|
|
Post by weirdmonger on Nov 8, 2010 9:20:14 GMT
The stories in BLACK STATIC #19 real-time reviewed! =================================== Chain Reaction by Steve Rasnic Tem “You cannot believe things were always this bad.”I’m glad I’ve started my celebration of the second anniversary of my inception of real-time reviewing with this classic-to-be story. It is in itself a real-time narrative (literally) of a major statically-serial car pile-up — as a result of an avalanche (I think) — a piecemeal visitation to each constituent of the pile-up by one of its victim drivers, reminiscent (but not all that much) of Jean-Luc Godard’s film ‘Weekend’ (1967)…but that comparison gives you the idea. It is well-written (and although I rarely mention artwork in my real-time reviews, brilliantly illustrated by Dave Senecal) – and the story itself, without giving anything away, sure collects the leitmotifs retrocausally towards its own plot gestalt (a process that has recently become a personal obsession of mine). All life is here, absurd, horrific, poignant, itemised, surreal, caricatured… Loved the Suitcase Man, just as one example. And I also enjoyed what I interpreted as a seasoned authorial man’s view of life that does not only have entropy individually for each of us but globally for our way of life itself as a slow downward path from civilization’s beginning to where we are now and, later, to where we will be in a few minutes’ time….. Hey, loved it! (7 Nov 10) ======================= Beachcombing by Ray Cluley “The man was so lonely and sad and empty like a flat tyre.” The boy finds ‘treasures’ on the beach inadvertently to scry lives about their previous owners… Beautifully described. Plainsong prose. Passive yet strong. This boy ‘itemises’ things in his rite-of-search more passively (although the scrying is far more active than he can imagine) and indeed more fearfully than the main protagonist in the previous story conducts a similar ‘itemisation’ or scrying as he travels the pile-up. A wonderful contrast of styles, but a similarity of thrust. It may only be me, but I imagine the man Tommy sees is a later version of that protagonist in ‘Chain Reaction’. But such a tangent of personal critique cannot prevent this separately special ‘Beachcombing’ becoming its own treasure that passive or active readers alike will keep forever after first discovering it. [May I recommend another fiction that stems from a boy's beachcombing: quite different, of course, but possibly complementary: the novel 'Notes From An Exhibition' by Patrick Gale.] (7 Nov 10 – another 2 hours later) ========================= The Sleep Mask by Joel Lane “ The only cars he could see looked too damaged to be in use. [...] …the roads were hardly roads at all.” It is a bit of a cheek to switch characters from story to story as I did above, but here Joel does a similar job for me within his extremely Lane-like story – a dream-combing as this mag’s third rite-of-search, a floundering between reality and irreality: seeking by a dark itemisation-of-’travel’ for that handle that is the ever-ungraspable truth. Who is the right who in our antecedents (a question betokening a deep sadness within this story)? Who is the man seeking ostensible oblivion? (7 Nov 10 – another 2 hours later)
[Can one literally drown in dreams as if dreams are the con(dream)fused panoply of one's own life and its participants scrolled before you in those last moments of drowning? Possibly an irrelevant imponderable. (Joel's stories in 'Nemonymous' were entitled 'The Drowned' and 'The Drowned Market')] (7 Nov 10 – another 10 minutes later)
====================
they will not rest by Simon Clark
“…the sleep debt would build and build…”
[Cf: Joel Lane's story above: "When he started to pay off the sleep debt..."]
I am currently drowned in connections. What a way to celebrate an anniversary of real-time synchronicities, those parthenogenetic serendipities of truth hatched from artifice! And all to the good of the stories separately and to their mighty gestalt. We have a flood (of dreams?) and utter disturbed sleep to the point of enforced sleeplessness causing a sort of holcaust zombie-feel in this story … and beachcombing tellingly introduced towards the end…and drowning.
Simon Clark’s story is an imaginative feat of enormously impressive proportions. A Horror story plain and simple, honed for genre readers, and with originality oozing at every pore. The incredible greater cosmos and the microcosm of humanity in interface, set within the purlieus of windy Whitby. The human emotions of the main protagonists are depicted neatly, some strong as a soldier’s, others weak and self-serving. Love and lust. Pity and cruelty.
People ‘zombied’ by a need to keep awake so as to avoid the walking coffins (cf: Dickens’ Tale of Two Cities). And flying coffins! Almost in war-time formation. And it all seems so believable within the plot. Can’t give any more away. Blakean and something I’d guess to be essentially pure Clark.
” – and when they force themselves awake the dream doesn’t leave. It remains inside their heads where it overlaps reality.” (7 Nov 10 – another three hours later)
======================
The Wound Dresser by Lavie Tidhar
“‘What is your name, angel?’ she demanded as soon as I sat down.
‘Joel.’”
This is a brief but over-brimming story as this mag’s fiction’s perfect coda … “at the conclusion of a grand symphony, straining for the final note.”
The ‘midwife’ of those souls who die, inter alia, in the death camps… Poetic, and deeply felt.
Create your own connections, do.
I am spent.* My first ever single day’s real-time review.
I am finished. Numbed, but fulfilled. A perfect set of five stories. Exquisite. (7 Nov 10 – another 3 hours later)
=====================
There is much else in ‘Black Static’ to interest the Horror genre fan. In fact, about only 50% of it, I guess, is the fiction I have discussed above.
*I am still awake. Not all dead bodies are put in coffins. Most are mercifully converted into ashes. Some were (and perhaps still are) piled together without care. Humanity’s cruelty to humanity. And later today, nothing will have changed in the nature of change. (8 Nov 10)
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnlprobert on Nov 8, 2010 10:06:16 GMT
and the story itself, without giving anything away, sure collects the leitmotifs retrocausally towards its own plot gestalt
Who is the right who in our antecedents (a question betokening a deep sadness within this story)?
What a way to celebrate an anniversary of real-time synchronicities, those parthenogenetic serendipities of truth hatched from artifice! And all to the good of the stories separately and to their mighty gestaltDes, I know you consider me to be anti-intellectual, and I don't doubt for a second that your real-time reviews probably aren't written for the likes of me, which is why I tend to give them a miss, but it does still surprise me when I come across them that with the amount of education I have had I still have absolutely no idea what the sentences like the above could even begin to mean! 
|
|
|
|
Post by David A. Riley on Nov 8, 2010 10:09:01 GMT
I know what YOU mean with that one, John. It had me scratching my head, I must admit. I would reach for a dictionary, but I don't think I will. I'd probably be none the wiser if I did.  |
|
|
|
Post by weirdmonger on Nov 8, 2010 10:32:16 GMT
I don't know what to say. Unless we meet in the pub every week, nobody really knows what makes anyone else tick. If I called anyone an anti-intellectual, that's because their posts indicate to me that their internet persona wants to be seen as that. Fair enough. It's not meant as an insult.  . As to the extracts quoted, I agree out of context they appear a bit outlandish and perhaps they are. But they use words from the dictionary. des and the story itself, without giving anything away, sure collects the leitmotifs retrocausally towards its own plot gestalt
Who is the right who in our antecedents (a question betokening a deep sadness within this story)?
What a way to celebrate an anniversary of real-time synchronicities, those parthenogenetic serendipities of truth hatched from artifice! And all to the good of the stories separately and to their mighty gestaltDes, I know you consider me to be anti-intellectual, and I don't doubt for a second that your real-time reviews probably aren't written for the likes of me, which is why I tend to give them a miss, but it does still surprise me when I come across them that with the amount of education I have had I still have absolutely no idea what the sentences like the above could even begin to mean! |
|
|
|
Post by Craig Herbertson on Nov 8, 2010 11:43:14 GMT
I don't know what to say. Unless we meet in the pub every week, nobody really knows what makes anyone else tick. If I called anyone an anti-intellectual, that's because their posts indicate to me that their internet persona wants to be seen as that. Fair enough. It's not meant as an insult. . As to the extracts quoted, I agree out of context they appear a bit outlandish and perhaps they are. But they use words from the dictionary. des and the story itself, without giving anything away, sure collects the leitmotifs retrocausally towards its own plot gestalt
Who is the right who in our antecedents (a question betokening a deep sadness within this story)?
What a way to celebrate an anniversary of real-time synchronicities, those parthenogenetic serendipities of truth hatched from artifice! And all to the good of the stories separately and to their mighty gestaltDes, I know you consider me to be anti-intellectual, and I don't doubt for a second that your real-time reviews probably aren't written for the likes of me, which is why I tend to give them a miss, but it does still surprise me when I come across them that with the amount of education I have had I still have absolutely no idea what the sentences like the above could even begin to mean! This is where the Lifemanship student says blithely - 'Oh, did you really struggle with that simple bagatelle?' I know what all the words mean separately but at times their combination made me stop and think - and I have reread the sentence three times now. I keep getting a feeling, without having read enough of Des, that he is somehow attacking conventional boundaries of what is a 'story'. This kind of critique seems to be implying that the critique is part of an ongoing narrative inclusive of the story itself and the next one to come. The lazy part of me would like Des to come out now and make a one paragraph statement of his artistic intent to save me catching up on reading thousands and thousands of words to have a clearer idea. There are times when you want to be stretched a bit. You pick up a book with large words that you've saved for the train but stick it back in the bag after twenty minutes of a brown study. Happily. foresight reminded you to slip that tatty Avengers novel in your side pocket. You arrive refreshed and are delighted to see that there's a seedy market stall with books near the station which offers up a battered fontana anthology. It'll only be ten more minutes of the brain twister before the return journey is saved by those short stories. It's really mood that makes the book's enjoyment possible. I suspect that, for those of us who endured a fair amount of further education, about the last thing one wants to do is continue it into leisure time. I have stacks of philosophy and anthropology books on my shelves but I can't remember the last time I read one through - they're great for dipping into . As an interesting aside (to me at least) I just realised that Des and I have stories published in Works 7 in 1990 which was pretty early on in our writing. Only noticed it now. Yours is a rather neat tale called 'Death Sweat', Des. |
|
|
|
Post by weirdmonger on Nov 8, 2010 12:12:55 GMT
As an interesting aside (to me at least) I just realised that Des and I have stories published in Works 7 in 1990 which was pretty early on in our writing. Only noticed it now. Yours is a rather neat tale called 'Death Sweat', Des. No sweat, Craig. It's just that John put three separate sentences from different parts of the review together as if it were one passage. |
|
|
|
Post by Craig Herbertson on Nov 8, 2010 12:23:46 GMT
As an interesting aside (to me at least) I just realised that Des and I have stories published in Works 7 in 1990 which was pretty early on in our writing. Only noticed it now. Yours is a rather neat tale called 'Death Sweat', Des. No sweat, Craig. It's just that John put three separate sentences from different parts of the review together as if it were one passage. Which I guess wouldn't worry you? Wasn't it James Joyce who was dictating Finnegan's Wake when some else walked into the door and spoke, interrupting him. When the scribe looked quizzical Joyce said 'let me hear that bit? And then kept the interpolation in the sentence. |
|
|
|
Post by weirdmonger on Nov 8, 2010 12:32:45 GMT
No sweat, Craig. It's just that John put three separate sentences from different parts of the review together as if it were one passage. Which I guess wouldn't worry you? Not really. Your paragraph you requested: Stories are chosen to appear where they do in a single book or in a particular order for some reason. Whether editorial intent or some synchronous power beyond that. Who knows? I try to tap that power and give it back to the book, in the hope this gives a new slant upon the separate power of each story and on their overall effect together. Some fiction lends itself to this approach more than others, and I try by instinct to choose to review books accordingly. As a separate matter, Was the journey of reading a book *different* by virtue of the fact that I knew I was intent on publicly writing *about* the journey while making that very journey? I sense that public real-time reviewing — hopefully giving alternative perspectives to previous readers of the book as well as to its new readers — also creates a wonderful experience, yes, a different experience from what would otherwise have taken place, i.e. not only for the reader but also for the person spending time and effort in creating the real-time review. It is perhaps the new way to *read*, one that, *psychologically*, is now only possible through using the internet in this way. One of the more positive things about the internet, among a lot of negative ones. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnlprobert on Nov 8, 2010 12:37:04 GMT
It's just that John put three separate sentences from different parts of the review together as if it were one passage. No. That wasn't the intention at all, which is why I spaced them out and deliberately took pains to quote three excerpts from the reviews of three different stories to illustrate the point that it wasn't one specific part of the review I didn't understand but pretty much most of it. I don't mean this insultingly either, btw, and I suspect our minds work in very different ways. I don't mind trying to stretch myself with something a little more intellectually challenging either, but I'm not entirely sure that what I quoted was either challenging or intellectual as I couldn't make sense of it at all! |
|
|
|
Post by Craig Herbertson on Nov 8, 2010 12:41:42 GMT
Which I guess wouldn't worry you? Not really. Your paragraph you requested: Stories are chosen to appear where they do in a single book or in a particular order for some reason. Whether editorial intent or some synchronous power beyond that. Who knows? I try to tap that power and give it back to the book, in the hope this gives a new slant upon the separate power of each story and on their overall effect together. Some fiction lends itself to this approach more than others, and I try by instinct to choose to review books accordingly. As a separate matter, Was the journey of reading a book *different* by virtue of the fact that I knew I was intent on publicly writing *about* the journey while making that very journey? I sense that public real-time reviewing — hopefully giving alternative perspectives to previous readers of the book as well as to its new readers — also creates a wonderful experience, yes, a different experience from what would otherwise have taken place, i.e. for the reader and for the person spending time and effort in creating the real-time review. It is perhaps the new way to *read*, one that, *psychologically*, is now only possible through using the internet in this way. One of the more positive things about the internet, among a lot of negative ones. Thanks for taking the time Des. I found that interesting. Dem was asking what the difference was and I bumbling tried to explain what i thought it was. I think my basic point is that the internet is changing what a review actually is. Makes me think that 'process' is dominating the previously established monoliths of publishing reviews and indeed everything else). We should now re title the online 'Black Static' as 'Black Process' |
|
|
|
Post by weirdmonger on Nov 8, 2010 12:44:23 GMT
John, that may not have been your intention, but it may have given that impression. That was the first impression I had before reading your post properly and then, as the writer of the review, I knew they were separate sentences from different parts of review
In any event those three bits did not make up a large % of the review and in the context they probably weren't all that important in hindsight to the meat of the rest of the review.
|
|
|
|
Post by weirdmonger on Nov 8, 2010 13:02:40 GMT
Thanks for taking the time Des. [...] Makes me think that 'process' is dominating the previously established monoliths of publishing reviews and indeed everything else). We should now re title the online 'Black Static' as 'Black Process' Thanks, Craig. Coincidentally I wrote this yesterday about that very 'process'. A good word for it. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnlprobert on Nov 8, 2010 13:03:07 GMT
John, that may not have been your intention, but it may have given that impression. That was the first impression I had before reading your post properly and then, as the writer of the review, I knew they were separate sentences from different parts of review In any event those three bits did not make up a large % of the review and in the context they probably weren't all that important in hindsight to the meat of the rest of the review. That's fair enough. I merely wanted to make the point that on the whole I don't really understand a lot of what you say, or imply, in your reviews, and sentences like the ones I quoted merely serve to alienate me further. However I suspect that your work isn't really intended for people whose thought processes operate the way mine do anyway (and again I don't mean that to be an insult) so I suspect this sort of thing just isn't for me! |
|
|
|
Post by weirdmonger on Nov 8, 2010 13:17:28 GMT
Thanks, John. My real-time reviews are best enjoyed by the authors themselves, judging from feedback. There is much feedback recorded on my main RTR page. As I said above, it is also an experience that enhances my own reading of a book simply by quickly reporting to supposed others in the world about the audit trail of my reading as I proceed. Others should try it... And I think it does elicit new slants in a fiction by such a process both for oneself and others. |
|
|
|
Post by weirdmonger on Nov 8, 2010 14:27:36 GMT
|
|
. 
