|
Post by vaughan on Oct 2, 2009 7:10:34 GMT
My latest read is a second trip to Hutson territory. My first, Deathday, was not a complete success.
Of course, I have Slugs and it's sequel here, but it seemed a bit obvious going for that - I'm going to like it, I already love the movie and it's a killer animal book after all......
So on to Erebus it was.
The first thing I must say is that the cover of my book is the same one shown in this thread. But I could kick myself, because I saw a copy with a much better cover in a secondhand shop a month or so ago, and didn't grab it to save a pound fifty.... madness.
Anyway, on to the book. I must admit that overall I thought this one was terrific. I see some talk of gore, and shall we shall, some highly descriptive writing about it. Hey, that's all good for me. A bit of splatter makes the day pass faster. ;D
The basic premise though, and the setting, was what really set the thing off. While there was a mystery - however thinly veiled - it carried itself well. There was plenty of excitement, and action.
There were only two flaws. The first was the sex scenes - the first of what happens immediately after our lead gets shot through the shoulder "leaving an exit hole the size of a fist". No problem, bandage the guy up and have some sex. --LOL--
The second was the climax to the book. Like some Masterton I've read I felt Hutson needed to calm down a bit. The book grows in scale toward the end, and the smaller foundations on which it is built can't really support it. It's over-the-top, but not in a good way.
Still, I can certainly forgive it for that. It's a really fun read, and I'd certainly recommend it to all and sundry.
Wish I'd bought the superior cover though..............
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Oct 1, 2009 18:35:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Oct 1, 2009 18:32:02 GMT
It's all about the story for me. But I will seek the best cover I can.
And Dr. Strange, don't feel bad about the Pan thing - unlike many here I very rarely read short fiction - I prefer a novel. So you're not alone.
Cover art is amazing - but if I went with great covers as well as attractive stories then the whole thing would be out of control and I'd need to move to a much bigger place.
I keep the cream, and adore the rest from afar. But it's novels for me.
Take The Rats as an example. The first copy I had was a newer print, bit of a rubbish cover. I enjoyed reading it. But I came across the original cover which I prefer, so I bought that as well. I'm in the process of finding a new owner for my first copy. No need for me to have both.................
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Sept 30, 2009 14:57:45 GMT
I had two copies of this. The cover above is the original, but I ended up passing it on to a friend.
The cover I kept is an outrageous rip-off of the monster from "Night of the Demon". I couldn't possibly let it go.
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Sept 30, 2009 13:44:01 GMT
You specialize in books I'd love to own myself. ;D
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Sept 30, 2009 0:38:01 GMT
I read this over the last couple of days.
I first read the book many moons ago, back when it was first published in paperback, although to be honest the only thing that stuck in my mind was the cover art.
So, having read it again, what do I make of it?
Well, the strangest thing for me was that the lead character is a bit of a joker. He's always making witty asides and never truly seems to take things very seriously. This keeps the book light and breezy, and for ruined chance that there might be some real tension of scares.
Still, one assumes Masterton knew what he was doing, and this was all part of his intention.
Once we get to Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves bit.... well, it seemed to familiar for me to really get wrapped in it. There is, however, a nice incantation sequence at the end, with a twist or two - those worked well.
I don't want it to come across as though I had a problem with this book, because I truly didn't. But given the leads temperament, it's never really going to be horrifying or terribly exciting.
So - my memory tells me it's a cracking horror novel - my current thoughts are that it's a fairly lightweight - if enjoyable - entry.
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Sept 30, 2009 0:22:29 GMT
Oh - and carolinec. Tull are great aren't they? Favorite album? Got to be the first for me. Lots of good afterwards, of course. Not seen them live since Under Wraps!!!!
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Sept 30, 2009 0:20:11 GMT
They feel (as I do too) that the vitriol aimed at Ally from this board has been - for want of a better word - disgusting. OK, some people don't like her book and they didn't like her marketing tactics, but what I've see here from some people is nothing short of bullying. Well, our opinion differs. I think you're blowing the criticism way out of proportion. What is wrong with someone simply stating: "X author's book is complete and utter rubbish?" Why is that bad? It is simply the opinion of one individual, and is the heart and essence of this and every other forum I have ever been a member of. For instance, I recently commented on a John Saul novel, and frankly I thought it was right bore. Apparently it sold a million copies, but to me it was a waste of time. Surely that's okay, I read it - I didn't like it - and I wrote that I didn't like it. Why is that problematic - even I chose to use juvenile language or glib remarks? This is just a forum, a bunch of people. No-one's ego gets pandered too, and at one time or another we all - probably - have been rebuked (I keep Demonik busy sending me PM's about how the forum software works and how I'm buggering it up --LOL--) That's okay, isn't it? Is the author in question even a member of this forum? I didn't think so. So how is it "bullying" in any way? Isn't that a rather general interpretation of bullying? What harm is being done? A person bought the book, they read it, and they apparently hated it. That's okay, isn't it? And it's okay to state as much on a forum, isn't it? What's the alternative - niceties around tea and scones, patting each other on the back while pulling faces when no-one is looking? And finally - have those over at the BFS forum really acted any better in this regard? I think not. I'm an outsider. I've not read the book, and I've never heard of the author (or book) in question. Should I see the book - after all this - I shall run in the other direction. ;D But really, people seem to have gotten worked out over a very minor thing. If the BFS are going to run awards, then they'll get people who disagree with them. As does everyone who sets themselves up to state a "best" of the year among a diverse and opinionated audience. Nothing that has been said on here changes the competition winners, after all. Debate, rather, is to be encouraged I'd have thought. The BFS forum appears to be an Internet low-light, the attitudes I've read there are extremely poor since they attacked this entire site, not just an opinion. The BFS is fair game, because they've set themselves up as an organization - an official symbol of something. They ought to be big enough to take the rough with the smooth. otherwise they look like rank amateurs. Their board is run from the site of an official organization - and I don't want to come across as simply trying to defend The Vault, because nothing could be further from the truth, and I'm a newbie here anyway - but the only thing I truly see as shameful here is that the administrators on an official board like that haven't simply deleted the terrible things I've read over there. Now - THAT is shameful. Their standards should be higher, they're not an amateur board such as this. Sorry if any of this offends you - it's simply my opinion. I don't have to worry about the BFS, nor the BFS me. No-one listens to me anyway, and I certainly will give their site a wide berth in future. And the author in question - well, clearly there'll be no sale here. But it's all good, I have plenty to read, and I'm sure the lady in question will publish another novel with some cover-blurb mentioning her award. And so on, and so on.....
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Sept 29, 2009 22:23:05 GMT
carolinec: I think you've got me wrong too. I wasn't around last year when the "incident" you refer to took place (a debate about old and new, I guess?) Sorry to hear you feel like this isn't really the place for you - but I don't know what went on in the past.
But reading that thread over on BFS it's clear a certain vocal individual would ridicule someone like myself because I like old horror novels (and Crab books). And that is what prompted my post.
I'd like to read about new horror, because I might be guided to books that I *would* like. But left to my own devices I'm back in the old days.... it's a natural progression for me. I'm not hurting new horror at all.
The criticism of new horror - in my experience - has come from current authors. And I'm making the leap that it's largely because they want to SELL. Personally I'm not all that interested in what sells, only what I ENJOY. If you enjoy something totally different then that's absolutely fine. I'd never criticize you for not liking a Crabs book - believe me, I can see the faults (which is half the fun) as well as anyone else.
I don't know anything about the BFS. I'm learning now. I'm not a member on the board over there. I don't recognize many names over there either. But the impression I'm getting after visiting it is that it's most definitely a place where I wouldn't feel welcome.
While claims - equally as juvenile as anything I've read in this thread - have been made over there, there is one key difference. This is an INDEPENDENT BOARD. It has a focus, a topic if you will. It is - as far as I know - run for the love of it, for fun, as a hobby of sorts. The members here are simply fans. It doesn't represent anything other than a love of a subject. There's no board, no-one truly in charge, just administrators. And I'll tell you, as a relative newbie here, I've found some members to be truly generous of the time and books.
The BFS though......... isn't that pretending to be a representative ORGANIZATION? As such, acting as they are is shameful, and just one more reason I think I'd better stay away. If the level of discussion and angst over there - because someone deemed a winning book to be, for want of a better word, rubbish - is anything to go by, it's just another gentleman's club protecting the honor of a lady.
Who am I? No-one. No-one at all. I read everything from Guy N. Smith to Graham Swift, Ian McEwan, JG Ballard, and tomes on film theory, silent cinema and on. Lots of things. Here I discuss pulp horror. My introduction to the BFS has been eye-opening, and I really think they need to take a good hard look at themselves. I don't think, based on this, they're fit for purpose. Who'd want to be associated with such things?
Beats me.
Good luck on your endeavors, and I hope you find lots of great things to read. It's unlikely any one board will address every need and desire - you know? You've always seemed reasonable to me, sorry to see you stay away.
Click-Click-Click.
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Sept 29, 2009 16:33:20 GMT
I support Chelsea.
I am offended by a comment in here.
See how easy it is to do?
I want to add that this is not the first time I'd read someone pouring some scorn on someone like myself who doesn't have much interest in current horror fiction. However, when I've read it it's been from people who don't have any interest in past fiction, as though it's below them.
Why not simply live and let live? If you read modern horror, good for you. Internet forums are full of opinions, they're not press releases. If you enjoy the "classics" (however you choose to define it) then that's all good too. Surely there is value in paying tribute to the masters of a bygone era? As someone who enjoys some modern movies, I won't apologize for admitting that my heart lies in with silent cinema - and some of the early talkies. Am I somehow poorer? I think not.
I like pulp horror because it entertains me. It's outdated, outmoded, and has spurious sexist content. And it's fun. I'm not ashamed of that. I have no reason to be.
It's not easy to say why modern horror doesn't do it for me. One thing is that I'm hardly short of titles to read - and there is only so much time in the day. Another is that I last tried to read a newish Stephen King book (The Cell) and it was utter drivel.
But no writer should be working in a vacuum. New writers ought to know about passed authors. It might actually help them. Time will tell whether the works of current authors will still be avidly collected 30 years down the road. If they are, I expect they'll be very proud and happy about it.
Rather than complain about people who think horror ended with Giant Crabs - maybe, without vitriol, the person could consider why that might be. I suspect the answer is "entertainment". And at some level, all fiction should entertain.
Here's a question - why is current horror book front cover artwork - uniformly horrible? Take a look at a NEL - it's pretty good all round. Takes a look in Borders at the horror section - nothing calls to me, it's full of rubbish riffing on Buffy ad campaigns. Maybe it's just me.........
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Sept 29, 2009 10:20:45 GMT
Blimey.
I give up! ;D
I know the search is rubbish. So this time I didn't search at all. I trawled through every page in the NEL forum to see if anyone had a thread on it. Saw none - and created the thread.
Never saw the SUB-forum.
What a LOSER!
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Sept 29, 2009 10:18:49 GMT
I read this one in a few short hours, at a small 176 pages it whizzes by, which is a good thing. I have to admit I was somewhat confused by the book at first. Was this a true story, or not? Perhaps I've been living on the moon or something. I got my answer when reading the first few pages (am I the only one that always reads EVERY page of a book? Doubtful). On the back of the title page it states: "The characters and situations in this book are entirely imaginary and bear no relation to any real person or actual happening." So there you have it - it's a work of fiction. But wait. It's not. A quick Google search found me this: (I hope I can be forgiven a hotlink in this case - and for using The Daily Mail!) Hm - someone dropped the ball at NEL on this one. ;D Anyway, on to the book itself. As a story told by the wife it reads rather strangely. She credits two Fleet Street journalists for doing all the research, and I tend to think there might have been some ghost-writing going on, if only because there are very few really personal things mentioned. This is pretty much a (somewhat mangled) chronology of The Beast and his actions. It beggars belief what went on. Jersey is an island 9 miles long, and 5 miles wide, yet it took more than a decade to find a local who was committing these crimes. They had enough DNA evidence to catch the guy - but alas, this was before testing could be done. I found it rather frustrating to read at times because I kept saying to myself: Surely they can tell something by the guys hair sample?!?!?!. But then, they didn't have cell phones either. ;D Dare I also say that there is some padding here. The criminal, Ted, claimed he had links with Gilles De Rais, a child murderer from 1432. The author wants to discuss this - which is fair enough. But before getting down to the nitty gritty of it - we get nine pages of a rambling history of the fellow. This followed by a further six pages where we see some of the similarities. So fifteen pages in all - which is a bit much to be honest. It also comes at the end of the book, stalling its conclusion somewhat. There is also a "Black Magic" angle here, but it's very under-developed and offers no real evidence. There's also talk of a "secret society", but if there was such a thing then it's still very secret. The book also mentions that Ted was a bit of a ladies man. But when I saw the picture linked above I was left a little perturbed - if that's the case, I'm Clark Gable! All joking aside this was clearly a terrible case (or series of cases). It's made worse by the incompetence of the local police force (there are two distinct sets on the island, neither of which seemed to have much of a clue). As you might know, there was a case on Jersey recently where terrible child abuse was discovered at an old school (dug out of the basement). Well, Ted's wife ran such a school, and Ted stepped in to play Father Christmas there (he never abused kids he knew). I wonder if it's the same place? Hm. Well, interesting read this - even if NEL were confused about it being a true story or not. I thought the cover was really good, but having seen the photograph above it kind of puts it into perspective! Interesting read - and for me a different kind of NEL.
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Sept 29, 2009 0:46:38 GMT
I hold the Oscars up as an example of the WORST kind of awards ceremony. It's lots of back-slapping, self-serving, politically correct posturing. It's also a good measure of what NOT to watch. It's about not rocking the boat, keeping the status quo, and celebrating each other.
Sure, every once in a whole a decent film gets an award of some kind - but blimey, 99.9% of the time it's a disgrace.
As for the Oscar show - bad music, naff presenters, and women prancing around in borrowed clothing and jewelry. It's so spineless.
Makes me nauseous even thinking about it. BAD.
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Sept 28, 2009 19:32:49 GMT
Just want to add a note.
I use Firefox.
I use an add-on that suppresses ALL Flash code.
As such - this link does NOTHNG.
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Sept 28, 2009 14:52:39 GMT
Incongruous.
Yes, that's the word I'd use to describe this one.
This novel seemed to me to be a mix and match of the the weirdest elements, both for the story being told and more especially for Guy N. Smith himself. It's weird, and wonderful.
And incongruous.
Let me explain (I see there are fans -even big fans - of this book here, and I want to make myself completely clear.)
The book opens with cowboys and Indians. The wild west. The frontier days. The Cavalry. Yes - GNS is up for some bow and arrow action - tipi's, totem poles, river bed action and circles of wagons, all that stuff. Incongruity number 1. GNS writing a western?
Hard done by, a squaw is raped and generally downtrodden. Cursed and cursing.
Next.
England. A place I thought of a Southend-on-Sea, because it's always bloody raining. A fair ground with stereotypical crooks everywhere. And motor bike gangs. Not only motor bike gangs - but THE motor bike gang. Hells Angels.
Big Dipper, throwing rings into nails, air guns to shoot metal ducks, lions, apes, an elephant, candy floss. And an Indian. In Southend (or wherever you fancy the place is). A Squaw. A squaw named Jane. Jane.
Incongruity number 2.
Our central cast: Roy, Liz, and Rowena.
You're going to spend a lot of time with these three, and you're not likely to meet a more dissatisfying group for quite some time. Roy is a wimp. Liz is a bitch. Rowena is deaf and dislikes her mother.
They mope, they moan, and they have no control whatsoever over their child. They're holidaying in a hotel that is run by left-overs from the Second World War (or so it seems). If only it'd been Basil Fawlty's place we might have had more fun.
As the cover blurb states: Hell's fury breaks loose on a holiday weekend".
But it actually breaks loose over the ENTIRE WEEK.
Incongruity number 3.
And it rains. And it rains. It rains every day - all day - all the time. And apparently when it rains there is only one place to go, to the fair. Of course. So to the fair they go, they meet Jane. Liz gets angry, Rowena gets a free doll carved from wood, Roy gets an erection.
The Squaw doesn't mind Roy's erection at all.
Jane isn't just a fortune teller - she's a repair woman. She repairs things around the fair (there's quite a bit of this to do, since the bikers smash the place to bits). A handy-woman, no less.
Jane is raped by the bikers. She likes it. Heck - we're told - she even orgasmed.
Incongruity number 4.
From here hell's fury breaks loose. Jane is as much a victim as everyone else. Rowena is running the show. A man is kicked to death while swimming in the sea - by a doll a couple inches high (no, seriously). A woman is kicked to death in a cave - by the same doll.
And it rains and rains. It's miserable. People start dying. The police appear every now and again but the Keystone Cops would have had more luck with an investigation - I've seen Abbot and Costello figure out far larger mysteries.
So they close the fairground after murder number one? No. Two? No. Three? No.
There's an attempted rape on the Big Dipper. While it's moving. Going around, throwing people about. It doesn't work out (wonder why?)
Boats sink, machines fail, engines stall. It rains. Rains some more. The rain is followed by copious amounts of water falling from the sky - AKA: more bloody rain.
And the book cover - not the one shown above - lies. My cover has a carved Manitou doll, clearly in the wild west, an (apparently) naked woman in the background, arms aloft. Odd.
I think we can assume that I was left floundering by this one. There are so many odd elements thrown together. The fair ground, the story of native Americans, the carvings, the best Punch and Judy show ever, and rotten relationships thrown together in holidays none of them really wants.
Odd.
Frankly I didn't settle with it. Part of me is surprised I got through it. On the other hand it has some wonderful moments - and there's some pure pulp nonsense going on.
But it didn't feel GNS-thy. It felt disassociated, strange, and obtuse.
I liked it. I disliked it at the same time.
Going to need to read again some time. GNS caught me off guard. That can't be a bad thing.
And as for those incongruities.......
|
|