Clear communication

While surfing the Net this morning I tripped over a three-year-old article from THE PARIS REVIEW about Barry N. Malzberg's many early-'70s science-fiction novels. The author took about 4,000 words to conclude that all those books are crap -- but it took him years to decide that.
He said he read Malzberg's most famous novel, BEYOND APOLLO (1972), SEVEN TIMES while trying to decide if it was crap.
That's devotion above and beyond the call of duty.
SF readers apparently took this as a slam. But here's the thing -- have you tried to READ any of Malzberg's novels?
This PARIS REVIEW write-up struck me as a pretty legit response to some pretty difficult books. It was written with a lot of humor and insight, and the writer had clearly done his homework.
I read BEYOND APOLLO twice and didn't like it much -- that was back in the day when I forced myself to finish EVERYTHING, no matter how bad. I didn't mind the book so much -- but I thought I was missing something. I thought there was something wrong with ME. That's why I read it again. And decided I didn't miss much.
The PR writer's point was that Malzberg's books aren't so much science fiction as they are about THE DIFFICULTY OF WRITING.  They're all pretty distant, many of them are about a character making notes for a story he can hardly tell, etc. Read Malzberg's HEROVIT'S WORLD (1974) -- one of his few novels I finished back in the day -- and you'll get all that in spades.
As I get older, more and more I prefer direct, clear communication that doesn't play games with me. You can still handle Big Subjects while being direct. You don't have to be clever or tricky or murky.
But here's the thing. Some of Malzberg's work is pretty great. I think some of his essays on SF's history and his part in it are pretty freakin' brilliant. His book THE ENGINES OF THE NIGHT (1982) is an angry, despairing look at the history of SF, with some amazing, moving portraits of forgotten writers. His essay "Tripping With the Alchemist" is a very interesting peek behind the literary scene, and very warm and human.
Some of his short stories are pretty great -- especially "La Croix (The Cross)" and "A Galaxy Called Rome." Both these later became novels. GALAXIES has some interesting sections about the brutal reality of the SF world and SF publishing at the time. It's an angry, hilarious book ... in places. But I couldn't finish it. CROSS OF FIRE pads-out a brilliant short story.
If you read ENGINES OF THE NIGHT, you'll learn (in a section called "What I Did on My Summer Vacation") how Malzberg once wrote a novel OVER A WEEKEND for $4,000 -- and once you get over the shock, it's pretty freakin' funny. Of course the novel, TACTICS OF CONQUEST ... well, I couldn't finish it.
Some people think Malzberg's novels are funny. I'll get back to that.
I tried others. GUERNICA NIGHT shows an overcrowded future plagued by suicides. But the best, most painful part of the book has Malzberg writing about a talented fellow SF writer who died -- a guy Malzberg could have helped, but for some reason chose not to. Those sections are great -- couldn't finish the novel.
THE SPREAD is an early-'70s porn novel written just like Malzberg's SF, only using a porno-mag setting. Kinda dull, but not terrible. Odd how much SF and porn have in common.
THE MEN INSIDE is an ugly and depressing attack on cancer. Couldn't finish it.
DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE, FALLING ASTRONAUTS, SODOM AND GOMORRAH BUSINESS, UNDERLAY, REVELATIONS ... couldn't finish any of them. Doesn't mean they're crap.
If a book doesn't work for you, put it down. Don't waste your time. There's plenty of other good stuff out there. Maybe you're not who the book was meant for.
There are lots of great writers I can't read. I haven't been able to finish a Stephen King novel since NEEDFUL THINGS.
I haven't read a single thing ever by acclaimed SF writer Gene Wolfe that I've been able to figure out. Got all the way through SHADOW OF THE TORTURER, but I was confused. I read all those reviews saying "Great, magical writing, epic adventure," and I thought there was something wrong with ME. Thought I'd missed something again. By the time I picked up SOLDIER IN THE MIST (which should have been simpler because the hero only remembers what he writes down), I still couldn't figure out what Wolfe was up to. But I learned my lesson -- I gave up halfway through.
Lotta people think Samuel R. Delany's brilliant. His early novels THE EINSTEIN INTERSECTION and EMPIRE STAR are magic, but by NOVA (possibly by BABEL-17) he was cramming too much into too small a space, and I gave up 200 pages into DHALGREN.
Just because a book gets rave reviews doesn't mean it's good. Does it work for you?
On Malzberg the comedian -- he may be a cranky New Jersey version of Harlan Ellison, but Malzberg likes to joke. Awhile back at the GALAXY'S EDGE website, Malz posted a criticism of '60s anthologist and book-critic Judith Merril, saying her work to publicize the '60s "New Wave" in science fiction "destroyed the field."
If it weren't for the New Wave, Barry's experimental, off-the-wall work would never have been published. And he took the loosening-up in the SF field back then as far as he could, selling something like 70 novels between 1968 and 1975. He wouldn't be able to sell any of those works in the SF field of today.
Barry owes the New Wave whatever career he's had. And he'd admit it.
He has to be joking.

#650: The perils of self-publishing

THE MOODY BLUES COMPANION, edited with an introduction & historical essay by Edward Wincentsen, 2001, 185 large-print pages, around $15 from Amazon.com.

This is a beginner's book. It's for beginning Moody Blues fans, it's put together by a beginning writer, probably published in his basement, & it's tough to read because it has dozens -- possibly hundreds -- of typographical errors in it. The sentence structure in the intro & historical essay is awfully rough, & the best writing in the book isn't by the guy with his name on the cover.
In cases like this, you hope the information inside makes up for the awkward writing, the errors in punctuation, the bad structure, the sentence fragments, the factual errors, the lack of a table of contents or an index.
I was prepared to do a hatchet job on this book. I was ready to call it the most disappointing book about progressive rock since Jerry Lucky's PROGRESSIVE ROCK FILES or Joe Benson's UNCLE JOE'S GUIDE TO PROGRESSIVE ROCK -- 2 other self-published "classics."
But there are actually some good things in here, tho it's definitely not worth the $15.
The best thing here is a 10-page interview with Moodies producer Tony Clarke -- he provides the perspective & humor that isn't found anywhere else in the book. And my hometown heroes Providence get a name-check!
Other than that, the best writing comes from articles published in the HIGHER AND HIGHER Moodies' fan magazine, & from newspaper or magazine interviews with the Moodies or former band members.
The historical essay has a couple of interesting sections & is very strong on the circumstances surrounding the recording of DAYS OF FUTURE PASSED -- how the Moodies were invited by Decca to record a "rocked-up" version of Dvorak's NEW WORLD SYMPHONY, etc. It's on the money about paring-down production on A QUESTION OF BALANCE so the guys could do the songs justice on-stage.
But it's thin on the period surrounding SEVENTH SOJOURN & their vacation in the early '70s. Most of their other albums are just barely mentioned. & the info about how Beatles manager Brian Epstein might have managed the Moodies to greater heights had he not died in 1967 is a whole new area to me, & I'd not seen it mentioned anywhere before. Not sure what Wincentsen's source is for this info.
But overall, the history's a disappointment. The history in the TIME TRAVELER box-set is better, though still not an award-winner. Hell, I wrote an essay on the Moodies in high school creative writing class that had more depth than this....
So this book would not have satisfied me as a high school fan & it doesn't tell me much that's new now. But Wincentsen brought all the data together & says he hopes somebody will write an "authorized" book on the Moodies soon. So do I -- I'd like to read it. I'd really like to see somebody do a John McPhee-style history on the band, before the stories get any older.
The biggest problem with self-published books is that by definition they were probably too weak to be published professionally. There's usually an obvious weakness. Usually with self-publication the problem is that the manuscript never gets professionally proofread by somebody trained in spelling, punctuation, sentence structure....
You may think none of this matters much, but try reading it. This book has WAY too many punctuation errors and sentence fragments, & was clearly written by a writer who didn't know how to edit or proofread his own work. Referring to the Moodies' early history as an R&B "beat" band, Wincentsen refers to this music more than once as "R&B's music."
While I didn't find too many spelling errors, there is one VERY embarrassing reference to former Moodies keyboard player "Mink" Pinder. That mistake is enough to make you wonder about all the other information being presented. If the author can't spell someone's name right, what else has he messed up?
The writer owes it to his paying customers to do the job RIGHT. Writing clearly, fluently, correctly, isn't really that hard. But it does take time ... or even a second draft....
Other problems: The discography is a joke, there isn't even a list of songs on each album -- listing song titles & songwriting credits could have filled up the dozen empty pages at the back of the book, & it wouldn't have been that much more work. The discography doesn't include release dates -- the only place they're mentioned is in the historical essay. Solo albums aren't listed in the discography -- they're only mentioned in the history.
There's an essay that takes the central metaphor from the Moodies' album TO OUR CHILDREN'S CHILDREN'S CHILDREN and goes way too far.... There's a list of Frequently Asked Questions that actually has some good info in it, but not enough.... Did you know the Four Tops did a version of the Moodies' classic B-side "Simple Game"? Well, you didn't learn that by reading this book....
There's a long section with fans' stories about meeting the guys in the band, & they're nice, but ... they're probably not what you'd buy this book for....
Kudos to Wincentsen for seeing a need for this book and pulling the info together. He DID make it happen -- but then he didn't seem to know what he wanted to do with it, whether he wanted to make it a non-fiction overview or a fan's souvenir. One thing it ISN'T is an in-depth investigation of the band's work.
Overall, not much of a companion if you're a big Moodies fan. Two stars, max.

#598: Doubting Thomas

Writer & critic Thomas M. Disch was always attracted 2 the embarrassments of science fiction -- the main embarrassments 4 him seemed 2 B that most of it was worthless & most of it was written 4 kids. Disch always wanted 2 believe that he was writing 4 mature, intelligent adults.
This was maybe an issue 4 Disch because -- altho he started out writing SF -- he was brilliant & multi-talented. As his career went on he wrote gothics, plays, lots of poetry, opera, videogames, & 3 huge horror novels that got rave reviews & capped his career. He also wrote quite a bit of criticism thruout his career.
Disch's ON SF (2005) collects over 40 of these pieces. 2 of them R about science-fiction embarrassments -- & sevral other sections read like rough drafts 4 his cynical 1998 critical overview of SF, THE DREAMS OUR STUFF IS MADE OF. The sections on Newt Gingrich's co-written science-fiction novels(!), Whitley Strieber's allegedly factual UFO-abduction books, & SF writers Walt & Leigh Richmond's "telepathic" collaborative writing were all recycled in DREAMS -- Disch's point being that SF was most like itself when it was being its most schlocky.
But Disch doesn't seem 2 get much fun from pointing out the embarrassments. He mostly seems embarrassed himself -- offended that such stuff is allowed 2 exist in the same universe as his more refined novels.
Disch had a lot of talent, & wrote sevral SF stories that I think R classics. It's tough 2 argue with "Descending" or "The Number You Have Reached." Or there's the spooky possession tale "The Asian Shore." Disch withdrew his novel CAMP CONCENTRATION (1968) from consideration 4 a Nebula Award -- tho there R none of the standard SF devices like spaceships & lasers in it, it's an intellectual adventure & it's not 4 kids.
His novel 334 (1973) got lots of acclaim -- a near-future novel in which the Welfare State takes over. He finally won a major SF award 4 ON WINGS OF SONG (1979). & 1 of his late horror novels, THE M.D. (1991), waits on my bookshelf 2 B read -- I got a few pgs in2 it. The 1 thing the reviews I've read of it agree on is that it's pretty grim. So I can probly wait 4 that....
But Disch wasn't always grim & serious. There R reviews included here from his magazine work 4 TWILIGHT ZONE and FANTASY AND SCIENCE FICTION, & they R as vivid & clever & argumentative as I remembered. I wish there were more of them. Disch had absolutely no patience 4 hacks, & he pinpoints weaknesses in writers like Stephen King, John Shirley & Barry N. Malzberg.
But here again, Disch is so self-conscious & refined & offended -- as if he is above all this trash he has 2 review. There R some good insights -- he almost makes me want 2 TRY 2 re-read Gene Wolfe's BOOK OF THE NEW SUN quartet -- a project I know I'd NEVER get thru. & there R good critical pieces on summa the works of Philip K. Dick & William Burroughs.
I wish this book were more FUN, but I gather that Disch's life wasn't exactly a barrel of laughs, either. He suicided a couple years ago after his longtime lover died & while the landlord of his New York City apartment tried repeatedly 2 have him evicted.
In their edition of this book, the University of Michigan Press helps put across some of Disch's attitude toward SF right on the front cover -- they call the collection "A last judgement on the genre." That gets the feeling of what's inside just about right, & I'll bet Disch probably enjoyed it.

No more Visions?

Back when I was a teenager & knew I wanted 2 B SOME kind of writer when I grew up, science-fiction writer Harlan Ellison was 1 of my heroes.
He was fearless. He Cmd Ndlessly Nrgetic & productive. & he wrote some of the wildest, most adventurous, most involving, most outrageous SF short-stories of the late '60s & early '70s, & in2 the '80s -- "The Deathbird," "Pretty Maggie Moneyeyes," "'Repent, Harlequin!,' Said the Ticktockman," "A Boy and His Dog," "From A to Z in the Chocolate Alphabet," "Eidolons," "With Virgil Oddum at the East Pole," pick yr faverite....
In his TV criticism & commentary of the time (most collected in the brilliant THE GLASS TEAT & THE OTHER GLASS TEAT, & later stuff in the slightly-mellower WATCHING), Harlan Cmd 2 have his hand on the pulse of the times. It was a turbulent period, but the diffrences Btween Right & Wrong Cmd a lot simpler then, & Harlan Cmd 2 make the right choice every time. & the things he got gloriously, righteously angry about Cmd WORTH getting angry about, every time.
He also thot a LOT of himself & his talent. But if U really R that brilliant, is self-confidence a flaw?
The Ghods were apparently waiting 4 Harlan 2 mess up. & in the mid-'70s Harlan apparently messed-up Big Time.
Starting in the mid-'60s, Harlan edited a series of massive original SF short-story anthologies under the banner title DANGEROUS VISIONS. The 1st book, in 1967, along w/ the effects of the British New Wave, helped lead SF in2 a more realistic outlook, where it Bgan 2 Xplore more deeply the clash Btween normal people & advances in technology & society. SF Bgan 2 focus more on real people & real problems, perhaps Bgan 2 move its focus more toward the present or near-future problems rather than the distant future.
Some SF fans & writers applauded this. Some thot it was gonna lead 2 the Nd of SF. The change in approach & the Xperimental way summa the stories were written drove some folks up the wall. 4 awhile in the '60s, SF had its own sorta "generation gap."
Harlan kept the ball rolling. A 2nd, even bigger book, AGAIN DANGEROUS VISIONS, appeared in 1972. Not all the stories in the 2 volumes were brilliant or trail-blazing efforts, Ghod knows. Some were pointless Xperiments, some were 1st-stories that showed a little promise, some were pieces by writers (J.G. Ballard, John Brunner, Thomas M. Disch, Roger Zelazny, Theodore Sturgeon) who were doing revolutionary things elsewhere, or had already done mosta their best work.
But the series was very popular, & sevral of the stories in the books won SF awards: Philip Jose Farmer's outrageous "Riders of the Purple Wage," Samuel R. Delany's "Aye, and Gomorrah...," Joanna Russ's "When it Changed," Ursula K. LeGuin's "The Word for World is Forest" (which some SF folks think is echoed in James Cameron's recent blockbuster SF movie AVATAR).
Harlan kept going. He announced in the intro 2 AGAIN that the final volume in the series, THE LAST DANGEROUS VISIONS, was projected 4 publication sometime in '73. The book was supposed 2 B even bigger than AGAIN. LAST didn't appear as scheduled, & Dspite announcements every few yrs since, the book has never appeared....
LAST is now about 27 yrs overdue. It's sorta Bcome SF's equivalent 2 the Beach Boys' SMILE album. The project has changed publishers at least 3 times. At last report, the book was planned as a massive 3-volume set, 2 B packaged in a box, w/ possibly as many as 150 stories included. The book was estimated at possibly 3/4's of a million words, a short-story collection longer than WAR AND PEACE.... Needless 2 say, its never officially bn scheduled 4 publication.
Christopher Priest's THE LAST DEADLOSS VISIONS is a 35-pg pamphlet/fanzine (which later Bcame a short book, THE BOOK ON THE EDGE OF FOREVER) that Xamines what happened 2 LAST, why it never appeared, why Ellison won't give it up, & what has happened over the yrs 2 the 100 or so writers who contributed stories 2 the book.
Perhaps the most painful part of the mess is that possibly up 2 1/3rd of the writers who were sposta appear in the book have DIED while waiting 4 it 2 B published. Among them R: Octavia Butler, Avram Davidson, Frank Herbert, Mack Reynolds, Clifford D. Simak, Richard Wilson, Alfred Bester, Leigh Brackett & Edmond Hamilton, Ward Moore, Edgar Pangborn, Algis Budrys, Tom Reamy, & Manley Wade Wellman. (Cordwainer Smith died in 1966, Anthony Boucher in 1968 -- including stories by them was sposta B a coup, of sorts....)
(There R a few other writers whose status I'm unsure about; Priest's writeup was all over the Internet a decade ago, when I 1st read it -- at that time he included a list of LAST contributors who'd died, which added a certain poignancy 2 the whole thing -- but Priest admitted then that he'd also lost track of the deaths....)
The other writers have mostly bn hanging on since, some of them were apparently paid as little as 2 cents per word 4 their stories (well below the field's avg payment), some of them paid as long ago as 1969 4 a book that's never bn completed. Ellison's productivity went way down around the mid-'80s or so -- he has reportedly suffered from depression & writer's block 4 yrs. 1 commenter in DEADLOSS claims that 1 of the reasons the book has never bn finished is Bcos Ellison wasn't physically able 2 write the wordy, vivid, funny/outrageous author-introductions that have helped make the books & Ellison famous.
Over the yrs various writers have pulled their stories from the book, reportedly 1 sure way 2 make Ellison furious. John Varley's "The Bellman" (published a few yrs back & subsequently reprinted in a coupla Best-SF-of-the-Year collections) & Michael Bishop's "Dog's Lives" R among the stories that have bn pulled from the book & published elsewhere. Cordwainer Smith's widow sold his story "Himself in Anarchon" elsewhere & Ellison threatened 2 sue, but it was settled out-of-court.
Priest suggests Ellison should either publish the huge book or let the massive project go. It matters little at this late date, & the book is YEARS past the point where it woulda had its greatest impact. Ellison apparently wanted a book that would blow all other possible competitors completely away -- a book 2 outdo all others -- & the project got away from him.
I think there's another option -- how about a SERIES of reasonably-sized books including all the stories that were scheduled 4 the project? That should B enuf short-story collections 4 the next dozen yrs or so.... Ellison could get the project done in bite-sized pieces, something more EZily manageable -- & he could have fun w/ the titles. Like all those old SF original-anthology series' in the '70s, he could call them LAST 1, LAST 2, LAST 3, etc. He's used assistant-editorial help B4 on the project, according 2 Priest. It Cms sad that we may C none of this massive project until after Harlan has joined the list of his deceased contributors....
Priest's Xpose was all over the Internet a decade ago, which is when I 1st read it. Since then, Priest has asked that the Internet version B dropped -- tho whether that's Bcos he felt his little book had done its work or 2 shield people from what he thot might B Ellison's overreaction is unknown. Priest himself has gone on 2 considerable success, writing sevral more novels & winning a coupla awards, tho 4 awhile he thot he'd written himself outta the SF field.
Since then, DEADLOSS has Bcome a rather Xpensive limited-edition book, & is still available in a slightly-more-reasonably-priced pamphlet edition w/ updates -- my copy goes up thru 1988. Ellison's fans tend 2 hate this book, thinking Priest is taking unfair shots at their hero. Contributors 2 LAST Cmd shocked in2 action by it, judging by the comments Priest received. It's a pretty intresting story if yr an SF fan. & it's (still) not over yet....