|
Post by Craig Herbertson on Oct 15, 2010 12:01:31 GMT
Really liked Swell head- echoes of Stephen King and the Elephant Man but a poignant wee number that somehow made the Seventh a right on Panish collection
|
|
|
Post by Craig Herbertson on Oct 15, 2010 13:03:14 GMT
I've been meaning to do this for ages so maybe I'll go for it now. Were you thinking of a specific size of story Dem?
|
|
|
Post by dem bones on Oct 15, 2010 16:13:44 GMT
I've been meaning to do this for ages so maybe I'll go for it now. Were you thinking of a specific size of story Dem? well, i've no plans to do anything with them beyond making some CD's, but the Stephen Volk story runs 17 pages in Charles's book and it takes Larry Connelly 40 minutes to get through it. if, for arguments sake, we were looking at putting the results on a Vault & friends YouTube channel, there's a ten minute ceiling on each clips, so anything longer and it would have to run over parts one, two, three ... - i'm not sure how many of our lot have the patience for that if there are no visuals to write home about. But it would be mental to have a channel where our authors and musicians could showcase their work. Any ideas?
|
|
|
Post by Craig Herbertson on Oct 15, 2010 17:07:59 GMT
I've been meaning to do this for ages so maybe I'll go for it now. Were you thinking of a specific size of story Dem? well, i've no plans to do anything with them beyond making some CD's, but the Stephen Volk story runs 17 pages in Charles's book and it takes Larry Connelly 40 minutes to get through it. if, for arguments sake, we were looking at putting the results on a Vault & friends YouTube channel, there's a ten minute ceiling on each clips, so anything longer and it would have to run over parts one, two, three ... - i'm not sure how many of our lot have the patience for that if there are no visuals to write home about. But it would be mental to have a channel where our authors and musicians could showcase their work. Any ideas? You could do a dark stars of the vault series of shorts
|
|
|
Post by Craig Herbertson on Oct 16, 2010 10:25:53 GMT
Not sure if D.F Lewis invented the concept of real time review but I'm having a bash on the Seventh BBOH here: www.heavenmakers.com/?cat=4
|
|
|
Post by dem bones on Oct 16, 2010 13:35:20 GMT
Not sure if D.F Lewis invented the concept of real time review but I'm having a bash on the Seventh BBOH here: www.heavenmakers.com/?cat=4 not being wilfully dim here, but i genuinely do not understand the concept. please explain in layman's terms how a 'real time' review differs from the plain old reviews served up by everybody else? Are the rest of us scribbling away in anti-time or something? i'm glad you managed to do justice to The Pier, Craig. i found it very difficult to articulate my feelings about that one. There's a Ramsey Campbellishness about it and i've never been any good at writing about his stuff either, unless he's included some dirty bits. Been trying to locate Thana's Whitechapel Society Short Story award winning From Hell To Eternity to direct folk toward, but those dastardly rotters at the WS seem to have removed it.
|
|
|
Post by Craig Herbertson on Oct 17, 2010 1:47:24 GMT
Not sure if D.F Lewis invented the concept of real time review but I'm having a bash on the Seventh BBOH here: www.heavenmakers.com/?cat=4 not being wilfully dim here, but i genuinely do not understand the concept. please explain in layman's terms how a 'real time' review differs from the plain old reviews served up by everybody else? Are the rest of us scribbling away in anti-time or something? i'm glad you managed to do justice to The Pier, Craig. i found it very difficult to articulate my feelings about that one. There's a Ramsey Campbellishness about it and i've never been any good at writing about his stuff either, unless he's included some dirty bits. Been trying to locate Thana's Whitechapel Society Short Story award winning From Hell To Eternity to direct folk toward, but those dastardly rotters at the WS seem to have removed it. Oh God, now you've got me. I think you've just hit on a genuine problem with the instantaneous internet review and the conventional paper review. My understanding (based on simply reading D.F Lewis' reviews) was that they are instant in the sense that he reads a story and immediately records his impression and writes it down - his reviews seem more like an artistic response to the story; a kind of additional tale within a tale. The only real difference I think is that the 'normal' reviewer will perhaps read the whole book and go through it tale by tale in a slightly more rigid format and you will get a whole review of the anthology. I would equate a 'real time review' with an artist observing a sculpture and commenting to other observers present on the work rather than a writer noting down the key features of a sculpture, commenting on its historical context and artistic credentials to people who will read what he has said a bit later. The real problem though is that reviewers on the Vault often do just this a la Lewis - yourself and John come to mind immediately - as you go through a work sharing impressions with vaultees which are also of course artistic responses, sometimes informative, often incisive, usually very witty. So, If I'm honest the distinction is not really clear anymore and is becoming less so. If I'm more honest I would say its a good way of directing people on to my site , which virtually no one knows about, as they will be getting some installments. (I did feel a certain hesitancy about advertising a review elsewhere when I get so much pleasure from coming on here and not being asked to go elsewhere. I agonized a bit over whether to simply post in the vault as well as or instead of but in the end my site is so tiny I thought it had better have something on it. ) Thana Niveau's piece struck me on three distinct levels - elegantly told, assured start to an anthology and interesting concept. Essentially you felt 1. safe - this is well written 2. assured - if its all up this standard the anthology's looking good 3. intrigued - have I understood this clearly? Must read it again when I've finished. Apologies if I've made things less clear - It's 3am. I am full of whisky (laphroaig) and have just been driven back hundreds of miles after a gig...
|
|
|
Post by dem bones on Oct 17, 2010 6:05:48 GMT
Apologies if I've made things less clear - It's 3am. I am full of whisky (laphroaig) and have just been driven back hundreds of miles after a gig... Apologies? Craig, what you've just done is way beyond the call of duty and i thank you for it. ah, i did kind of suspect that "real time review" translates as "Des gives it stream of consciousness bollocks about stuff as he reads it" and it is true we've been using that process since day one (other serial offenders: Franklin Marsh, Steve, Rog ....). can't say i ever thought of it as particularly ground breaking but, well .... yet another example of just how criminally undervalued has been Vault's immense contribution to Eng Lit and stuff! will be following your review and have added Heavenmakers to the Vault Of Gloomy list on Vault@Wordpress - not that it will do you much good. And if and when you record a reading of one of your stories, please upload it somewhere we can find it!
|
|
|
Post by Craig Herbertson on Oct 17, 2010 10:11:35 GMT
Just woke up with a pretty bad hangover so this is going to be even worse. If you wanted to know anything about the subject where else would you come but the vault! I think I'll just post up my scribblings like everyone else but put them on the on my site as well. Problem is, with the standard of analysis here its a bit like being a new stand up comedian being asked to follow the horror equivalent of the young Billy Connelly. Thanks for the add.
|
|
|
Post by andydecker on Oct 17, 2010 11:56:20 GMT
The real problem though is that reviewers on the Vault often do just this a la Lewis - yourself and John come to mind immediately - as you go through a work sharing impressions with vaultees which are also of course artistic responses, sometimes informative, often incisive, usually very witty. This is so true. I love the way you guys write especially the shorts up. I would if I could it, but I don´t have the necessary language sklii and - what is more important - not the right affinity. You grew up with things like the Pan books and you know how to appreciate it, while my diet always was novels - or novella-like stuff -, and while I know if I like a tale or not, I have kind of a hard time really appreciating or knowing enough of the form to recognize the finer points. At least you know what is a good drink
|
|
|
Post by Johnlprobert on Oct 18, 2010 23:29:22 GMT
Not sure if D.F Lewis invented the concept of real time review but I'm having a bash on the Seventh BBOH here: www.heavenmakers.com/?cat=4 not being wilfully dim here, but i genuinely do not understand the concept. please explain in layman's terms how a 'real time' review differs from the plain old reviews served up by everybody else? Are the rest of us scribbling away in anti-time or something? I know - I've felt the same about that. For anyone who's wondering, (and I'm not being facetious here) the way I review stuff is I read the story & then I write some comments about it. As far as I'm concerned that's what reviewing is. What I will also add though is that I think a review should: 1) Tell you whether you would want to read the story / book yourself or avoid it like the plague 2) Do so in an entertaining manner that makes it worthwhile reading the review. Having read a couple of Des' reviews I can appreciate he's trying to do something rather different from the above and has tried to find a name for it that makes that point. I suspect most of us who do these things review in real time but Des' are far more introverted, personal responses whereas most reviews are by their very nature extrovert.
|
|
Thana Niveau
Devils Coach Horse
We who walk here walk alone.
Posts: 109
|
Post by Thana Niveau on Oct 19, 2010 14:15:01 GMT
Craig, thanks so much for your kind words on "The Pier"! It's lovely for me to hear. I'm looking forward to the rest of your reviews. And Dem, it's just as well the WS took my story off the website, as they'd formatted it rather - er, creatively. With any luck it will appear in print (actual print, not Net-print) in the not-too-distant future.
|
|
|
Post by dem bones on Oct 19, 2010 16:37:23 GMT
i'm very pleased to hear that, Lady P. i think it's fair to say that The Pier has been very well recieved, but those expecting more of the same from the Rent Boy Ripper story are in for a nasty surprise! It's horrible! For anyone who's wondering, (and I'm not being facetious here) the way I review stuff is I read the story & then I write some comments about it. As far as I'm concerned that's what reviewing is. What I will also add though is that I think a review should: 1) Tell you whether you would want to read the story / book yourself or avoid it like the plague 2) Do so in an entertaining manner that makes it worthwhile reading the review. there's no right or wrong way, but it's that type of review i find most helpful and enjoyable. i've been turned on to so many novels and shorts purely on the strength of what people have written about them on here or in Paperback Fanatic. i like best when something of the reviewers personality shines through. Franklin, for example, should have been a used car salesman, the amount of truly APPALLING rubbish i've splashed out for because he made this or that item sound so utterly glorious. i shall always be grateful to him for that. Between them, Nightreader and Mark converted me to Gerald Suster. A whole TRIBE (there is no other word) of devotees pointed me toward GNS, think i'd only read The Walking Dead and a Sabbat when we started and i wasn't much cop on NEL or Hamlyn either. Steve, FM, Rip, KC, Funky, Saucy and Sev were prominent in the crew of reprobates who sure taught me the error of my ways! Only recently, Lemming got me into Anthony Horowitz and now i can't get enough of him. when i think of it, there's no better place to have misspent the last five years of my life. .... I would if I could do it, but I don´t have the necessary language skill and - what is more important - not the right affinity ..... and while I know if I like a tale or not, I have kind of a hard time really appreciating or knowing enough of the form to recognize the finer points. Andy, i'd agree we've somehow attracted a number of gifted authors, but i sure as hell ain't one of them so i just stick to my demented cheerleader bit. Nobody seems to mind too much. what i've found with Vault is that people are generally kind and will forgive plenty if they see you're enthusiastic and making a bit of an effort. Either that or they've sussed i'm going to keep battering the keyboard regardless so there's not much point them moaning about it.
|
|
|
Post by Craig Herbertson on Oct 19, 2010 20:45:32 GMT
It's a great story Thana. Already looking forward to the next one. There are so many good reviewers here. Can't count the times I've read a review and laughed my socks off or grimly decided I've got to buy the book - based solely on the passion of a vaultee.
|
|
|
Post by weirdmonger on Oct 19, 2010 21:57:30 GMT
Not sure if D.F Lewis invented the concept of real time review but I'm having a bash on the Seventh BBOH here: www.heavenmakers.com/?cat=4 not being wilfully dim here, but i genuinely do not understand the concept. please explain in layman's terms how a 'real time' review differs from the plain old reviews served up by everybody else? Hi, I suppose JLP is right later on this thread, it is a personal way of reading a book: a public rite of passage that the authors themselves, at least, according to feedback, enjoy. Here's an example. My real-time review of BACK FROM THE DEAD: nullimmortalis.wordpress.com/2010/08/22/back-from-the-dead/
|
|