that I remember well, being that I had just entered the workforce at the very time this novel takes place and it is a picture perfect representation of how the city was at that time. 

The story is essentially a ?slice of life? story. The nameless narrator and protagonist works at a prestigious magazine as a fact checker, barely holding onto his job due to his daily and nightly carousing, most of the time amped up on coke. His wife, a fashion model, had recently left him and his ambitions as a writer have stalled. Throughout it all he tries to put on a brave face to others, coming off like nothing is wrong but internally he is struggling with his failures and his sense of loss - not only losing his wife, but also his mother, who passed away the year before. He spends his time with his friends, jumping from club to club, thinking that this would be a way to avoid the unhappiness he feels. The irony is that he doesn?t find happiness and doesn?t enjoy himself and it only makes him more miserable. There is this constant feeling that he and his peers must keep moving but none of them ever actually ?arrive.? He moves in a world where the idea of being in the ?right? club is equated with being the most important thing one can do in life. It is a world where celebrities and fashion models are asked for their opinions about the world. It is a world where most people you encounter are bombed out of their minds on drugs, looking for the next person to bring home at night. Meanwhile, the real America is circulating all around them: the army of homeless people, the merchants selling stolen merchandise on the street, an older generation that had long lost its idealism and drown their perceived failures in alcohol, a world in which one mistake can put you out on the street in a heartbeat. It was ?Morning in America? for some but not for everyone. 

All in all I really enjoyed this novel. It is a portrait of a time and place in which I could easily relate to - and again not necessarily the characters in the story, who are essentially ?Yuppies? - but being that I was working in the ?belly of the beast? at the time this was enjoying its success, it brought back just how different the city was in those days and most importantly, after thirty years, how little, fundamentally, things have changed. Definitely recommended. If you haven?t read this, you should. A fine novel overall. 

Rating: * * * * * 

]]> Mon, 21 May 2012 05:03:00 GMT 1C91DC28499E877983A7D6D34F7A5D70 http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=2090451 <a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-gzRaMvZgvfI/T7VztowFtMI/AAAAAAAAAvs/s4gCkgtOmhc/s1600/49373.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">It took me nearly thirty years to finally getting around to reading this novel. Had I read it at the time of its release (1985) I don't know what I would have thought of it. It was a huge deal at the time and Bret Easton Ellis was being touted as a "new voice of a generation", and quite specifically, my generation (Ellis is only about two years older than I am).&nbsp; At that time, the trials and tribulations of ultra-wealthy Los Angeles post-high school kids would have meant absolutely nothing to me and perhaps of this perception I avoided actually reading the book for many many years. But of course curiosity got to me, as well as other people's recommendations. Thirty years on, I'm obviously in a much different place than I was then, when I was still a rebellious-minded 19 year old. I figured distance would allow me to look at this with a fresh perspective.&nbsp;In 1985, I was about the same age as the characters in the story; characters with names like "Clay", "Trent", "Rip", and "Blair". Having spent a lot of my teenage years hanging around the East Village and the Lower East Side in New York City, these characters and their life experiences couldn't have been more far removed from my own experiences. Social class certainly has a lot to do with this as well. The characters in this novel are, as I said, ultra-wealthy and ultra-spoiled. Their parents are filmmakers, Hollywood directors, magazine editors, or in some way involved with the high life in Los Angeles. They all live in plush mansions, have swimming pools and own the most (then) modern gadgets, and they all attend the "good" schools. They spend their time going to clubs, going to parties, eating and drinking in expensive restaurants, all of them, dysfunctional and drug addled - coke, the main drug choice. I couldn't have been more removed from this social scene.&nbsp;The story revolves around the narrator, "Clay", who returns to Los Angeles after having been away at college in New Hampshire. From the beginning you can see that he has changed somewhat from being away - although four months away from home wouldn't seem long enough for an individual to "change" all that much. However once he begins reconnecting with his friends little by little you begin to see how detached he is from them, although he suffers from the same issues that most of them suffer from. The characters in the story are utterly self-absorbed and obsessed with fitting in with their peers, where one little "faux-pas" such as wearing the wrong article of clothing could be get you ostracized. As noted earlier, they spend nearly all their time going to clubs, parties and doing massive amounts of coke. Their parents are largely absent, or if not totally absent, completely disconnected from what their kids are doing, preferring to care only about themselves and their lot in life. Here is where the "generational" theme comes in - the idea of being "lost", troubled, and completely ignored.&nbsp;Ellis's style is minimalistic, stripped down to its bare bones. Written in the first person present tense, it almost has the feeling of a journal as "Clay" meanders through his four weeks at home before having to return to New England for the next semester. The style is engaging enough to keep the reader interested in wanting to know what's going to happen - and it is towards the last third of the novel where the story takes a decidedly dark turn. Suddenly, all the tediousness and emptiness of the characters actions starts to make sense and the story that is actually being told begins to unfold. Here is a group of young people who are totally without a moral compass, so self-absorbed that they have no ability to empathize with the plight of others, or even show the least bit compassion to those that are supposed to be their friends. And herein lies the crux of what the novel is about. It is a "generational statement" and even though these characters are from well off families and have everything they could ever want, there's still a sort of "emptiness", this giant hole in their lives where they can't quite figure out what their purpose in life is. In spite of it all, they are lost, rudderless, dysfunctional - yet no one cares - not even themselves.&nbsp;This is the second book by Ellis that I have read. I started with what was considered his "Magnum Opus", the controversial "American Psycho", a novel I had a tough time getting through due to its tedium and the main character's obsession with designer clothing (which was pointed out nearly every other paragraph). This, to me, is by far a superior novel and for those who have never read Ellis, this would be one to start with. In the end, I enjoyed this novel very much. It's a very good read and although it may seem a little "dated" now, it doesn't take away from the story being told. It may even be a source of nostalgia for some, being that it is picture perfect of the time in which it is set and Ellis does a wonderful job in capturing that. Recommended.&nbsp;Rating: * * * *&nbsp;

It took me nearly thirty years to finally getting around to reading this novel. Had I read it at the time of its release (1985) I don?t know what I would have thought of it. It was a huge deal at the time and Bret Easton Ellis was being touted as a ?new voice of a generation?, and quite specifically, my generation (Ellis is only about two years older than I am).  At that time, the trials and tribulations of ultra-wealthy Los Angeles post-high school kids would have meant absolutely nothing to me and perhaps of this perception I avoided actually reading the book for many many years. But of course curiosity got to me, as well as other people?s recommendations. Thirty years on, I?m obviously in a much different place than I was then, when I was still a rebellious-minded 19 year old. I figured distance would allow me to look at this with a fresh perspective. 

In 1985, I was about the same age as the characters in the story; characters with names like ?Clay?, ?Trent?, ?Rip?, and ?Blair?. Having spent a lot of my teenage years hanging around the East Village and the Lower East Side in New York City, these characters and their life experiences couldn?t have been more far removed from my own experiences. Social class certainly has a lot to do with this as well. The characters in this novel are, as I said, ultra-wealthy and ultra-spoiled. Their parents are filmmakers, Hollywood directors, magazine editors, or in some way involved with the high life in Los Angeles. They all live in plush mansions, have swimming pools and own the most (then) modern gadgets, and they all attend the ?good? schools. They spend their time going to clubs, going to parties, eating and drinking in expensive restaurants, all of them, dysfunctional and drug addled - coke, the main drug choice. I couldn?t have been more removed from this social scene. 

The story revolves around the narrator, ?Clay?, who returns to Los Angeles after having been away at college in New Hampshire. From the beginning you can see that he has changed somewhat from being away - although four months away from home wouldn?t seem long enough for an individual to ?change? all that much. However once he begins reconnecting with his friends little by little you begin to see how detached he is from them, although he suffers from the same issues that most of them suffer from. The characters in the story are utterly self-absorbed and obsessed with fitting in with their peers, where one little ?faux-pas? such as wearing the wrong article of clothing could be get you ostracized. As noted earlier, they spend nearly all their time going to clubs, parties and doing massive amounts of coke. Their parents are largely absent, or if not totally absent, completely disconnected from what their kids are doing, preferring to care only about themselves and their lot in life. Here is where the ?generational? theme comes in - the idea of being ?lost?, troubled, and completely ignored. 

Ellis?s style is minimalistic, stripped down to its bare bones. Written in the first person present tense, it almost has the feeling of a journal as ?Clay? meanders through his four weeks at home before having to return to New England for the next semester. The style is engaging enough to keep the reader interested in wanting to know what?s going to happen - and it is towards the last third of the novel where the story takes a decidedly dark turn. Suddenly, all the tediousness and emptiness of the characters actions starts to make sense and the story that is actually being told begins to unfold. Here is a group of young people who are totally without a moral compass, so self-absorbed that they have no ability to empathize with the plight of others, or even show the least bit compassion to those that are supposed to be their friends. And herein lies the crux of what the novel is about. It is a ?generational statement? and even though these characters are from well off families and have everything they could ever want, there?s still a sort of ?emptiness?, this giant hole in their lives where they can?t quite figure out what their purpose in life is. In spite of it all, they are lost, rudderless, dysfunctional - yet no one cares - not even themselves. 

This is the second book by Ellis that I have read. I started with what was considered his ?Magnum Opus?, the controversial ?American Psycho?, a novel I had a tough time getting through due to its tedium and the main character?s obsession with designer clothing (which was pointed out nearly every other paragraph). This, to me, is by far a superior novel and for those who have never read Ellis, this would be one to start with. In the end, I enjoyed this novel very much. It?s a very good read and although it may seem a little ?dated? now, it doesn?t take away from the story being told. It may even be a source of nostalgia for some, being that it is picture perfect of the time in which it is set and Ellis does a wonderful job in capturing that. Recommended. 

Rating: * * * * 

]]> Fri, 18 May 2012 03:00:00 GMT 96D6D290E333AE126D3D38A2DC693F20 http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=2071666 <a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MO79BcncKZk/T62vrSCWinI/AAAAAAAAAvg/K4FeUpV3R-E/s1600/Hauntedcvr.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">I've been working my way through all of Chuck Palahniuk's books over the past year, reading them in order (for no particular reason, really, other than to watch how his work progresses - or not). I am up to 2005's "Haunted", a novel mainly comprised of 23 short stories, all strung together with a narrative arc that, again, says an awful lot about the state of contemporary American culture. At first glance, one would get the impression that it's a riff on "Reality TV" - and there definitely is that element to it - but underneath there is much more to mine here. Yes, it's definitely a commentary on the American addictions: fame &amp; celebrity, but it's also about the willingness of people who love to bitch and complain, those who love to be critical of everything around them yet do absolutely nothing to make things better - a theme that I have been thinking an awful lot about in recent months, scouring the internet. Labeled as a "horror" novel, but not in the traditional sense. There are allusions to the story about the night when Byron, Shelly, etc, were holed up in a house on a stormy night and decided to see who could come up with the most horrifying story. This is the model on which "Haunted" is based. Only the "horror" of these stories do not come with fangs, capes, transformations, ghosts, etc. They are the horrors of every day, the horrors of the culture, the horrors of those who are permanently on the outside of society - a running theme for Palahniuk.&nbsp;The structure of the novel is truly original. Written in the first person plural, the narrator is simultaneously in the background and part of the group of severely dysfunctional characters that populate the story. Each character is nameless, save for the snarky nicknames they had given one another (i.e. "Saint Gut-Free", "Miss America," "Missing Link" and so on). The story revolves around a group of would-be writers who decide to answer an ad to give up three months of their lives in order to write their "masterpiece" and are taken and locked away in an abandoned theater, deprived of food, water, heat, etc in order to enhance their "suffering" to help them produce their masterworks. Soon, the group of writers decide that their "suffering" would make a great story in and of itself, devising a way - in "Survivor-like" fashion, to change the narrative for their own advantage in order for them all to become "famous" for their plight. Each character tells their own story, some of which are invented and others confessional tales about their particular dysfunction.&nbsp;Each of the stories could stand on their own and as I was reading it, had wondered whether these stories were written with the intention of being an actual short story collection or whether they were written with the intentional purpose to blend with the overall narrative. Either way, the stories, taken on their own, make this book worth the read alone. Taken all together, what you have here is a truly original work which explores the many differing "horrors" of contemporary culture in America. Some of the stories are pretty harsh (as are the acts that take place within the overall story. It is a horror novel, after all) but some are not grotesque as in blood-splatter-gore-slasher type stories one would expect. Some of them are horrifying by the mere fact that they are so commonplace, so recognizable in the world today; the horrific things people do to themselves and to one another for all kinds of insane and idiotic reasons. Definitely worth checking out.&nbsp;Rating: * * * * &nbsp;

I?ve been working my way through all of Chuck Palahniuk?s books over the past year, reading them in order (for no particular reason, really, other than to watch how his work progresses - or not). I am up to 2005?s ?Haunted?, a novel mainly comprised of 23 short stories, all strung together with a narrative arc that, again, says an awful lot about the state of contemporary American culture. At first glance, one would get the impression that it?s a riff on ?Reality TV? - and there definitely is that element to it - but underneath there is much more to mine here. Yes, it?s definitely a commentary on the American addictions: fame & celebrity, but it?s also about the willingness of people who love to bitch and complain, those who love to be critical of everything around them yet do absolutely nothing to make things better - a theme that I have been thinking an awful lot about in recent months, scouring the internet. Labeled as a ?horror? novel, but not in the traditional sense. There are allusions to the story about the night when Byron, Shelly, etc, were holed up in a house on a stormy night and decided to see who could come up with the most horrifying story. This is the model on which ?Haunted? is based. Only the ?horror? of these stories do not come with fangs, capes, transformations, ghosts, etc. They are the horrors of every day, the horrors of the culture, the horrors of those who are permanently on the outside of society - a running theme for Palahniuk. 

The structure of the novel is truly original. Written in the first person plural, the narrator is simultaneously in the background and part of the group of severely dysfunctional characters that populate the story. Each character is nameless, save for the snarky nicknames they had given one another (i.e. ?Saint Gut-Free?, ?Miss America,? ?Missing Link? and so on). The story revolves around a group of would-be writers who decide to answer an ad to give up three months of their lives in order to write their ?masterpiece? and are taken and locked away in an abandoned theater, deprived of food, water, heat, etc in order to enhance their ?suffering? to help them produce their masterworks. Soon, the group of writers decide that their ?suffering? would make a great story in and of itself, devising a way - in ?Survivor-like? fashion, to change the narrative for their own advantage in order for them all to become ?famous? for their plight. Each character tells their own story, some of which are invented and others confessional tales about their particular dysfunction. 

Each of the stories could stand on their own and as I was reading it, had wondered whether these stories were written with the intention of being an actual short story collection or whether they were written with the intentional purpose to blend with the overall narrative. Either way, the stories, taken on their own, make this book worth the read alone. Taken all together, what you have here is a truly original work which explores the many differing ?horrors? of contemporary culture in America. Some of the stories are pretty harsh (as are the acts that take place within the overall story. It is a horror novel, after all) but some are not grotesque as in blood-splatter-gore-slasher type stories one would expect. Some of them are horrifying by the mere fact that they are so commonplace, so recognizable in the world today; the horrific things people do to themselves and to one another for all kinds of insane and idiotic reasons. Definitely worth checking out. 

Rating: * * * *  

]]> Sat, 12 May 2012 05:36:00 GMT 6922F3D55EB059A1F20AACEAD17589B9 http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=2052572 <a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-i5F7URO1aJc/T6U0pufV9rI/AAAAAAAAAvI/E2XwrQS0Ae0/s1600/bubbling-cauldron.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">"I think more than writers, the major influences on me have been European movies, jazz, and Abstract Expressionism." - Don DeLilloAs writers, we each come to the table with something unique - or should. While the old adage "there's nothing new under the sun" is often true, still - there's always a way of taking what has gone before and somehow making it your own; and this can be done by the simple act of being honest with yourself and creating something that you feel in your heart and your guts; to approach what you do with what is uniquely you without trying to copy someone else or writing something you think people want to read.&nbsp; We usually start off by copying those we admire but sooner or later you have to find your own voice, find your own way of approaching the page. And we all have different aspirations, our own vision, and since we are individuals with differing experiences and sensibilities, naturally what comes out on the page is going to be something different.&nbsp;In his essay, "Fires", Raymond Carver discussed his influences and the general notion of what influences a writer - and it's not only other writing. For him (as I'm sure it is for many others) it was life experiences, day to day observations, snippets of overheard conversation, memories, however vague or abstract. All of it goes into the mix. When I came across the Don DeLillo quote at the top of this post, it occurred to me that this is not only true in writing but in all art forms as well. There are many things that get thrown into the pot when we are creating something, even perhaps when we are unaware of it.&nbsp;When I first started writing I wrote poetry exclusively for many years and I was coming to it as a musician who loved to read and write. I had no formal training, no writing classes, no MFA program that I attended. Poetry seemed like the natural thing being that I was a songwriter. The influences on those old poems were other poets, yes, but mainly they were more informed by my experiences, thoughts, observations, inward contemplation, political beliefs, current events, social trends, relationships, music, art, history, and so on. I wrote mainly "free verse" poetry, meaning, if I want to be honest with you and myself, that I was totally uninterested in form or even the "mechanics" of poetry. I couldn't care less what constituted a sonnet, or a ballad, or whatever forms poetry takes. I had no schooling in writing poetry nor was I interested in any. So perhaps they weren't "poems" in the true sense of the word, but merely "snapshots" of a particular thought or observation at the time they were being written. Essentially I was writing by ear and the type of poetry I was writing certainly wasn't everyone's cup of tea. As with fiction writing, or any other kind of writing, even the reader comes to it with their own sensibilities; and after many years of submitting poetry to literally hundreds of magazines, journals and publishers, you learn rather quickly how those sensibilities differ from one editor to the next, from one reader to the next. Poems rejected by one can quite often be accepted by others, as it had happened for me. But I managed a couple of chapbooks and landed these "poems" in about forty journals of varying type over the years, so they obviously worked on some people.&nbsp;Fiction writing is a whole different ballgame and I came to it pretty much the same way. I soon learned that this approach wasn't going to work and I was going to have to think things through a little if I wanted to come up with something viable. The first problem I encountered was what to write about. What was this novel going to be? I did what most writers do, I suppose. I "wrote what I knew." I also took some cues from the novelists I was reading at the time, which was mostly experimental and Beat writers. Literally flying by the seat of my pants - and not really having any "writer friends" (other than the other poets I'd met via the small press scene at the time) - I basically went in blind. The books on writing didn't help at all, since most of them seemed geared towards those who were writing genre fiction or those who sought to write something "marketable." So I just dipped into the pool of writing influences I had at the time and went from there. It took a long time and what I wound up with was something of a story threaded within all the experiments and literary ideas that appealed to me at the time: stream of consciousness, cut-up writing, poetry, surrealism, etc. There were other influences too: film, particularly foreign films. It took many years to complete and in the end, I felt I had a flawed piece of work, but a worthy attempt nonetheless for a first effort. This novel, "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/November-Rust-ebook/dp/B005PG72LE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1336227039&amp;sr=8-1">November Rust," wound up sitting in a drawer for a couple of years before I decided to release it - mainly for the hell of it. A lot of work went into it, why let it rot in a drawer? I figured the response to it would be the same as the response I got from my poetry. Some will like it, some won't. It wasn't the end of the world. In the meantime, I started thinking about my next book, and this is where I had the most trouble. I wanted to do something different from the first book, the question was, what exactly? &nbsp;When I began the next novel, "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Naderia-ebook/dp/B005PG7DKE/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1336227093&amp;sr=1-1">Nadería", I was pretty much in the same boat. I had written about 40-50 pages and thought that it wasn't really anything different from the first book. I was at a loss. So I spent some time "learning", reading books on writing, reading theory, discussing ideas with the few writer friends I had, still - nothing was happening. The problem, I later discovered, was that I was too "gunked up" with literary theory and it was, at least for me, blocking me from moving forward. I kept asking myself, "What is it that I am attempting to do here?" and seriously thinking about what kind of writer I wanted to be. An epiphany of sorts came like a bolt out of the blue one morning while sitting on the subway. It occurred to me that the reason why I was so blocked was because I was standing in my own way. I should approach writing in the same manner in which I approached music all those years. With music, I never limited myself. I was open to all kinds of music, listened to everything imaginable, absorbed it, and whatever I had written, threw all those influences and ideas into the mix to come up with something that would (hopefully) be my own thing. Why was it that I was limiting myself when it came to fiction? Why not approach it the same way? It was exactly the question I needed to ask myself.&nbsp;Feeling inspired, nothing was off-limits. I began to read books outside my comfort zone, reading all kinds of books: fiction, poetry, history, biographies, you name it. I soon realized that I had many interests in many different things that weren't necessarily literary related: art, film, philosophy, photography, music, history; why not dip into these waters as well? I began thinking "musically", not that the prose would be "musical" but taking the same approach I took when writing music all those years - open the windows. Let it all in. Throw it all in, mix things up, and most importantly, remember that you are writing fiction.&nbsp;Remember that you're writing fiction. That was really the key to everything. It slowly dawned on me - sort of like a sunlight coming through the window - that I had been so influenced by the "write what you know" mantra that I had forgotten about all the other things I actually know. It wasn't about what I experienced personally, but also observation and knowledge, the ability to put yourself in another person's shoes, the ability to project yourself into the mind or situation of another, the ability to listen to other people when they talk: their thoughts, fears, hopes, dreams, stories, experiences, and so on; all of it ingredients for what can potentially be compelling storytelling. Once I stepped outside of myself, the floodgate of ideas opened and I suddenly realized that I had a treasure trove of ideas for stories that didn't necessarily have anything to do with me. It occurred to me that I can say an awful lot via the "lives" of invented characters and their stories. Like I said, it was a sort of creative epiphany - one that may have been obvious to some all along - but for me, something I had to come around to understand and see clearly. It allowed me to shed the creative shackles that I had initially imposed on myself and I stopped worrying about labels, stopped worrying about whether what I was doing fit into any particular category, whether or not what I was writing was "Literary" and just focus on the storytelling element and allowing the thing to be what it wants to be. And it feels great too. Anything is possible and if one allows himself that sense of freedom there's a good chance that eventually one could come up with something that is uniquely one's own. And that is the goal here, isn't it?&nbsp;

?I think more than writers, the major influences on me have been European movies, jazz, and Abstract Expressionism.? - Don DeLillo

As writers, we each come to the table with something unique - or should. While the old adage ?there?s nothing new under the sun? is often true, still - there?s always a way of taking what has gone before and somehow making it your own; and this can be done by the simple act of being honest with yourself and creating something that you feel in your heart and your guts; to approach what you do with what is uniquely you without trying to copy someone else or writing something you think people want to read.  We usually start off by copying those we admire but sooner or later you have to find your own voice, find your own way of approaching the page. And we all have different aspirations, our own vision, and since we are individuals with differing experiences and sensibilities, naturally what comes out on the page is going to be something different. 

In his essay, ?Fires?, Raymond Carver discussed his influences and the general notion of what influences a writer - and it?s not only other writing. For him (as I?m sure it is for many others) it was life experiences, day to day observations, snippets of overheard conversation, memories, however vague or abstract. All of it goes into the mix. When I came across the Don DeLillo quote at the top of this post, it occurred to me that this is not only true in writing but in all art forms as well. There are many things that get thrown into the pot when we are creating something, even perhaps when we are unaware of it. 

When I first started writing I wrote poetry exclusively for many years and I was coming to it as a musician who loved to read and write. I had no formal training, no writing classes, no MFA program that I attended. Poetry seemed like the natural thing being that I was a songwriter. The influences on those old poems were other poets, yes, but mainly they were more informed by my experiences, thoughts, observations, inward contemplation, political beliefs, current events, social trends, relationships, music, art, history, and so on. I wrote mainly ?free verse? poetry, meaning, if I want to be honest with you and myself, that I was totally uninterested in form or even the ?mechanics? of poetry. I couldn?t care less what constituted a sonnet, or a ballad, or whatever forms poetry takes. I had no schooling in writing poetry nor was I interested in any. So perhaps they weren?t ?poems? in the true sense of the word, but merely ?snapshots? of a particular thought or observation at the time they were being written. Essentially I was writing by ear and the type of poetry I was writing certainly wasn?t everyone?s cup of tea. As with fiction writing, or any other kind of writing, even the reader comes to it with their own sensibilities; and after many years of submitting poetry to literally hundreds of magazines, journals and publishers, you learn rather quickly how those sensibilities differ from one editor to the next, from one reader to the next. Poems rejected by one can quite often be accepted by others, as it had happened for me. But I managed a couple of chapbooks and landed these ?poems? in about forty journals of varying type over the years, so they obviously worked on some people. 

Fiction writing is a whole different ballgame and I came to it pretty much the same way. I soon learned that this approach wasn?t going to work and I was going to have to think things through a little if I wanted to come up with something viable. The first problem I encountered was what to write about. What was this novel going to be? I did what most writers do, I suppose. I ?wrote what I knew.? I also took some cues from the novelists I was reading at the time, which was mostly experimental and Beat writers. Literally flying by the seat of my pants - and not really having any ?writer friends? (other than the other poets I?d met via the small press scene at the time) - I basically went in blind. The books on writing didn?t help at all, since most of them seemed geared towards those who were writing genre fiction or those who sought to write something ?marketable.? So I just dipped into the pool of writing influences I had at the time and went from there. It took a long time and what I wound up with was something of a story threaded within all the experiments and literary ideas that appealed to me at the time: stream of consciousness, cut-up writing, poetry, surrealism, etc. There were other influences too: film, particularly foreign films. It took many years to complete and in the end, I felt I had a flawed piece of work, but a worthy attempt nonetheless for a first effort. This novel, ?November Rust,? wound up sitting in a drawer for a couple of years before I decided to release it - mainly for the hell of it. A lot of work went into it, why let it rot in a drawer? I figured the response to it would be the same as the response I got from my poetry. Some will like it, some won?t. It wasn?t the end of the world. In the meantime, I started thinking about my next book, and this is where I had the most trouble. I wanted to do something different from the first book, the question was, what exactly?  

When I began the next novel, ?Nadería?, I was pretty much in the same boat. I had written about 40-50 pages and thought that it wasn?t really anything different from the first book. I was at a loss. So I spent some time ?learning?, reading books on writing, reading theory, discussing ideas with the few writer friends I had, still - nothing was happening. The problem, I later discovered, was that I was too ?gunked up? with literary theory and it was, at least for me, blocking me from moving forward. I kept asking myself, ?What is it that I am attempting to do here?? and seriously thinking about what kind of writer I wanted to be. An epiphany of sorts came like a bolt out of the blue one morning while sitting on the subway. It occurred to me that the reason why I was so blocked was because I was standing in my own way. I should approach writing in the same manner in which I approached music all those years. With music, I never limited myself. I was open to all kinds of music, listened to everything imaginable, absorbed it, and whatever I had written, threw all those influences and ideas into the mix to come up with something that would (hopefully) be my own thing. Why was it that I was limiting myself when it came to fiction? Why not approach it the same way? It was exactly the question I needed to ask myself. 

Feeling inspired, nothing was off-limits. I began to read books outside my comfort zone, reading all kinds of books: fiction, poetry, history, biographies, you name it. I soon realized that I had many interests in many different things that weren?t necessarily literary related: art, film, philosophy, photography, music, history; why not dip into these waters as well? I began thinking ?musically?, not that the prose would be ?musical? but taking the same approach I took when writing music all those years - open the windows. Let it all in. Throw it all in, mix things up, and most importantly, remember that you are writing fiction. 

Remember that you?re writing fiction. That was really the key to everything. It slowly dawned on me - sort of like a sunlight coming through the window - that I had been so influenced by the ?write what you know? mantra that I had forgotten about all the other things I actually know. It wasn?t about what I experienced personally, but also observation and knowledge, the ability to put yourself in another person?s shoes, the ability to project yourself into the mind or situation of another, the ability to listen to other people when they talk: their thoughts, fears, hopes, dreams, stories, experiences, and so on; all of it ingredients for what can potentially be compelling storytelling. Once I stepped outside of myself, the floodgate of ideas opened and I suddenly realized that I had a treasure trove of ideas for stories that didn?t necessarily have anything to do with me. It occurred to me that I can say an awful lot via the ?lives? of invented characters and their stories. Like I said, it was a sort of creative epiphany - one that may have been obvious to some all along - but for me, something I had to come around to understand and see clearly. It allowed me to shed the creative shackles that I had initially imposed on myself and I stopped worrying about labels, stopped worrying about whether what I was doing fit into any particular category, whether or not what I was writing was ?Literary? and just focus on the storytelling element and allowing the thing to be what it wants to be. And it feels great too. Anything is possible and if one allows himself that sense of freedom there?s a good chance that eventually one could come up with something that is uniquely one?s own. And that is the goal here, isn?t it? 

]]> Sun, 06 May 2012 18:15:00 GMT 92C77BA5E4DB90700B8681BC480DAC78 http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=2050770 <a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0-cG7M4EkFA/T6U9vb4nN_I/AAAAAAAAAvU/c1hHFThCqaU/s1600/SanctuaryNovel.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">Furthering my exploration of William Faulkner, this 1931 novel was certainly a strange and dark one. According to Faulkner, this was a novel that was "a cheap idea because it was deliberately conceived to make money. I had been writing books for about five years, which got published but not bought." A strange thought in my mind since I sincerely feel that this novel was way ahead of its time. It reads like something that could have easily been written today. The plot is complex but at it's heart it's a brilliant "noir" concerning rape, kidnapping, bootlegging, false accusations, class differences and of course a commentary on the "southern way of life." It is truly a dark and disturbing story. And the writing is simply wonderful, as this passage will attest:&nbsp;A final saffron-colored light lay upon the ceiling and the upper walls, tinged already with purple by the serrated palisade of Main Street high against the western sky. She watched it fade as the successive yawns of the shade consumed it. She watched the final light condense into the clock face, and the dial change from a round orifice in the darkness to a disc suspended in nothingness, the original chaos, and change in turn to a crystal ball holding in its still and cryptic depths the ordered chaos of the intricate and shadowy world upon whose scarred flanks the old wounds whirl onward at dizzy speed into darkness lurking with new disasters.&nbsp;I don't see how Faulkner felt that this novel was written purely "to make money" since it is far from something just "spit out" for the masses, even by today's standards. It is artfully written, and the story is artfully told, despite it's "potboiler" elements. And despite the crime fiction sensibility this story has, it's also not a "beach read", something disposable and easy. You have to pay attention here - as with all of Faulkner's novels I've read thus far. It was said that this was the novel that was Faulkner's commercial breakthrough and established Faulkner's reputation as a novelist. After reading this, it's easy to see why. A highly recommended read.&nbsp;Rating: * * * * &nbsp;

Furthering my exploration of William Faulkner, this 1931 novel was certainly a strange and dark one. According to Faulkner, this was a novel that was ?a cheap idea because it was deliberately conceived to make money. I had been writing books for about five years, which got published but not bought.? A strange thought in my mind since I sincerely feel that this novel was way ahead of its time. It reads like something that could have easily been written today. The plot is complex but at it?s heart it?s a brilliant ?noir? concerning rape, kidnapping, bootlegging, false accusations, class differences and of course a commentary on the ?southern way of life.? It is truly a dark and disturbing story. And the writing is simply wonderful, as this passage will attest: 

A final saffron-colored light lay upon the ceiling and the upper walls, tinged already with purple by the serrated palisade of Main Street high against the western sky. She watched it fade as the successive yawns of the shade consumed it. She watched the final light condense into the clock face, and the dial change from a round orifice in the darkness to a disc suspended in nothingness, the original chaos, and change in turn to a crystal ball holding in its still and cryptic depths the ordered chaos of the intricate and shadowy world upon whose scarred flanks the old wounds whirl onward at dizzy speed into darkness lurking with new disasters. 

I don?t see how Faulkner felt that this novel was written purely ?to make money? since it is far from something just ?spit out? for the masses, even by today?s standards. It is artfully written, and the story is artfully told, despite it?s ?potboiler? elements. And despite the crime fiction sensibility this story has, it?s also not a ?beach read?, something disposable and easy. You have to pay attention here - as with all of Faulkner?s novels I?ve read thus far. It was said that this was the novel that was Faulkner?s commercial breakthrough and established Faulkner?s reputation as a novelist. After reading this, it?s easy to see why. A highly recommended read. 

Rating: * * * *  

]]> Sat, 05 May 2012 19:52:00 GMT 840A94EB093B5282C8410D70C0903E1D http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=2037253 <a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-C2ydP7Yu16s/T6AcDoYmTXI/AAAAAAAAAu8/6Iz1bryBRjE/s1600/keep4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">This was another book I bought at Coliseum Books when I was seventeen. I had already read his two best known books, "Animal Farm" and "1984" in school - both of which I enjoyed immensely - so I was curious to read the other works he had available. "Keep the Aspidistra Flying" was the first one I chose (along with "Down and Out in Paris and London" on the same day). This novel was my next foray into expanding my reading horizons at the time and I can clearly recall lying in bed at night reading this book for hours, unable to put it down.&nbsp;The story is about a man named Gordon Comstock who forgoes his job and life of privilege in an open "war" with what he terms as "the money-god". He leaves his job as a well paid copywriter at an advertising agency in order to take on a low paying job so he could write his poetry. Needless to say things do not go so well for him. He both enjoys his new life of destitution while at the same time having disdain for it and over time becomes bitter and neurotic, becoming obsessed with how he sees what the role of money plays in social relationships. The Aspidistra plant serves as a symbol for those who (as Gordon sees) desire to "make good" and settle down, to be the very thing he was at war with. But there is a twist, of course and I would recommend that those who have never read this novel to read it and see the story through. It is definitely well worth the discussion.&nbsp;I read this book at a time when I, too, was at "war" with the growing sensibilities of the Reagan Era, so it had a special resonance for me. It also continued to push me further down the road to explore writers and novels that has something to say, something that was more than just entertainment, and coming at a time when I began to become more socially aware. I also suspect that in some small way it would be influential on my politics in the years that followed.&nbsp;I eventually came to read all of Orwell's novels, but this one I would list as my favorite out of all his fiction. He had written many non-fiction works as well, all of which are worth exploring.&nbsp;

This was another book I bought at Coliseum Books when I was seventeen. I had already read his two best known books, ?Animal Farm? and ?1984? in school - both of which I enjoyed immensely - so I was curious to read the other works he had available. ?Keep the Aspidistra Flying? was the first one I chose (along with ?Down and Out in Paris and London? on the same day). This novel was my next foray into expanding my reading horizons at the time and I can clearly recall lying in bed at night reading this book for hours, unable to put it down. 

The story is about a man named Gordon Comstock who forgoes his job and life of privilege in an open ?war? with what he terms as ?the money-god?. He leaves his job as a well paid copywriter at an advertising agency in order to take on a low paying job so he could write his poetry. Needless to say things do not go so well for him. He both enjoys his new life of destitution while at the same time having disdain for it and over time becomes bitter and neurotic, becoming obsessed with how he sees what the role of money plays in social relationships. The Aspidistra plant serves as a symbol for those who (as Gordon sees) desire to ?make good? and settle down, to be the very thing he was at war with. But there is a twist, of course and I would recommend that those who have never read this novel to read it and see the story through. It is definitely well worth the discussion. 

I read this book at a time when I, too, was at ?war? with the growing sensibilities of the Reagan Era, so it had a special resonance for me. It also continued to push me further down the road to explore writers and novels that has something to say, something that was more than just entertainment, and coming at a time when I began to become more socially aware. I also suspect that in some small way it would be influential on my politics in the years that followed. 

I eventually came to read all of Orwell?s novels, but this one I would list as my favorite out of all his fiction. He had written many non-fiction works as well, all of which are worth exploring. 

]]> Tue, 01 May 2012 22:25:00 GMT 004AA748489120BD63CED83AE4CFDD40 http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=2028275 <a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-j5UKrvewckc/T5vZ2LiuP4I/AAAAAAAAAuw/5lyqX0XR78U/s1600/885232.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">I was the tender age of seventeen when I came across this wonderful novel by Polish novelist Tadeusz Konwicki while cutting school and browsing around Coliseum Books on W57th Street. It was 1983 and my mind was bursting with the immense possibilities of this world, feeling inspired and unwilling to deal with the boredom and the nonsense of high school - hence my "vacation day" and a trip to midtown to spend the day which was then my favorite bookstore. I didn't go there that day to look for anything in particular - it was more a way to 'feed the head', to be surrounded by books rather than to be surrounded by idiots in the classroom. Coliseum was one of those bookstores where you could literally find just about anything and I was in the mood to read something that would make one think a little, something a little intelligent, and something that would go along with my then growing interest in what was going on in the world. It was a time in my life when I felt the urge to understand, explore and learn. It was Punk Rock and other politically/socially minded music I had been listening to at the time which furthered this desire to know more about the world around me.&nbsp;In the news, the Solidarity movement in Poland was reaching fever pitch and the new Polish Pope was making headlines as well, supporting the movement in his native land. The Cold War was at its height and America's new president, Ronald Reagan, was scaring the shit out of a lot of people with his tough talk against the Soviets. So it seemed appropriate that I happened upon this book when I did. It seemed to fit in with what was going on at the time and it looked like something quite different from the usual Stephen King or other Sci-Fi/Horror paperbacks I had been reading up until that time. This was the novel that opened the door to other literary possibilities to explore.&nbsp;As for the story, in brief: a former Polish partisan awakens in his landlady's living room after trying to poison himself. He is surrounded by a colorful cast of characters - including another former partisan with only one hand - each dealing with their day to day lives, problems, issues, each dealing with the effects of war and feeling trapped between the former horrors of the Nazi invasions and the current plight under the thumb of the Soviets. The narrator's memories of hiding out in the forest and fighting off the Nazis become infused with the present day story: the concern of the townsfolk that their home would be destroyed by the construction of a dam. There are many "ghosts" in that forest which is threatened to be wiped out by the dam's construction - sort of symbolizing the "burying" of the past - in essence wiping it out. It is a tricky narrative as well, with no separation between the present day story and the memories of the main character. A truly wonderful read, from what I remember.&nbsp;Little did I know that this book would, in a few years time, have a more personal resonance for me (concerning an affair or sorts with a woman who's family had dealt with the horrors this book speaks of) and it only made it that much more resonant. This was the book that opened the floodgates, the book that lead me towards discovering a whole new world out there and the literary possibilities that existed. I consider it a stepping stone to other great things: great novels, yes, but also a new way of looking at the world around me.&nbsp;

I was the tender age of seventeen when I came across this wonderful novel by Polish novelist Tadeusz Konwicki while cutting school and browsing around Coliseum Books on W57th Street. It was 1983 and my mind was bursting with the immense possibilities of this world, feeling inspired and unwilling to deal with the boredom and the nonsense of high school - hence my ?vacation day? and a trip to midtown to spend the day which was then my favorite bookstore. I didn?t go there that day to look for anything in particular - it was more a way to ?feed the head?, to be surrounded by books rather than to be surrounded by idiots in the classroom. Coliseum was one of those bookstores where you could literally find just about anything and I was in the mood to read something that would make one think a little, something a little intelligent, and something that would go along with my then growing interest in what was going on in the world. It was a time in my life when I felt the urge to understand, explore and learn. It was Punk Rock and other politically/socially minded music I had been listening to at the time which furthered this desire to know more about the world around me. 

In the news, the Solidarity movement in Poland was reaching fever pitch and the new Polish Pope was making headlines as well, supporting the movement in his native land. The Cold War was at its height and America?s new president, Ronald Reagan, was scaring the shit out of a lot of people with his tough talk against the Soviets. So it seemed appropriate that I happened upon this book when I did. It seemed to fit in with what was going on at the time and it looked like something quite different from the usual Stephen King or other Sci-Fi/Horror paperbacks I had been reading up until that time. This was the novel that opened the door to other literary possibilities to explore. 

As for the story, in brief: a former Polish partisan awakens in his landlady?s living room after trying to poison himself. He is surrounded by a colorful cast of characters - including another former partisan with only one hand - each dealing with their day to day lives, problems, issues, each dealing with the effects of war and feeling trapped between the former horrors of the Nazi invasions and the current plight under the thumb of the Soviets. The narrator?s memories of hiding out in the forest and fighting off the Nazis become infused with the present day story: the concern of the townsfolk that their home would be destroyed by the construction of a dam. There are many ?ghosts? in that forest which is threatened to be wiped out by the dam?s construction - sort of symbolizing the ?burying? of the past - in essence wiping it out. It is a tricky narrative as well, with no separation between the present day story and the memories of the main character. A truly wonderful read, from what I remember. 

Little did I know that this book would, in a few years time, have a more personal resonance for me (concerning an affair or sorts with a woman who?s family had dealt with the horrors this book speaks of) and it only made it that much more resonant. This was the book that opened the floodgates, the book that lead me towards discovering a whole new world out there and the literary possibilities that existed. I consider it a stepping stone to other great things: great novels, yes, but also a new way of looking at the world around me. 

]]> Sat, 28 Apr 2012 16:55:00 GMT 6B25EF1F8E112432FE5E900234B1128A http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=2024877 <a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--8uUfNSZrfY/T5nRkn5aazI/AAAAAAAAAuk/706ZBnyGv0U/s1600/Jonathan-franzen-freedom.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">It's taken me two years since the release of this novel to finally get around to reading it. In fact, it's taken me up until April 2012 to get around reading Jonathan Franzen at all. The reason for such a delay in reading a novelist who has been both lauded and despised with equal measure was simply the fact that there were a billion other books and authors I wanted to read first, not out of some reactionary rejection over the fact that Franzen is a "popular" author or the fact that this novel in particular was designated an official "Oprah Book." Nevertheless, I've heard a hell of a lot of people talk of Franzen over the years and have read quite a few articles about his writing and about the author himself, none of which had any sense of balance. Either he was loved and praised as the "savior of American fiction" or hated and despised.&nbsp;Two perfect examples can be found in these two articles. The <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2010/aug/23/jonathan-franzen-freedom">first is by Jonathan Jones from the U.K.'s Guardian, which praises Franzen as a "genius" and calls this novel "The novel of the century" and the second is from The Atlantic's <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/10/smaller-than-life/8212/">literary critic B.R. Myers, who, with this article around the time of the novel's release, was noted for "taking down" Franzen, exposing him for the fraud that Myers - and many others - saw him to be. Just Google Franzen and you will not see a shortage of opinions about him. So naturally, my curiosity was piqued and I knew at some point I would have to read him and see what the fuss was all about.&nbsp;I chose "Freedom" because it was his most recent novel and this was the novel that either established him as "The Great American Novelist" as <a href="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2010185,00.html">Time Magazine's cover story had referred to him or the writer of "juvenile prose" who had written a "monument to nothing" as B.R. Myers concluded. I was a little apprehensive because I didn't really know what to expect. Was this really going to be a waste of time, was it going to be "hipster bullshit", or was this going to be something worthwhile? I came to this novel trying to put aside all the biases from either the pro or anti-Franzen camp and read it with an open mind.&nbsp;Part of the reason why I think Franzen ignites such vitriol in some is because of all the attention he had been getting over the years. Couple that with some of the dumb things he had said in his interviews, the "infamous" snub of Oprah, among other things (one thing I personally always disagreed with was his notion that he "doubted that anyone with an internet connection in their workspace is writing good fiction." That's a personal matter and patently untrue). He also has "the look" that some people associate with an "Author": the studious, serious looking man of letters and sometimes I think there are those out there - whether they are writers or just lovers of literature - who are actively looking for someone to believe in, someone to breathe life back into what they see as the dearth of quality in American contemporary fiction. This same "look" also seems to rub people the wrong way (according to a lot of blog comments), coming off as "smug" and "pompous." They, like a lot of people often do, equate the person with the work and find a hard time separating the two. I don't know Franzen, though I have seen him on many a talk show on C-Span over the years. He didn't come off as all that pompous to me, but then again, I didn't really care one way or the other, although I was interested in what he had to say about the current state of American fiction.&nbsp;Another reason, I suspect, is his extreme popularity. It has been my experience that a lot of writers are by nature fiercely competitive. Not all writers, of course, but many, something I never quite understood. Franzen is what they want to be: acknowledged, praised, recognized, and most importantly, famous. I have found that the louder the critic - particularly among younger writers - the more famous they desire to be. What seems to drive their anger is that they feel that they deserve that recognition and that respect and that fame and resent the fact that someone they see as inferior to them is getting all that attention while they toil away in obscurity. It's a natural feeling, one that I do understand, believe me but I can't help get the feeling that those who simply hate Franzen desire to be in the position that he is in at the moment. From my browsing around the internet and reading comments and message boards, etc, many a writer would kill to be as well known as Franzen currently is. But all this has absolutely nothing to do with the work. The bottom line is: Did Franzen write a good book?&nbsp;So, I finally decided to dip my toe into the Franzen waters and see what all the fuss is about and I have to say, with all honesty, I was quite surprised. I was half-expecting a pompous, "clever," highly "Literary" novel (despite my efforts to come to it with no biases), filled with self-conscious "literary" experiments, catering to those who love their books highbrow and difficult. "Freedom" is certainly not this. What you have here is a pretty straightforward story and Franzen's style is quite ordinary if you ask me. Very well written but ordinary. By the time I got 100 pages in, I kept asking myself what the hell the fuss was all about. Franzen is neither the "Great American Novelist" nor is he deserving of all the hatred being thrown at him. It is actually a very good book with a very good story being told, one that kept me engaged to the very end. Was it a work of "genius"? Absolutely not, nor was it terrible or pretentious. Just a straightforward tale, one in which people of my generation could easily relate to (although Franzen and his characters are quite a few years older than I am.) Nor is it a "perfect" novel by any stretch. There were many times where I felt it could have been a much shorter book and I found myself skimming over large sections of the story, sections I thought the book could have easily have done without. It could have been "tighter", but that's just me and how I prefer a novel to read. One gets the feeling that Franzen was so in love with these characters he had a hard time letting them go and wrote on and on and on until he could finally bring it to a conclusion. Personally, I felt that if the book had ended on page 535, it would have been much more powerful an ending, leaving the reader to wonder what happened next. Instead, he seemed to choose the route that would tie everything up, not necessarily neatly, but enough to satisfy those who prefer an ending that reads "The End." Overall he has a very good story here and one does become so engaged with the characters he created you truly want to follow them and see what happens. &nbsp;Is he "The Great American Novelist?" Not by a long shot, but one could definitely argue that he is a&nbsp;very good novelist based on this one book. (If you ask me Cormac McCarthy is more deserving of that title in contemporary fiction). I kept asking myself why were the passions so high on either side of the Franzen debate? Why has he become either the "savior" or the "whipping boy" to a lot of people?&nbsp;I think a lot of it comes from the fact that there are a lot of people out there who are passionate about literature and writing in general who are desperately looking for someone to believe in, someone to carry the torch so to speak. Back in the day when novelists were of more importance to our culture, you had people like Hemingway, Mailer, Faulkner, etc, that people could "look to." The novel, as an art form, has unfortunately become less and less important in our culture and novelists in particular have become nothing more than providers of entertainment for the overwhelming majority of the population. It's really only die-hard readers and writers and lovers of literature who find the novelist to be more important to the culture than he/she currently is for most people. I'm one of those who feel they are and should be more important to the culture at large but the fact of the matter is they no longer are. Television, film, music, popular culture in general has usurped the "importance" of the novelist in our culture. Add to this the fact that since the 1980s (in my estimation, anyway) art forms have become more compartmentalized and more abundant. There are a billion different categories and subcategories for everything that one can be renowned in their genre (so to speak) and be ignored by the overwhelming majority of people yet still make a name for himself. It isn't so one-dimensional anymore. What people consider "Literature" now can be broken into a million different factions. So those who are very into Serious Literature are seeking someone to carry the torch in the same manner that the past masters have. Who exactly are the new Hemingways, Mailers and Faulkners? Do they even exist? Will they even exist anymore? So people will grab anyone that comes along that shows promise and foist their expectations upon them, only to be disappointed by them when they discover that perhaps that's not what their intentions are to begin with. How many novelists have been looked to as the Literary Messiah over the past two decades and how many have actually lived up to that? Perhaps the novelist's position in our culture has been permanently diminished, or perhaps that "messiah" is yet to emerge. Franzen certainly isn't it, although he did write a good, entertaining novel here.&nbsp;I don't know if Franzen himself has embraced the role those want to give to him or not. Perhaps he has, and this is why there's such a backlash against him. But if he didn't, and all he is attempting to do is write good books with a good story to tell, then it is the fault of others who pinned their high hopes on someone who simply wasn't and isn't looking to carry that torch; and that's what usually happens whenever anyone seeks a messiah to "save" them.&nbsp;"Freedom" was a very enjoyable book. Not a work of genius and not a load of shit either. Perhaps it should be approached devoid of all the hype and vitriol and be judged for what it is rather than what it was supposed to be. That may be the problem here, then again, people have a right to their own opinions and judgment - and this is my opinion, my judgment, for what it's worth.&nbsp;Rating: * * * 1/2&nbsp;

It?s taken me two years since the release of this novel to finally get around to reading it. In fact, it?s taken me up until April 2012 to get around reading Jonathan Franzen at all. The reason for such a delay in reading a novelist who has been both lauded and despised with equal measure was simply the fact that there were a billion other books and authors I wanted to read first, not out of some reactionary rejection over the fact that Franzen is a ?popular? author or the fact that this novel in particular was designated an official ?Oprah Book.? Nevertheless, I?ve heard a hell of a lot of people talk of Franzen over the years and have read quite a few articles about his writing and about the author himself, none of which had any sense of balance. Either he was loved and praised as the ?savior of American fiction? or hated and despised. 

Two perfect examples can be found in these two articles. The first is by Jonathan Jones from the U.K.?s Guardian, which praises Franzen as a ?genius? and calls this novel ?The novel of the century? and the second is from The Atlantic?s literary critic B.R. Myers, who, with this article around the time of the novel?s release, was noted for ?taking down? Franzen, exposing him for the fraud that Myers - and many others - saw him to be. Just Google Franzen and you will not see a shortage of opinions about him. So naturally, my curiosity was piqued and I knew at some point I would have to read him and see what the fuss was all about. 

I chose ?Freedom? because it was his most recent novel and this was the novel that either established him as ?The Great American Novelist? as Time Magazine?s cover story had referred to him or the writer of ?juvenile prose? who had written a ?monument to nothing? as B.R. Myers concluded. I was a little apprehensive because I didn?t really know what to expect. Was this really going to be a waste of time, was it going to be ?hipster bullshit?, or was this going to be something worthwhile? I came to this novel trying to put aside all the biases from either the pro or anti-Franzen camp and read it with an open mind. 

Part of the reason why I think Franzen ignites such vitriol in some is because of all the attention he had been getting over the years. Couple that with some of the dumb things he had said in his interviews, the ?infamous? snub of Oprah, among other things (one thing I personally always disagreed with was his notion that he ?doubted that anyone with an internet connection in their workspace is writing good fiction.? That?s a personal matter and patently untrue). He also has ?the look? that some people associate with an ?Author?: the studious, serious looking man of letters and sometimes I think there are those out there - whether they are writers or just lovers of literature - who are actively looking for someone to believe in, someone to breathe life back into what they see as the dearth of quality in American contemporary fiction. This same ?look? also seems to rub people the wrong way (according to a lot of blog comments), coming off as ?smug? and ?pompous.? They, like a lot of people often do, equate the person with the work and find a hard time separating the two. I don?t know Franzen, though I have seen him on many a talk show on C-Span over the years. He didn?t come off as all that pompous to me, but then again, I didn?t really care one way or the other, although I was interested in what he had to say about the current state of American fiction. 

Another reason, I suspect, is his extreme popularity. It has been my experience that a lot of writers are by nature fiercely competitive. Not all writers, of course, but many, something I never quite understood. Franzen is what they want to be: acknowledged, praised, recognized, and most importantly, famous. I have found that the louder the critic - particularly among younger writers - the more famous they desire to be. What seems to drive their anger is that they feel that they deserve that recognition and that respect and that fame and resent the fact that someone they see as inferior to them is getting all that attention while they toil away in obscurity. It?s a natural feeling, one that I do understand, believe me but I can?t help get the feeling that those who simply hate Franzen desire to be in the position that he is in at the moment. From my browsing around the internet and reading comments and message boards, etc, many a writer would kill to be as well known as Franzen currently is. But all this has absolutely nothing to do with the work. The bottom line is: Did Franzen write a good book? 

So, I finally decided to dip my toe into the Franzen waters and see what all the fuss is about and I have to say, with all honesty, I was quite surprised. I was half-expecting a pompous, ?clever,? highly ?Literary? novel (despite my efforts to come to it with no biases), filled with self-conscious ?literary? experiments, catering to those who love their books highbrow and difficult. ?Freedom? is certainly not this. What you have here is a pretty straightforward story and Franzen?s style is quite ordinary if you ask me. Very well written but ordinary. By the time I got 100 pages in, I kept asking myself what the hell the fuss was all about. Franzen is neither the ?Great American Novelist? nor is he deserving of all the hatred being thrown at him. It is actually a very good book with a very good story being told, one that kept me engaged to the very end. Was it a work of ?genius?? Absolutely not, nor was it terrible or pretentious. Just a straightforward tale, one in which people of my generation could easily relate to (although Franzen and his characters are quite a few years older than I am.) Nor is it a ?perfect? novel by any stretch. There were many times where I felt it could have been a much shorter book and I found myself skimming over large sections of the story, sections I thought the book could have easily have done without. It could have been ?tighter?, but that?s just me and how I prefer a novel to read. One gets the feeling that Franzen was so in love with these characters he had a hard time letting them go and wrote on and on and on until he could finally bring it to a conclusion. Personally, I felt that if the book had ended on page 535, it would have been much more powerful an ending, leaving the reader to wonder what happened next. Instead, he seemed to choose the route that would tie everything up, not necessarily neatly, but enough to satisfy those who prefer an ending that reads ?The End.? Overall he has a very good story here and one does become so engaged with the characters he created you truly want to follow them and see what happens.  

Is he ?The Great American Novelist?? Not by a long shot, but one could definitely argue that he is a very good novelist based on this one book. (If you ask me Cormac McCarthy is more deserving of that title in contemporary fiction). I kept asking myself why were the passions so high on either side of the Franzen debate? Why has he become either the ?savior? or the ?whipping boy? to a lot of people? 

I think a lot of it comes from the fact that there are a lot of people out there who are passionate about literature and writing in general who are desperately looking for someone to believe in, someone to carry the torch so to speak. Back in the day when novelists were of more importance to our culture, you had people like Hemingway, Mailer, Faulkner, etc, that people could ?look to.? The novel, as an art form, has unfortunately become less and less important in our culture and novelists in particular have become nothing more than providers of entertainment for the overwhelming majority of the population. It?s really only die-hard readers and writers and lovers of literature who find the novelist to be more important to the culture than he/she currently is for most people. I?m one of those who feel they are and should be more important to the culture at large but the fact of the matter is they no longer are. Television, film, music, popular culture in general has usurped the ?importance? of the novelist in our culture. Add to this the fact that since the 1980s (in my estimation, anyway) art forms have become more compartmentalized and more abundant. There are a billion different categories and subcategories for everything that one can be renowned in their genre (so to speak) and be ignored by the overwhelming majority of people yet still make a name for himself. It isn?t so one-dimensional anymore. What people consider ?Literature? now can be broken into a million different factions. So those who are very into Serious Literature are seeking someone to carry the torch in the same manner that the past masters have. Who exactly are the new Hemingways, Mailers and Faulkners? Do they even exist? Will they even exist anymore? So people will grab anyone that comes along that shows promise and foist their expectations upon them, only to be disappointed by them when they discover that perhaps that?s not what their intentions are to begin with. How many novelists have been looked to as the Literary Messiah over the past two decades and how many have actually lived up to that? Perhaps the novelist?s position in our culture has been permanently diminished, or perhaps that ?messiah? is yet to emerge. Franzen certainly isn?t it, although he did write a good, entertaining novel here. 

I don?t know if Franzen himself has embraced the role those want to give to him or not. Perhaps he has, and this is why there?s such a backlash against him. But if he didn?t, and all he is attempting to do is write good books with a good story to tell, then it is the fault of others who pinned their high hopes on someone who simply wasn?t and isn?t looking to carry that torch; and that?s what usually happens whenever anyone seeks a messiah to ?save? them. 

?Freedom? was a very enjoyable book. Not a work of genius and not a load of shit either. Perhaps it should be approached devoid of all the hype and vitriol and be judged for what it is rather than what it was supposed to be. That may be the problem here, then again, people have a right to their own opinions and judgment - and this is my opinion, my judgment, for what it?s worth. 

Rating: * * * 1/2 

]]> Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:48:00 GMT AD429E3ACC0F1A0E7C4E72F9B06ED3B2 http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=2008981 <a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-RoqvkRLLXKM/T5RQSeivspI/AAAAAAAAAuc/cN-LsFJcp-s/s1600/Icon+eBook+Cover.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">My new short story eBook, "Icon" is now available in both <a href="http://www.lulu.com/shop/julian-gallo/icon/ebook/product-20077172.html">ePub and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Icon-ebook/dp/B007WKKPS8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1335119905&amp;sr=8-1">Kindle Editions. Just follow the link for more information.&nbsp;

My new short story eBook, "Icon" is now available in both ePub and Kindle Editions. Just follow the link for more information. 

]]> Mon, 23 Apr 2012 15:39:00 GMT F534712663F9914F58D4B4B282E614C4 http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=2005959 <a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_H4OGdaKiV8/T5NDQnaaITI/AAAAAAAAAuQ/BaM-8sCp5hU/s1600/Mediterraneo+cover+photo+1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">What would they do once the fire goes out? &nbsp;Two lifelong friends, Gianni Mazzaro and Matteo Radicci, set off on their summer travel, an annual ritual since their college days. This year it's the Mediterranean, the first stop being a small village in the mountains of southern Italy - a town in which both their families hailed from. They soon discover that their ancestral town has one foot in the twenty-first century, one foot still firmly rooted in the past, where some of the locals are still clinging to ancient folkways, vendettas and superstitious beliefs. Something dark had taken place in the village some three decades earlier and the mere arrival of the two friends - and Gianni in particular -&nbsp; sets off a chain of events that will shake this sleepy village to its very core.I am happy to announce that my new novel, "Mediterráneo", is scheduled for release sometime in late June/mid July of this year. I have to say I had a hell of a lot of fun writing this over the past year and a half. It was begun in January 2011 and completed in March of 2012. Don't let the "sunny" imagery the title invokes fool you. This is probably the strangest, darkest thing I've ever written and it certainly may not be for everyone. It's a little hard to describe what kind of novel this is but let's say that it's something of a cross between a "Mediterranean Noir" and a Gothic thriller with dashes of "Transgressive Fiction" thrown in for good measure. The story here is totally fictional, of course, but it's origins lie in my own genealogical research regarding my own family who also hail from southern Italy, Sicily and North Africa. More information is soon to follow but in the meantime, have a look at the book's cover above.&nbsp;Naturally this is the point where I shamelessly hawk my previous three novels: "<a href="http://expatspost.com/entertainment/november-rust-updated-interview-with-author-julian-gallo">November Rust" (2007), "<a href="http://garrycrystal.blogspot.com/2011/04/author-interview-julian-gallo-naderia.html">Nadería" (2011) and "<a href="http://garrycrystal.blogspot.com/2011/09/interview-with-julian-gallo-author-of.html">Be Still and Know That I Am" (2011). All three are available in paperback and eBook editions (both ePub and Kindle). I want to take the time to thank those who bought these three novels over the past couple of years. I am eternally grateful and thank you profusely for doing so. For more information about these three previous novels, you can find them via review/interviews conducted by the talented <a href="http://www.garrycrystal.blogspot.com/">Garry Crystal, who is an author in his own right with two eBooks currently available. You can find them <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Busker-London-Other-Tales-ebook/dp/B005MKCEJ8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1335051507&amp;sr=8-1">here and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/A-Relationship-in-Pieces-ebook/dp/B006YZDM1Y/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_1">here. &nbsp;Onward...

What would they do once the fire goes out?  

Two lifelong friends, Gianni Mazzaro and Matteo Radicci, set off on their summer travel, an annual ritual since their college days. This year it?s the Mediterranean, the first stop being a small village in the mountains of southern Italy - a town in which both their families hailed from. They soon discover that their ancestral town has one foot in the twenty-first century, one foot still firmly rooted in the past, where some of the locals are still clinging to ancient folkways, vendettas and superstitious beliefs. Something dark had taken place in the village some three decades earlier and the mere arrival of the two friends - and Gianni in particular -  sets off a chain of events that will shake this sleepy village to its very core.

I am happy to announce that my new novel, ?Mediterráneo?, is scheduled for release sometime in late June/mid July of this year. I have to say I had a hell of a lot of fun writing this over the past year and a half. It was begun in January 2011 and completed in March of 2012. Don?t let the ?sunny? imagery the title invokes fool you. This is probably the strangest, darkest thing I?ve ever written and it certainly may not be for everyone. It?s a little hard to describe what kind of novel this is but let?s say that it?s something of a cross between a ?Mediterranean Noir" and a Gothic thriller with dashes of ?Transgressive Fiction? thrown in for good measure. The story here is totally fictional, of course, but it?s origins lie in my own genealogical research regarding my own family who also hail from southern Italy, Sicily and North Africa. More information is soon to follow but in the meantime, have a look at the book?s cover above. 

Naturally this is the point where I shamelessly hawk my previous three novels: ?November Rust? (2007), ?Nadería? (2011) and ?Be Still and Know That I Am? (2011). All three are available in paperback and eBook editions (both ePub and Kindle). I want to take the time to thank those who bought these three novels over the past couple of years. I am eternally grateful and thank you profusely for doing so. For more information about these three previous novels, you can find them via review/interviews conducted by the talented Garry Crystal, who is an author in his own right with two eBooks currently available. You can find them here and here.  

Onward...

]]> Sun, 22 Apr 2012 04:48:00 GMT 72AE79BC78461646C2CF15F2EFFEB341 http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=1992471 <a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-NUxCOlFDCgg/T46bNo2vZkI/AAAAAAAAAuI/Qewnd-hUjIE/s1600/Image.ashx.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">An excellent primer for those who are interested in exploring the world of Arab fiction and authors. Some known to the English speaking world, others unknown, writing from across the breadth of the Arab speaking world: Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Morocco, Iraq, Yemen, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria and Sudan, though most of these novel excerpts and short stories are Egyptian.&nbsp;My personal favorites here are Alaa Al Aswany, Hala El Badry (Egypt), Hoda Barakat (Lebanon), Mohammed Barada and Mohammed Choukri (Morocco), (Choukri's novels are available in English, translated by Paul Bowles - said to be an illiterate who learned how to read and write at the age of 21. Many of his novels were banned in Morocco due to their subject matter. A writer definitely worth exploring), Ahmad Faqi (Libya), Emile Habiby (Palestine), Tawfik al-Hakim (Egypt), Bensalim Himmich (Morocco) just to name a few.&nbsp;What the Western reader will find here is writing that is uniquely suited to Arab and Islamic culture as well as a fusion between the Arab world and the best of the classic Western literature, since much of western literature began to filter its way down to the Arab world via colonialism and the fact that many of these writers had studied abroad, mostly in Europe, and the western influence is quite evident on many of these tales. But they all give a little insight into the customs and mores of the Arab world and while some of these stories and excerpts may be weaker than others, the great majority of them are well worth exploring for those who wish to venture beyond the literature of the western world. Definitely recommended.&nbsp;Rating: * * * * &nbsp; &nbsp;

An excellent primer for those who are interested in exploring the world of Arab fiction and authors. Some known to the English speaking world, others unknown, writing from across the breadth of the Arab speaking world: Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Morocco, Iraq, Yemen, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria and Sudan, though most of these novel excerpts and short stories are Egyptian. 

My personal favorites here are Alaa Al Aswany, Hala El Badry (Egypt), Hoda Barakat (Lebanon), Mohammed Barada and Mohammed Choukri (Morocco), (Choukri?s novels are available in English, translated by Paul Bowles - said to be an illiterate who learned how to read and write at the age of 21. Many of his novels were banned in Morocco due to their subject matter. A writer definitely worth exploring), Ahmad Faqi (Libya), Emile Habiby (Palestine), Tawfik al-Hakim (Egypt), Bensalim Himmich (Morocco) just to name a few. 

What the Western reader will find here is writing that is uniquely suited to Arab and Islamic culture as well as a fusion between the Arab world and the best of the classic Western literature, since much of western literature began to filter its way down to the Arab world via colonialism and the fact that many of these writers had studied abroad, mostly in Europe, and the western influence is quite evident on many of these tales. But they all give a little insight into the customs and mores of the Arab world and while some of these stories and excerpts may be weaker than others, the great majority of them are well worth exploring for those who wish to venture beyond the literature of the western world. Definitely recommended. 

Rating: * * * *    

]]> Wed, 18 Apr 2012 15:47:00 GMT 3E0581B3245EA90295AB63AF7A37D511 http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=1958313 <a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-vPpJZrblQ44/T4D3xjGhk7I/AAAAAAAAAuA/uYVL3jxYHFo/s1600/129839190.JPG.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">I absolutely loved this novel. One of those off-beat, smart, novels you don't often come across these days. The author, Amara Lakhous, is an Algerian, living in Italy, writing in Italian. "Divorce Islamic Style" is his second novel. (His first was "Clash of Civilizations Over an Elevator on the Piazza Vittorio" - a novel I definitely intend to read). &nbsp;Told in alternating chapters between Christian Mazzari, aka "Issa", a Sicilian court translator who speaks flawless Arabic is asked by the Italian Secret Service to pose as a recently arrived Tunisian immigrant to help flush out a terrorist cell in the Viale Marconi neighborhood of Rome. He ingratiates himself into the lives of the people of the neighborhood, playing his part to the hilt, blending in seamlessly; and "Sofia", a young beautiful Egyptian woman who is married to a devout Muslim who is only one declaration away of a final divorce. Sofia struggles with tradition and her new Westernized surroundings, torn between her right to be free and to be the dutiful Muslim wife. These two story lines converge throughout the novel until the final scene which will leave you scratching your head, questioning the notion of what is real and what isn't.&nbsp;The title of the book plays on the old Italian film "Divorce Italian Style" and is referenced throughout, a sort of updated, Islamic version in some ways. Packed with information on Islamic culture and the detailed lives of immigrants living and struggling in their new surroundings, this novel will no doubt foster a better understanding about the times we are living in - where everything and everyone is not beyond suspicion and everything and everyone may not be what they seem. A truly great read and a young author to keep an eye out for. &nbsp;Rating: * * * * *&nbsp;

I absolutely loved this novel. One of those off-beat, smart, novels you don?t often come across these days. The author, Amara Lakhous, is an Algerian, living in Italy, writing in Italian. ?Divorce Islamic Style? is his second novel. (His first was ?Clash of Civilizations Over an Elevator on the Piazza Vittorio? - a novel I definitely intend to read).  

Told in alternating chapters between Christian Mazzari, aka ?Issa?, a Sicilian court translator who speaks flawless Arabic is asked by the Italian Secret Service to pose as a recently arrived Tunisian immigrant to help flush out a terrorist cell in the Viale Marconi neighborhood of Rome. He ingratiates himself into the lives of the people of the neighborhood, playing his part to the hilt, blending in seamlessly; and ?Sofia?, a young beautiful Egyptian woman who is married to a devout Muslim who is only one declaration away of a final divorce. Sofia struggles with tradition and her new Westernized surroundings, torn between her right to be free and to be the dutiful Muslim wife. These two story lines converge throughout the novel until the final scene which will leave you scratching your head, questioning the notion of what is real and what isn?t. 

The title of the book plays on the old Italian film ?Divorce Italian Style? and is referenced throughout, a sort of updated, Islamic version in some ways. Packed with information on Islamic culture and the detailed lives of immigrants living and struggling in their new surroundings, this novel will no doubt foster a better understanding about the times we are living in - where everything and everyone is not beyond suspicion and everything and everyone may not be what they seem. A truly great read and a young author to keep an eye out for.  

Rating: * * * * * 

]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 07:30:00 GMT A5252942E341042E6C31875759CA1E52 http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=1949311 <a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-HU3VPIO1B5c/T3uH8O7u_CI/AAAAAAAAAtw/A2SXhZCTvAk/s1600/Photo+on+2011-01-26+at+18.18.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">Critics - whether professional or layperson - you got to love 'em. I suppose it has always gone with the territory but sometimes you just have to wonder about them. A lot of them seem jaded, sometimes for good reason, other times not. There are times when you just have to wonder whether certain people just make it their mission in life to tear down rather than build up. For the artist, the critic is something of a double-edged sword. We love them when they praise us, hate them when they slam us and wonder what their purpose is. I see their purpose: to help spread the word about what's worthy or to steer us away from what isn't. The problem is that it's purely subjective. We've all read reviews and critiques about our favorite artists and we don't always think the critic knows what he/she is talking about. Other times, we agree wholeheartedly - and that depends, of course, on your own sensibilities. It isn't so much that we take a critic's word as gospel. We often use their critiques to validate what we already think.&nbsp;Perhaps I should stop clicking on links and visiting various websites about writing - and the arts in general - because all it does is serve as a frustrating experience for me at times. But I can't help it. It's a topic that interests me greatly and I'm always curious to read what others have to say about a particular topic. The great thing about the advent of the internet is that it opens up the world to voices that would have remained anonymous otherwise. Some may argue that perhaps that's the way it should have remained but I tend to think the more voices out there, the better. There's always plusses and minuses. But when it comes to the arts, there is no shortage of opinions, critiques, theories, etc, and sometimes if you give someone the ability to have something to say about it, their first instinct is to slam it and tell everyone how much something sucks rather than what's good out there. I happen to think there's a hell of a lot of good things out there - both via the corporate avenues and independent avenues. You just have to look for it and focus your attention on that rather than what "sucks." Perhaps this problem can be solved by critics who point out what's right, rather than always pointing out what's wrong. That would be a start. &nbsp;I realize there is a difference between a professional critic and someone sitting at home with a laptop and the ability to string a sentence together but ultimately they're both dealing with the same thing: opinion. Okay, one may have had years of study in their particular department which gives them a sort of "expertise" on the matter, but essentially what you are getting is one person's opinion and we all know that even professional critics don't always agree on the same thing. For the "layman" or for a person who just wants to get an idea about what's what on a particular thing, they are often left bewildered, not knowing what to think. I read criticism all the time, or even just the capsule reviews you'll find in a magazine or in the Village Voice, or wherever else. Most of the time I find that the "critique" is more about the critic than it is about the thing he or she is writing about and you're left with 500-600 piece of namedropping and carefully constructed snark and very rarely much about the film, or book, or musician, or artist. This is why I have never based my own opinion on what a critic has to say about it. I have enough confidence in my own critical abilities to determine whether something is for me or not.&nbsp; We all do - and with art being such a subjective thing by its very nature, it's truly difficult to come to a conclusion with any sense of "certainty." &nbsp;Some of us out there are exposed to more than others and that will often determine how and what we think about a particular thing. I'll admit that a literature professor has more knowledge and has been exposed to more than the average reader who just randomly chooses a book on the shelf and then writing about it on their blog. I've admitted that much for myself. I'm no "expert" in any of these matters but I feel I've been exposed to enough to get a general sense of what I'm talking about. Some disagree. Whatever. We're dealing with opinions here, regardless of how much knowledge on a particular subject one may have. Subjectivity is at the heart of all this. But I'm speaking more of the lay-critic, the bloggers, the zine writers (if they even exist anymore), the website critics than I am of the professional critics, although they, too, have some culpability here.&nbsp;There are a hell of a lot of people out there decrying the current state of art, music, literature, film, name your topic. A lot of the time, I tend to agree with them about it but the one thing I've also noticed is that no one is doing anything about it other than crowing about it on their blogs, websites, newspaper articles, speeches, etc. This is particularly true in the realm of literature. If everything is so bad, and everything is in such dire straits, what's being done to actually change it? You hear about the desperate need for "Gatekeepers" yet they are &nbsp;always complaining about the very thing the "Gatekeepers" are letting in.Here's where any creative person comes in - and particularly young people. Instead of crowing about it, be the change you want to see, as Gandhi once said.&nbsp; The current state of literature is dismal? Then write the books that will correct the problem. The state of visual arts is pathetic? Then create the art that will be more meaningful and appealing. The state of films are nothing but Hollywood schlock and cynical attempts to just make money? Make the films that will be of more importance. And so on. All the energy that is expended writing endless articles and essays about how bad everything is does nothing to make the changes they want to see and all we're left with is noise and complaints with rarely anyone doing anything to make things better. Start the publishing companies that will publish better books. Start the production companies that will produce better films. Start the record labels that will issue better music. Open the galleries that will show better art. And those self-appointed critics? How about you&nbsp;come up with the very thing you wish to see yourself other than moaning about why others aren't doing it?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Like with anything else - independent or corporate - the best stuff will rise to the top and will last. The rest will be forgotten. It's the natural order of things. And perhaps what people consider crap these days will be forgotten and wither away into obscurity. We all have the ability to change it if one is willing to be proactive about it and make that change. Complaining about it alone will do nothing. Action will. That change will not happen if people leave it up to those who they are complaining about to do it. So be the change you want to see and use that energy and that fire to get things done rather than just complaining about it.&nbsp;

Critics - whether professional or layperson - you got to love 'em. I suppose it has always gone with the territory but sometimes you just have to wonder about them. A lot of them seem jaded, sometimes for good reason, other times not. There are times when you just have to wonder whether certain people just make it their mission in life to tear down rather than build up. For the artist, the critic is something of a double-edged sword. We love them when they praise us, hate them when they slam us and wonder what their purpose is. I see their purpose: to help spread the word about what's worthy or to steer us away from what isn't. The problem is that it's purely subjective. We've all read reviews and critiques about our favorite artists and we don't always think the critic knows what he/she is talking about. Other times, we agree wholeheartedly - and that depends, of course, on your own sensibilities. It isn't so much that we take a critic's word as gospel. We often use their critiques to validate what we already think. 


Perhaps I should stop clicking on links and visiting various websites about writing - and the arts in general - because all it does is serve as a frustrating experience for me at times. But I can?t help it. It?s a topic that interests me greatly and I?m always curious to read what others have to say about a particular topic. The great thing about the advent of the internet is that it opens up the world to voices that would have remained anonymous otherwise. Some may argue that perhaps that?s the way it should have remained but I tend to think the more voices out there, the better. There?s always plusses and minuses. But when it comes to the arts, there is no shortage of opinions, critiques, theories, etc, and sometimes if you give someone the ability to have something to say about it, their first instinct is to slam it and tell everyone how much something sucks rather than what?s good out there. I happen to think there?s a hell of a lot of good things out there - both via the corporate avenues and independent avenues. You just have to look for it and focus your attention on that rather than what ?sucks.? Perhaps this problem can be solved by critics who point out what?s right, rather than always pointing out what?s wrong. That would be a start.  

I realize there is a difference between a professional critic and someone sitting at home with a laptop and the ability to string a sentence together but ultimately they?re both dealing with the same thing: opinion. Okay, one may have had years of study in their particular department which gives them a sort of ?expertise? on the matter, but essentially what you are getting is one person?s opinion and we all know that even professional critics don?t always agree on the same thing. For the ?layman? or for a person who just wants to get an idea about what?s what on a particular thing, they are often left bewildered, not knowing what to think. I read criticism all the time, or even just the capsule reviews you?ll find in a magazine or in the Village Voice, or wherever else. Most of the time I find that the ?critique? is more about the critic than it is about the thing he or she is writing about and you?re left with 500-600 piece of namedropping and carefully constructed snark and very rarely much about the film, or book, or musician, or artist. This is why I have never based my own opinion on what a critic has to say about it. I have enough confidence in my own critical abilities to determine whether something is for me or not.  We all do - and with art being such a subjective thing by its very nature, it?s truly difficult to come to a conclusion with any sense of ?certainty.?  

Some of us out there are exposed to more than others and that will often determine how and what we think about a particular thing. I?ll admit that a literature professor has more knowledge and has been exposed to more than the average reader who just randomly chooses a book on the shelf and then writing about it on their blog. I?ve admitted that much for myself. I?m no ?expert? in any of these matters but I feel I?ve been exposed to enough to get a general sense of what I?m talking about. Some disagree. Whatever. We?re dealing with opinions here, regardless of how much knowledge on a particular subject one may have. Subjectivity is at the heart of all this. But I'm speaking more of the lay-critic, the bloggers, the zine writers (if they even exist anymore), the website critics than I am of the professional critics, although they, too, have some culpability here. 

There are a hell of a lot of people out there decrying the current state of art, music, literature, film, name your topic. A lot of the time, I tend to agree with them about it but the one thing I've also noticed is that no one is doing anything about it other than crowing about it on their blogs, websites, newspaper articles, speeches, etc. This is particularly true in the realm of literature. If everything is so bad, and everything is in such dire straits, what?s being done to actually change it? You hear about the desperate need for "Gatekeepers" yet they are  always complaining about the very thing the "Gatekeepers" are letting in.

Here?s where any creative person comes in - and particularly young people. Instead of crowing about it, be the change you want to see, as Gandhi once said.  The current state of literature is dismal? Then write the books that will correct the problem. The state of visual arts is pathetic? Then create the art that will be more meaningful and appealing. The state of films are nothing but Hollywood schlock and cynical attempts to just make money? Make the films that will be of more importance. And so on. All the energy that is expended writing endless articles and essays about how bad everything is does nothing to make the changes they want to see and all we?re left with is noise and complaints with rarely anyone doing anything to make things better. Start the publishing companies that will publish better books. Start the production companies that will produce better films. Start the record labels that will issue better music. Open the galleries that will show better art. And those self-appointed critics? How about you come up with the very thing you wish to see yourself other than moaning about why others aren't doing it?   

Like with anything else - independent or corporate - the best stuff will rise to the top and will last. The rest will be forgotten. It?s the natural order of things. And perhaps what people consider crap these days will be forgotten and wither away into obscurity. We all have the ability to change it if one is willing to be proactive about it and make that change. Complaining about it alone will do nothing. Action will. That change will not happen if people leave it up to those who they are complaining about to do it. So be the change you want to see and use that energy and that fire to get things done rather than just complaining about it. 

]]> Thu, 05 Apr 2012 15:54:00 GMT C58C6B46C9C72CA9EC5EE4BADAFC4571 http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=1945170 <a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-j8lEeU8KaKI/T3weu3ykq5I/AAAAAAAAAt4/OAi9MapydrI/s1600/tuareg-alberto-vazquez-figueroa-paperback-cover-art.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">It would only figure that recent events would coincide with me reading this novel (the Tuareg rebellion in Mali). Tuareg culture is something of a recent fascination for me so I was eager to read this book.&nbsp;Set in what appears to be the desert lands of Algeria around the time of its independence, a Tuareg named Gazel Sayah rules over a vast stretch of desert, still governed by ancient laws and traditions, completely cut off from the political events taking place in the capital. Two fugitives arrive at his camp and according to the ancient laws of hospitality, Gazel invites them in. Meanwhile the fugitives are being pursued by military officers of the recently formed government. During the night, one of the fugitives is killed and the other hauled away. This is a supreme insult to the Tuareg customs and Gazel pursues the offenders and takes his revenge. The military now pursues Gazel, who leads them across the hot, barren desert - a land he knows well - in a cat and mouse game which will only end in tragedy.&nbsp;I liked the story here but was a little disappointed by it's 1940s Hollywood adventure-like feel, although that was also part of its appeal. I suppose I was expecting more about the culture of the Tuaregs (which is definitely here) but not done in the way it was done. By the novel's end it was hard to tell what the message here was: remaining true to your culture despite modernity or the ancient customs time has come and its time to move into modernity. I suppose he left that up to the reader to decide for himself.&nbsp;All in all not a bad book but not a great one but that could be because my expectations were too high. There is a little of a Cohelo feel to this. A recommended read for the insights into Tuareg culture but not an essential one. For those interested in the culture may want to check this out.&nbsp;Rating: * * *&nbsp;

It would only figure that recent events would coincide with me reading this novel (the Tuareg rebellion in Mali). Tuareg culture is something of a recent fascination for me so I was eager to read this book. 

Set in what appears to be the desert lands of Algeria around the time of its independence, a Tuareg named Gazel Sayah rules over a vast stretch of desert, still governed by ancient laws and traditions, completely cut off from the political events taking place in the capital. Two fugitives arrive at his camp and according to the ancient laws of hospitality, Gazel invites them in. Meanwhile the fugitives are being pursued by military officers of the recently formed government. During the night, one of the fugitives is killed and the other hauled away. This is a supreme insult to the Tuareg customs and Gazel pursues the offenders and takes his revenge. The military now pursues Gazel, who leads them across the hot, barren desert - a land he knows well - in a cat and mouse game which will only end in tragedy. 

I liked the story here but was a little disappointed by it?s 1940s Hollywood adventure-like feel, although that was also part of its appeal. I suppose I was expecting more about the culture of the Tuaregs (which is definitely here) but not done in the way it was done. By the novel?s end it was hard to tell what the message here was: remaining true to your culture despite modernity or the ancient customs time has come and its time to move into modernity. I suppose he left that up to the reader to decide for himself. 

All in all not a bad book but not a great one but that could be because my expectations were too high. There is a little of a Cohelo feel to this. A recommended read for the insights into Tuareg culture but not an essential one. For those interested in the culture may want to check this out. 

Rating: * * * 

]]> Wed, 04 Apr 2012 15:16:00 GMT AC498523E50647959D83B6891874D2F4 http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=1939842 <a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-_RT1Vc-Fo8M/T3onS4dau7I/AAAAAAAAAto/Ua4ywl_t8ag/s1600/self-true.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">My literary education has been primarily self-taught. I never took a writing class or workshop (unless you count a creative writing class I took in high school, which I don't) nor do I have an MFA or even applied to the program. I've learned what I have learned up to this point through reading and advice and recommendations from others. There were two writers in particular that pushed me towards wanting to write a novel: Henry Miller and Jack Kerouac. I always loved these two writers and count them as two of my major early influences. Reading them lead to others, and those lead to others, and so on and so on. My reading, in essence, was trial by error, picking up books from writers that other writers mentioned and admired. I imagine a lot of writers have done just this. I didn't get my recommendations from professors or writing instructors, so it's not that much of a surprise that some of what is "essential reading" for writers, I've never read or just haven't gotten around to yet (although I intend to correct this at some point.) The point is, whether it be reading writers other writers admired or simple "trial and error" while spending time at The Strand or any other bookstore around New York, that's how I came to all this and in a way, I like it. It was exactly how I came to discover my favorite musicians over my lifetime. So I do not come from the typical literary background that most writers who have aspired to do this since birth normally come from. I'm learning as I go. I have my thoughts and opinions on literary matters (such as they are) but I do not claim to be an expert. There is still a hell of a lot I don't know and in a way, that's what makes it all very exciting and inspiring to me. You just never know what's around the corner or behind any new door that presents itself to you along the journey.&nbsp;My starting point was 20th century literature, George Orwell being a very early favorite, then came Milan Kundera, Tadeusz Konwicki and Kurt Vonnegut. But it was the Beat writers that really opened it all up to me. The Beats and the Moderns. There was something about these books that really spoke to me in a way the "classics" did not. I've read some of the classics, of course, and enjoyed many of them but they didn't resonate with me in the same way Kerouac and Miller did, or Céline, or Hemingway, or Cortázar. The Moderns, the Post-Moderns, these were the authors I gravitated towards, both novelists and poets. I can't really explain why but the works from these authors really spoke to me and the best thing is that there were and are others who I've yet to discover. Each year I come across more of these wonderful books and authors who I find incredibly inspiring and educational. If I had to give an answer as to why they did, it was because they were writers willing to do something different, who bucked convention and did things their own way, the way they wanted. Not that their work wasn't grounded in the classics (most, if not all of them, were) but whatever was there was pushed far in the background and what you had was something unique, something daring or at the very least, interesting. At least to me.&nbsp;So I suppose it would come as no surprise that my first attempt at a novel would be to write the kind of book I enjoyed reading. That novel ("<a href="http://www.amazon.com/November-Rust-ebook/dp/B005PG72LE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1333405251&amp;sr=8-1">November Rust") took me 7 years to complete and in the end I didn't quite know what it was I had there. To make a long story short, I basically shelved the thing for a couple of years before deciding to release it in early 2007. In the meantime, I had begun another novel, mainly to see if I had another in me, and that one, too, ("<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Naderia-ebook/dp/B005PG7DKE/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1333405281&amp;sr=1-1">Nadería") took about the same length of time to write and that was because at that point, I was struggling with the idea of what kind of writer I wanted to be. For most of the last decade I struggled with this and I eventually came to the conclusion that I needed to step back and reassess what I was trying to do. What was my goal?&nbsp; What did I want to achieve?&nbsp; What was truly in my heart?&nbsp; "Nadería" was the novel that answered that question for me and once I figured it out, I was able to complete it. &nbsp;All of the above is in reaction to a lot of internet browsing the past year or so, surfing many writer's sites, blogs, forums, etc and the one thing I noticed above all else is that everyone has an opinion on literature and literary matters and each and every one of them is different. Some will insist that their view is the correct one that everyone must follow, while others take the exact opposite view, insisting their view is the correct way to go. For any writer who is learning - or even those who are just beginning - it can be a very overwhelming endeavor. Just what is the "correct" way to go about it?&nbsp;Well, after years of soul searching and reading and trying to learn, I've come to the conclusion that one must simply go with what's in them. Keep open minded, of course, and learn as much as you can but ultimately whatever vision you have, whatever goal you want to achieve, set your sights on it and get down to it. I had my own creative epiphany about two years ago when I decided to take a step back and reassess what it was I was trying to do and since then I've been able to unclog the drain so to speak and I've been able to write more, experiment with different ideas and actually enjoy it, rather than feeling I was knocking my head against the wall each time I sat down to write. In the end, it all depends on what your goals are and for me, personally, it's trying to find the middle ground between writing something interesting while at the same time trying to get whatever ideas I want to get across in an entertaining way - to write a story that will make people think about it for a while without being "too heavy" about it. I want what I do to be as good as my abilities allow me to be, with always an eye looking towards expanding and improving with each new project. I'm not trying to be the next David Foster Wallace. I'm trying to be myself - for better or for worse.&nbsp;There's a lot out there about all matters literary - to what's great about it to what's wrong with it all and there's no dearth of opinions on the matter and the differing camps aren't in short supply, that's for sure. It does interest me to read about it all but in the end it just gives me a headache - especially when writers begin sniping at one another, trying to ignite literary feuds and all the rest of it. None of that interests me nor do I want any part of that. I simply don't care. Each writer is someone different (that is if they are actually being true to themselves and not just aping what's "popular" or catering to a certain sensibility.) Yes, there are better writers than others. That's no surprise. There's always someone better than you and always someone you're better than (rendering the concept of "best" sort of irrelevant if you ask me) and we all have differing opinions on what's worth reading and what isn't. In other words there's a hell of a lot of noise out there and from my point of view the best thing to do is ignore the noise and keep focused on what you are trying to accomplish. Some will come along, others will not. But those that do come along, it makes it all even more worthwhile knowing that you connected to them in some way, that what you created resonated, had an effect, and that only enhances the creative fulfillment which makes us do this in the first place.&nbsp;Shakespeare said, "To thine own self be true."&nbsp;Believe it.&nbsp;

My literary education has been primarily self-taught. I never took a writing class or workshop (unless you count a creative writing class I took in high school, which I don?t) nor do I have an MFA or even applied to the program. I?ve learned what I have learned up to this point through reading and advice and recommendations from others. There were two writers in particular that pushed me towards wanting to write a novel: Henry Miller and Jack Kerouac. I always loved these two writers and count them as two of my major early influences. Reading them lead to others, and those lead to others, and so on and so on. My reading, in essence, was trial by error, picking up books from writers that other writers mentioned and admired. I imagine a lot of writers have done just this. I didn?t get my recommendations from professors or writing instructors, so it?s not that much of a surprise that some of what is ?essential reading? for writers, I?ve never read or just haven?t gotten around to yet (although I intend to correct this at some point.) The point is, whether it be reading writers other writers admired or simple ?trial and error? while spending time at The Strand or any other bookstore around New York, that?s how I came to all this and in a way, I like it. It was exactly how I came to discover my favorite musicians over my lifetime. So I do not come from the typical literary background that most writers who have aspired to do this since birth normally come from. I?m learning as I go. I have my thoughts and opinions on literary matters (such as they are) but I do not claim to be an expert. There is still a hell of a lot I don?t know and in a way, that?s what makes it all very exciting and inspiring to me. You just never know what?s around the corner or behind any new door that presents itself to you along the journey. 

My starting point was 20th century literature, George Orwell being a very early favorite, then came Milan Kundera, Tadeusz Konwicki and Kurt Vonnegut. But it was the Beat writers that really opened it all up to me. The Beats and the Moderns. There was something about these books that really spoke to me in a way the ?classics? did not. I?ve read some of the classics, of course, and enjoyed many of them but they didn?t resonate with me in the same way Kerouac and Miller did, or Céline, or Hemingway, or Cortázar. The Moderns, the Post-Moderns, these were the authors I gravitated towards, both novelists and poets. I can?t really explain why but the works from these authors really spoke to me and the best thing is that there were and are others who I?ve yet to discover. Each year I come across more of these wonderful books and authors who I find incredibly inspiring and educational. If I had to give an answer as to why they did, it was because they were writers willing to do something different, who bucked convention and did things their own way, the way they wanted. Not that their work wasn?t grounded in the classics (most, if not all of them, were) but whatever was there was pushed far in the background and what you had was something unique, something daring or at the very least, interesting. At least to me. 

So I suppose it would come as no surprise that my first attempt at a novel would be to write the kind of book I enjoyed reading. That novel (?November Rust?) took me 7 years to complete and in the end I didn?t quite know what it was I had there. To make a long story short, I basically shelved the thing for a couple of years before deciding to release it in early 2007. In the meantime, I had begun another novel, mainly to see if I had another in me, and that one, too, (?Nadería?) took about the same length of time to write and that was because at that point, I was struggling with the idea of what kind of writer I wanted to be. For most of the last decade I struggled with this and I eventually came to the conclusion that I needed to step back and reassess what I was trying to do. What was my goal?  What did I want to achieve?  What was truly in my heart?  ?Nadería? was the novel that answered that question for me and once I figured it out, I was able to complete it.  

All of the above is in reaction to a lot of internet browsing the past year or so, surfing many writer?s sites, blogs, forums, etc and the one thing I noticed above all else is that everyone has an opinion on literature and literary matters and each and every one of them is different. Some will insist that their view is the correct one that everyone must follow, while others take the exact opposite view, insisting their view is the correct way to go. For any writer who is learning - or even those who are just beginning - it can be a very overwhelming endeavor. Just what is the ?correct? way to go about it? 

Well, after years of soul searching and reading and trying to learn, I?ve come to the conclusion that one must simply go with what?s in them. Keep open minded, of course, and learn as much as you can but ultimately whatever vision you have, whatever goal you want to achieve, set your sights on it and get down to it. I had my own creative epiphany about two years ago when I decided to take a step back and reassess what it was I was trying to do and since then I?ve been able to unclog the drain so to speak and I?ve been able to write more, experiment with different ideas and actually enjoy it, rather than feeling I was knocking my head against the wall each time I sat down to write. In the end, it all depends on what your goals are and for me, personally, it?s trying to find the middle ground between writing something interesting while at the same time trying to get whatever ideas I want to get across in an entertaining way - to write a story that will make people think about it for a while without being ?too heavy? about it. I want what I do to be as good as my abilities allow me to be, with always an eye looking towards expanding and improving with each new project. I?m not trying to be the next David Foster Wallace. I?m trying to be myself - for better or for worse. 

There?s a lot out there about all matters literary - to what?s great about it to what?s wrong with it all and there?s no dearth of opinions on the matter and the differing camps aren?t in short supply, that?s for sure. It does interest me to read about it all but in the end it just gives me a headache - especially when writers begin sniping at one another, trying to ignite literary feuds and all the rest of it. None of that interests me nor do I want any part of that. I simply don?t care. Each writer is someone different (that is if they are actually being true to themselves and not just aping what?s ?popular? or catering to a certain sensibility.) Yes, there are better writers than others. That?s no surprise. There?s always someone better than you and always someone you?re better than (rendering the concept of ?best? sort of irrelevant if you ask me) and we all have differing opinions on what?s worth reading and what isn?t. In other words there?s a hell of a lot of noise out there and from my point of view the best thing to do is ignore the noise and keep focused on what you are trying to accomplish. Some will come along, others will not. But those that do come along, it makes it all even more worthwhile knowing that you connected to them in some way, that what you created resonated, had an effect, and that only enhances the creative fulfillment which makes us do this in the first place. 

Shakespeare said, ?To thine own self be true.? 

Believe it. 

]]> Tue, 03 Apr 2012 03:31:00 GMT 39938B67D5981F81197ECFE80360477C http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=1924131 <a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-c4hKJejgkPI/T3Os921YZlI/AAAAAAAAAtY/4By3JPCSVjk/s1600/thenames_first_ed.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">An American writer, James Axton, living in Greece in the early 1980s who has the talent to write great works of fiction but ended up writing risk analysis reports for a business that issues insurance to corporations at risk of terrorist attack in the Middle East and North Africa.&nbsp; He is estranged from his wife and young son and is generally living the life of a lonely and unhappy expatriate. Among his circle of friends is a man named Owen, who in his twilight years has a fascination with language, symbols and signs.&nbsp; It is through Owen that James learns of a fundamentalist cult who sees language as an instrument of oppression and they rebel against it by killing people. Since people are carriers of language, by killing them you destroy their capacity to use language.&nbsp;This is only part of the story here. Language, the politics of Empire, the intricacies of relationships, all of this comes together in a very complicated but thoroughly enjoyable read.&nbsp; This is not an easy read. There are such complex issues and connections here that you have to take your time with it, ingest it, but DeLillo's prose style is such that it doesn't bog the reader down with "heavy" leaden prose. He brings you right along, particularly his strength in character development, itself very complex. &nbsp;This is only the second novel by Don DeLillo that I have read and I'm definitely impressed and it seems his style by this point had grown by leaps and bounds since his debut, "Americana."&nbsp; He is clearly a writer I look forward to reading more of and I would highly recommend this book. Keep in mind it is not an easy "beach read."&nbsp; Although there are elements of a thriller here, it is more in the background, behind all the complex explorations of the nature and politics of language. &nbsp;Rating: * * * * *&nbsp;

An American writer, James Axton, living in Greece in the early 1980s who has the talent to write great works of fiction but ended up writing risk analysis reports for a business that issues insurance to corporations at risk of terrorist attack in the Middle East and North Africa.  He is estranged from his wife and young son and is generally living the life of a lonely and unhappy expatriate. Among his circle of friends is a man named Owen, who in his twilight years has a fascination with language, symbols and signs.  It is through Owen that James learns of a fundamentalist cult who sees language as an instrument of oppression and they rebel against it by killing people. Since people are carriers of language, by killing them you destroy their capacity to use language. 

This is only part of the story here. Language, the politics of Empire, the intricacies of relationships, all of this comes together in a very complicated but thoroughly enjoyable read.  This is not an easy read. There are such complex issues and connections here that you have to take your time with it, ingest it, but DeLillo?s prose style is such that it doesn?t bog the reader down with ?heavy? leaden prose. He brings you right along, particularly his strength in character development, itself very complex.  

This is only the second novel by Don DeLillo that I have read and I?m definitely impressed and it seems his style by this point had grown by leaps and bounds since his debut, ?Americana.?  He is clearly a writer I look forward to reading more of and I would highly recommend this book. Keep in mind it is not an easy ?beach read.?  Although there are elements of a thriller here, it is more in the background, behind all the complex explorations of the nature and politics of language.  

Rating: * * * * * 

]]> Thu, 29 Mar 2012 05:32:00 GMT DBF0E387AA4F5A90E72F45A6BD8FA593 http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=1894864 <a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_DmEFjpT5ac/T2ksakj-wzI/AAAAAAAAAtQ/S9jYRcDYrKw/s1600/The+Art+of+Nothing+eBook+Cover.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">My new short story eBook, "The Art of Nothing" is now available in <a href="http://www.lulu.com/shop/julian-gallo/the-art-of-nothing/ebook/product-20007759.html">ePub and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Art-of-Nothing-ebook/dp/B007MTQOSO/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1332292425&amp;sr=1-1">Kindle Editions. Just follow the links for more information.&nbsp; My new short story eBook, "The Art of Nothing" is now available in ePub and Kindle Editions. Just follow the links for more information. 

]]> Wed, 21 Mar 2012 06:19:00 GMT 232984055F112D62898AB60A5E581CC5 http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=1886716 <a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-rB_C5wXg0gs/T2aJPhC0SmI/AAAAAAAAAtI/gArKxLaIvsk/s1600/Photo+on+2011-01-26+at+18.18.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">I'm the first to admit that I am probably not all that well versed in the social media thing but I have been utilizing it for many years now. For writers and other artists it's almost a no-brainer these days if you want some kind of internet presence and/or a way to help promote your work and get the word out about what you do, especially if you're an independent artist. Whether your a writer published by a major house or the writer who releases his/her own material, chances are you have some sort of web presence: a blog, a Facebook page, a Twitter profile, or whatever else. It's just part of the game right now and from what I've been noticing, even the "biggies" are expecting their authors to establish themselves on the web in some form or another to take some of their own responsibility to promote their own work and have a hand in building their audience.&nbsp;I've had all these things for years now and for me it's worked. By establishing a web presence I've been able to not only sell some books but to also meet others who's interests are in line with my own and in the process met some very interesting, wonderful people. That was always another reason why I have these pages - to meet others around the world who share my interest in music, literature, art, and whatever else and I have, plenty of them and a lot of these people have work of their own which I think should be read, looked at or listened to. There are a lot of very talented people out there doing some very interesting work and these social media platforms allows for them to rise above obscurity, or at the very least the level of obscurity they would be if society not had these platforms, much like it was 20 years ago.&nbsp; It really has changed the game in a big way. I hate to use the word "game" but for some people, that's precisely what this all is. A huge game - and once you participate in it, you are blessed with seeing all the levels of professionalism a lot of artists have or extreme lack thereof. Often, it's a process of weeding out.&nbsp;Case in point: It was only fairly recently that I starting using Twitter. I had an account there for some time but never really utilized it, mainly because I really didn't "get it." At first it just seemed to be a bunch of people "tweeting" fairly irrelevant things about their daily lives - and I just didn't get it. But I started to use it again and once I "got it" it began to become a resource that I find very important if you are an artist looking to meet other likeminded people and help promote your work. I use it in the same manner in which I use all the others: a sort of combination of personal and professional. If anyone is on these sites because they like what I do, I encourage them to make personal contact. I'm open. Most of the time, I know it's only people who share an interest in something and it has nothing to do with my writing. That's fair and fine and I don't have any rules that that people have to be interested in it. Sometimes meeting good people who share common interests is good enough in and of itself. But Twitter, for the most part, seems to be aimed at those who try to pair down their interests to a specific area and often "follow" those people, artists, or organizations they want to keep in touch with. Twitter has come a long way from it's early days. From being a platform for people to "tweet" about what they ate for breakfast in the morning to actually help bring about a revolution in the Middle East and elsewhere. Journalists now "tweet" and it's become a much bigger thing than it once was. But in terms of this discussion, I'd like to keep it within the realm of artists using it to help further their careers.&nbsp;My "followers" have tripled on Twitter in the last year. Now I'm not naïve enough to believe that all these people are readers or even fans although the sales of my books have increased dramatically since I began utilizing it more. Most of the time people are seeking out others with common interests, some of them looking to promote themselves and sell their books. That's fine. I get it. That's the point, after all. I'm also not so naïve to believe that everyone you meet on there even cares about what you do. A lot of them are only interested in selling themselves and have no interest in you at all other than a potential customer. I get that too, although I'm not thrilled with that attitude so much. I like to connect with people, make it a little more personal, but you don't have any control over this. You will watch your "followers" come and go just like on any other social networking site.&nbsp;With Twitter, though, I find it more interesting than the others because of the amount of spam and I guess what some people feel are "ingenious" marketing methods. Sometimes you'll see a huge spike in your following, seemingly coming from out of nowhere. Usually the Twitter etiquette is to follow them back but I don't know if this is written in stone or not - nor do I really care. I usually do (that is if it isn't porn or obvious spam of some sort, or some other organization that I find reprehensible - like the strange increase in followers I got recently from right wing extremists, particularly of the evangelical variety, which I found highly amusing. They're all gone now, now that I didn't "follow" them back) but if one is a writer or an artist of some kind, chances are I'll follow them back and even "retweet" their projects and such to help spread the word about what they are doing. After all, it doesn't take much to do that. Merely a click of a button. People have been kind enough to do this for me so I return the favor. I have no doubt that because of this, my book sales increased dramatically over the past year.&nbsp;But you have to beware of those who have no idea what this is all about. Yes, you're going to get plenty of people who simply don't care about you at all and all they want you to do is buy their books. I can't count how many times I've gotten tweets that were nothing more than advertisements. "Buy my book! Buy my book!" with absolutely no personal connection whatsoever. That doesn't bother me so much as it does others. I simply ignore those, that is, unless they make some sort of attempt to make personal contact. Then you have those who's sole concern is to ramp up their numbers, to increase their "following."&nbsp; They essentially spam-follow hundreds of people at a time in an attempt to get you to follow them back, and then unfollow you once you do. This happened to me plenty of times, as I'm sure it's happened to others. This doesn't work, though, because people will simply drop you and unfollow you right back.&nbsp;But then there are these types, the more insidious ones who think you are merely there to be a free advertisement for them. I was recently "followed" by an author who asked me, as a favor, to mention her novel, give it a "tweet" to my 1200 + followers. I did so, even got thanked for it, only to be promptly unfollowed once I did it. In the grand scheme of things, who cares, but it does go to show you the level of unprofessionalism out there and the set of balls some people have in their insatiable desire to "make it."&nbsp; I unfollowed this person, deleted the "tweet" and blocked them for good measure. So it didn't work and she will discover soon enough that it will happen more than once. Not a good way to help promote yourself or your book.&nbsp;So if you are one who utilizes these sites in an attempt to promote your work, be prepared for the staggering amount of selfishness and self-absorption that you are no doubt going to run into - and don't take it personally. There's always the delete/block button to weed these folks out. Perhaps I still naïvely believe in the idea of independent artists helping one another out but I'm not so naïve anymore that I will extend that hand so willingly as I did in the past. I suppose the message here is to be wary. As in other avenues of life, many people simply do not have your interests at heart and only care about themselves. Human nature, I suppose. And not all that surprising these days.

I?m the first to admit that I am probably not all that well versed in the social media thing but I have been utilizing it for many years now. For writers and other artists it?s almost a no-brainer these days if you want some kind of internet presence and/or a way to help promote your work and get the word out about what you do, especially if you?re an independent artist. Whether your a writer published by a major house or the writer who releases his/her own material, chances are you have some sort of web presence: a blog, a Facebook page, a Twitter profile, or whatever else. It?s just part of the game right now and from what I?ve been noticing, even the ?biggies? are expecting their authors to establish themselves on the web in some form or another to take some of their own responsibility to promote their own work and have a hand in building their audience. 

I?ve had all these things for years now and for me it?s worked. By establishing a web presence I?ve been able to not only sell some books but to also meet others who?s interests are in line with my own and in the process met some very interesting, wonderful people. That was always another reason why I have these pages - to meet others around the world who share my interest in music, literature, art, and whatever else and I have, plenty of them and a lot of these people have work of their own which I think should be read, looked at or listened to. There are a lot of very talented people out there doing some very interesting work and these social media platforms allows for them to rise above obscurity, or at the very least the level of obscurity they would be if society not had these platforms, much like it was 20 years ago.  It really has changed the game in a big way. I hate to use the word ?game? but for some people, that?s precisely what this all is. A huge game - and once you participate in it, you are blessed with seeing all the levels of professionalism a lot of artists have or extreme lack thereof. Often, it?s a process of weeding out. 

Case in point: It was only fairly recently that I starting using Twitter. I had an account there for some time but never really utilized it, mainly because I really didn?t ?get it.? At first it just seemed to be a bunch of people ?tweeting? fairly irrelevant things about their daily lives - and I just didn?t get it. But I started to use it again and once I ?got it? it began to become a resource that I find very important if you are an artist looking to meet other likeminded people and help promote your work. I use it in the same manner in which I use all the others: a sort of combination of personal and professional. If anyone is on these sites because they like what I do, I encourage them to make personal contact. I?m open. Most of the time, I know it?s only people who share an interest in something and it has nothing to do with my writing. That?s fair and fine and I don?t have any rules that that people have to be interested in it. Sometimes meeting good people who share common interests is good enough in and of itself. But Twitter, for the most part, seems to be aimed at those who try to pair down their interests to a specific area and often ?follow? those people, artists, or organizations they want to keep in touch with. Twitter has come a long way from it?s early days. From being a platform for people to ?tweet? about what they ate for breakfast in the morning to actually help bring about a revolution in the Middle East and elsewhere. Journalists now ?tweet? and it?s become a much bigger thing than it once was. But in terms of this discussion, I?d like to keep it within the realm of artists using it to help further their careers. 

My ?followers? have tripled on Twitter in the last year. Now I?m not naïve enough to believe that all these people are readers or even fans although the sales of my books have increased dramatically since I began utilizing it more. Most of the time people are seeking out others with common interests, some of them looking to promote themselves and sell their books. That?s fine. I get it. That?s the point, after all. I?m also not so naïve to believe that everyone you meet on there even cares about what you do. A lot of them are only interested in selling themselves and have no interest in you at all other than a potential customer. I get that too, although I?m not thrilled with that attitude so much. I like to connect with people, make it a little more personal, but you don?t have any control over this. You will watch your ?followers? come and go just like on any other social networking site. 

With Twitter, though, I find it more interesting than the others because of the amount of spam and I guess what some people feel are ?ingenious? marketing methods. Sometimes you?ll see a huge spike in your following, seemingly coming from out of nowhere. Usually the Twitter etiquette is to follow them back but I don?t know if this is written in stone or not - nor do I really care. I usually do (that is if it isn?t porn or obvious spam of some sort, or some other organization that I find reprehensible - like the strange increase in followers I got recently from right wing extremists, particularly of the evangelical variety, which I found highly amusing. They?re all gone now, now that I didn?t ?follow? them back) but if one is a writer or an artist of some kind, chances are I?ll follow them back and even ?retweet? their projects and such to help spread the word about what they are doing. After all, it doesn?t take much to do that. Merely a click of a button. People have been kind enough to do this for me so I return the favor. I have no doubt that because of this, my book sales increased dramatically over the past year. 

But you have to beware of those who have no idea what this is all about. Yes, you?re going to get plenty of people who simply don?t care about you at all and all they want you to do is buy their books. I can?t count how many times I?ve gotten tweets that were nothing more than advertisements. ?Buy my book! Buy my book!? with absolutely no personal connection whatsoever. That doesn?t bother me so much as it does others. I simply ignore those, that is, unless they make some sort of attempt to make personal contact. Then you have those who?s sole concern is to ramp up their numbers, to increase their ?following.?  They essentially spam-follow hundreds of people at a time in an attempt to get you to follow them back, and then unfollow you once you do. This happened to me plenty of times, as I?m sure it?s happened to others. This doesn?t work, though, because people will simply drop you and unfollow you right back. 

But then there are these types, the more insidious ones who think you are merely there to be a free advertisement for them. I was recently ?followed? by an author who asked me, as a favor, to mention her novel, give it a ?tweet? to my 1200 + followers. I did so, even got thanked for it, only to be promptly unfollowed once I did it. In the grand scheme of things, who cares, but it does go to show you the level of unprofessionalism out there and the set of balls some people have in their insatiable desire to ?make it.?  I unfollowed this person, deleted the ?tweet? and blocked them for good measure. So it didn?t work and she will discover soon enough that it will happen more than once. Not a good way to help promote yourself or your book. 

So if you are one who utilizes these sites in an attempt to promote your work, be prepared for the staggering amount of selfishness and self-absorption that you are no doubt going to run into - and don?t take it personally. There?s always the delete/block button to weed these folks out. Perhaps I still naïvely believe in the idea of independent artists helping one another out but I?m not so naïve anymore that I will extend that hand so willingly as I did in the past. I suppose the message here is to be wary. As in other avenues of life, many people simply do not have your interests at heart and only care about themselves. Human nature, I suppose. And not all that surprising these days.

]]> Mon, 19 Mar 2012 06:25:00 GMT 8F44B52AD46C5F50F7CC387C03CE749B http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=1878075 <a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2Q6HFQzrY5M/T2KJxsVo9bI/AAAAAAAAAs8/GtStMh7EkdY/s1600/puzo+godfather.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">I have seen all "The Godfather" films a million times and both parts one and two have become favorite films of mine over the years - but I never read the novel from which these great films were derived. After seeing yet another rerun of "The Godfather" saga on TV recently, I figured it was about time that I finally read the novel.&nbsp;I have read Mario Puzo's two &nbsp;novels that preceded his best known book: "The Dark Arena" and "The Fortunate Pilgrim", both of which I enjoyed very much, particularly "The Fortunate Pilgrim" which could be looked at as something of a precursor to "The Godfather" although one has nothing to do with the other.&nbsp; "The Fortunate Pilgrim" was a very well written story about Italian immigrants living in the Hell's Kitchen section of New York City during the Depression era. There were some allusions to the Mafia in that story but the focus was mainly on the matriarch of the family, struggling to keep her family together amongst the old world and the new. A critical success, "The Fortunate Pilgrim" didn't sell very well, which is unfortunate because it is a far superior novel than it's follow up.&nbsp;Puzo himself claimed he had consciously set out to write a "bestseller" when he began "The Godfather." After all, he was a government clerk with five children to feed and his previous novels weren't selling. He set out to change that and according to the author he had a meeting with a publisher, regaling him with Mafia stories for about an hour and showed him a ten page outline. The publisher gave him a $5,000 advance and told him to go write the book. "The Godfather" is what he produced.&nbsp;I'm sure most readers here are aware of the plot since I am going on the assumption that many if not all those reading this saw the film. The film follows the novel fairly faithfully, although there are some differences, but more or less, what you see in the film comes directly from the novel, dialog included. What surprised me about the novel more than anything else was its clumsiness and repetitiveness of the writing. It is far less stylized than his previous two novels and there are many instances where he breaks a lot of what would be considered today's "rules" of writing. There is an awful lot of "telling" rather than "showing." (There were some instances of this in his previous novels, but far fewer examples than you'll find here). The other flaw the novel has is that it sometimes digresses into subplots concerning the character Johnny Fontane and Sonny Corleone's mistress Lucy Mancini, digressions that weren't truly necessary to move the story forward and seemed more like a distraction than anything else. But these are minor quibbles, really. Despite its flaws in style it is a remarkable story - told in the tradition of Balzac (who Puzo quotes at the very beginning of the novel) and Dostoevski. This is probably the only time that I found an instance where the film is superior to the novel. It isn't a bad book by any means but I think the film's brilliance and artful way of depicting the time, place and story influences my opinion more than anything else.&nbsp;If you haven't read any of Puzo's novels, I would strongly recommend you read this novel's predecessor, "The Fortunate Pilgrim", which depicts Italian-American immigrant life in a far superior way - and the writing itself is far superior as well. &nbsp;Rating: * * *&nbsp;

I have seen all ?The Godfather? films a million times and both parts one and two have become favorite films of mine over the years - but I never read the novel from which these great films were derived. After seeing yet another rerun of ?The Godfather? saga on TV recently, I figured it was about time that I finally read the novel. 

I have read Mario Puzo?s two  novels that preceded his best known book: ?The Dark Arena? and ?The Fortunate Pilgrim?, both of which I enjoyed very much, particularly ?The Fortunate Pilgrim? which could be looked at as something of a precursor to ?The Godfather? although one has nothing to do with the other.  ?The Fortunate Pilgrim? was a very well written story about Italian immigrants living in the Hell?s Kitchen section of New York City during the Depression era. There were some allusions to the Mafia in that story but the focus was mainly on the matriarch of the family, struggling to keep her family together amongst the old world and the new. A critical success, ?The Fortunate Pilgrim? didn?t sell very well, which is unfortunate because it is a far superior novel than it?s follow up. 

Puzo himself claimed he had consciously set out to write a ?bestseller? when he began ?The Godfather.? After all, he was a government clerk with five children to feed and his previous novels weren?t selling. He set out to change that and according to the author he had a meeting with a publisher, regaling him with Mafia stories for about an hour and showed him a ten page outline. The publisher gave him a $5,000 advance and told him to go write the book. ?The Godfather? is what he produced. 

I?m sure most readers here are aware of the plot since I am going on the assumption that many if not all those reading this saw the film. The film follows the novel fairly faithfully, although there are some differences, but more or less, what you see in the film comes directly from the novel, dialog included. What surprised me about the novel more than anything else was its clumsiness and repetitiveness of the writing. It is far less stylized than his previous two novels and there are many instances where he breaks a lot of what would be considered today?s ?rules? of writing. There is an awful lot of ?telling? rather than ?showing.? (There were some instances of this in his previous novels, but far fewer examples than you?ll find here). The other flaw the novel has is that it sometimes digresses into subplots concerning the character Johnny Fontane and Sonny Corleone?s mistress Lucy Mancini, digressions that weren?t truly necessary to move the story forward and seemed more like a distraction than anything else. But these are minor quibbles, really. Despite its flaws in style it is a remarkable story - told in the tradition of Balzac (who Puzo quotes at the very beginning of the novel) and Dostoevski. This is probably the only time that I found an instance where the film is superior to the novel. It isn?t a bad book by any means but I think the film?s brilliance and artful way of depicting the time, place and story influences my opinion more than anything else. 

If you haven?t read any of Puzo?s novels, I would strongly recommend you read this novel?s predecessor, ?The Fortunate Pilgrim?, which depicts Italian-American immigrant life in a far superior way - and the writing itself is far superior as well.  

Rating: * * * 

]]> Fri, 16 Mar 2012 05:36:00 GMT 58D0253CB66681CD5C1514CD474AB59C http://juliangallo.net/blog.cfm?feature=2524837&postid=1865354 <a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cLPzAU9RTrA/T15-0ATXpRI/AAAAAAAAAs0/qHWz_HTdYls/s1600/JJ.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">"Is there anything you don't like?"&nbsp;This was a question asked to me by a causal reader of this blog. Well, the honest answer is absolutely, of course. Believe me there is plenty out there today that doesn't move me in any way, shape or form - either in literature, music, art, film, you name it; and when I was a much younger man, I was far more vocal about it than I tend to be these days. So, yes, there are plenty of things out there that I don't like - can't stand, in fact. As I got a little older I've begun to practice the old adage: "if you have nothing good to say, don't say it at all." I've become more inclined to simply ignore those things that I don't like. Why waste time and energy on them?&nbsp; What would be the point? After all, I am not an expert on any of these matters. All I do is write about what I think of them, in this case mostly the books I've been reading; and I'm sure there will be times where I won't have such glowing things to say about what I've been reading. What I won't do is a hatchet piece. I don't really see the point in that. I've been a little critical at times but when I started this blog, my main purpose was - aside from promoting my own work - to try to pass on to others the things I found interesting and enjoyable. Even if I read something that I wasn't particularly fond of, I'll say so, but there's always something to pass on to those who may appreciate it more than I did.&nbsp;Artists by their very nature are often hyper-critical beings. I suppose it comes with the territory. We all look at something at some point and just know we could do a better job. I wouldn't be honest if I didn't say I haven't felt that way, especially in my younger days when I was more inclined to get up on the soapbox about it. Nowadays I'm more inclined to just dismiss it, ignore it and not waste precious energy on it. I'll leave that to the professional critics, of which I am most certainly not. I am just one man with an opinion, a feeling, an "impression" so to speak. I know what I like and what I don't like and why. Sometimes you may agree with me, other times you will not. That's only natural - and healthy. So if you're one to look for hatchet pieces here or if you're looking for someone to completely tear down another just because he can, I'm afraid you'll have to look elsewhere - and believe me, there is no shortage of that sort of thing all across cyberspace. The internet has allowed all of us with the ability to type and string a few words together the means to say what we wish about all kinds of things. Again, this is good and healthy, particularly in a free society. And a good healthy discussion is also a good thing. I'm not here for that. Again, I'll leave that up to others to do.&nbsp;I realize we live in an age where tearing another to pieces is considered entertainment. Just look at your television programs. Just look across the internet at your favorite blogs and websites about books, music, films and art. When I started this thing, I made a conscious effort to try to keep things positive. This doesn't always mean that everything will be glowing but I refuse to contribute to the noise that, in my view, is a blot on our culture (i.e. so-called "reality shows" - there you have it. I fucking hate those shows. All of them. I don't watch them). And what I mean by "positive" is that I intend to try to turn people on to things that I come across that they may not have been aware of (although a good deal of what I've read here aren't exactly "obscure" items). Still, for those who may not have heard of them, this is my way of trying to show you that there is something worth checking out.&nbsp;So yes, there are plenty of things that I dislike - and hate, in fact. I'm just no longer going to waste my time and energy on it, especially when there are better things out there to experience.&nbsp;

?Is there anything you don?t like?? 

This was a question asked to me by a causal reader of this blog. Well, the honest answer is absolutely, of course. Believe me there is plenty out there today that doesn?t move me in any way, shape or form - either in literature, music, art, film, you name it; and when I was a much younger man, I was far more vocal about it than I tend to be these days. So, yes, there are plenty of things out there that I don?t like - can?t stand, in fact. As I got a little older I?ve begun to practice the old adage: ?if you have nothing good to say, don?t say it at all.? I?ve become more inclined to simply ignore those things that I don?t like. Why waste time and energy on them?  What would be the point? After all, I am not an expert on any of these matters. All I do is write about what I think of them, in this case mostly the books I?ve been reading; and I?m sure there will be times where I won?t have such glowing things to say about what I?ve been reading. What I won?t do is a hatchet piece. I don?t really see the point in that. I?ve been a little critical at times but when I started this blog, my main purpose was - aside from promoting my own work - to try to pass on to others the things I found interesting and enjoyable. Even if I read something that I wasn?t particularly fond of, I?ll say so, but there?s always something to pass on to those who may appreciate it more than I did. 

Artists by their very nature are often hyper-critical beings. I suppose it comes with the territory. We all look at something at some point and just know we could do a better job. I wouldn?t be honest if I didn?t say I haven?t felt that way, especially in my younger days when I was more inclined to get up on the soapbox about it. Nowadays I?m more inclined to just dismiss it, ignore it and not waste precious energy on it. I?ll leave that to the professional critics, of which I am most certainly not. I am just one man with an opinion, a feeling, an ?impression? so to speak. I know what I like and what I don?t like and why. Sometimes you may agree with me, other times you will not. That?s only natural - and healthy. So if you?re one to look for hatchet pieces here or if you?re looking for someone to completely tear down another just because he can, I?m afraid you?ll have to look elsewhere - and believe me, there is no shortage of that sort of thing all across cyberspace. The internet has allowed all of us with the ability to type and string a few words together the means to say what we wish about all kinds of things. Again, this is good and healthy, particularly in a free society. And a good healthy discussion is also a good thing. I?m not here for that. Again, I?ll leave that up to others to do. 

I realize we live in an age where tearing another to pieces is considered entertainment. Just look at your television programs. Just look across the internet at your favorite blogs and websites about books, music, films and art. When I started this thing, I made a conscious effort to try to keep things positive. This doesn?t always mean that everything will be glowing but I refuse to contribute to the noise that, in my view, is a blot on our culture (i.e. so-called ?reality shows? - there you have it. I fucking hate those shows. All of them. I don?t watch them). And what I mean by ?positive? is that I intend to try to turn people on to things that I come across that they may not have been aware of (although a good deal of what I?ve read here aren?t exactly ?obscure? items). Still, for those who may not have heard of them, this is my way of trying to show you that there is something worth checking out. 

So yes, there are plenty of things that I dislike - and hate, in fact. I?m just no longer going to waste my time and energy on it, especially when there are better things out there to experience. 

]]> Tue, 13 Mar 2012 03:59:00 GMT 32CFD7AACC4E8E57DC57F22AC4AB5FB6