Yellow Gumballs

First paragraphs of the collection of short stories I came across today during lunch:

Sheila split open and the air was filled with gumballs. Yellow gumballs. That was awful for Stan, just awful. He had loved Sheila for a long time, fought for her, believed in their love until finally she had come around. They were about to kiss for the first time and then this: yellow gumballs.

Stan went to a group to try to accept that Sheila was gone. It was a group for people whose unrequited love had ended in some kind of surrealist moment. There is a group for everything in California.

That first sentence especially is perfect. It allows for your imagination to go crazy. Did the gumballs fly out of poor Sheila? Did they fall from the sky?

Can the rest of the book possibly be as good?

Dream Boy

While skimming the Netflix new releases last week a movie title jumped out at me: Dream Boy. I wondered if it was based on the very first gay-themed novel I ever bought, and indeed it was. I remember my teenage self skulking around a Barnes & Noble with that book in my hands, working up the courage to bring it up to the cashier. Justdoit, justdoit, just do it, I probably thought back then, and I'm sure the cashier asked, "Just this today?" and I would've thought, "Just this? Just this?? Lady, this is everything."

It's an odd book to make into a movie in 2010, though, because it is an old-school gay story, from back when no happy endings were allowed. The high-school-age protagonist, Nathan, finds refuge from a lifetime of horrible parental abuse in Roy, the lovely neighbor boy who takes him under his wing and into his hunky arms. Nathan is played by Stephan Bender, known to me only (but well) as young Clark Kent in Superman Returns. Finally getting a smooch from Roy should elicit the same bliss that he showed in Superman when he discovered he could fly, but unfortunately Bender basically cowers through the entirety of Dream Boy. Nathan wears a constant slouch, as though he's perpetually fearing a smack in the head -- a posture that would be appropriate for Clark Kent, but around Roy, you want Nathan to become Superman, and he never does. That's not to say the acting is bad -- Bender seems fully committed, and the love scenes are particularly touching because Nathan is so desperate for tenderness. But still, he's too cute to never flash us a smile.

Or maybe it works. Being old-school gay, this story cannot allow Nathan to be happy with Roy, or even to survive. So yes, at the end of the book and the movie Nathan does indeed get beaten to death by a classmate with the broken arm of a chair. And maybe it's because Nathan was cowering through the whole movie, as though he knew this was coming, that this final outcome is affecting enough to keep me thinking about it days later. Nathan never had a chance. 

The novel was published in 1995 and takes place, I think, in the 1970s, but the movie is set in a timeless neverwhere. Roy drives a 1930s pick-up, but other cars are more modern. There are no computers or cellphones, but the clothes are reasonably current. Even Roy and Nathan seem from opposing eras -- Nathan is scarred and scared, while Roy is well adjusted. The jumbled setting could represent a time like today, where maybe there's marriage equality on the coasts and a young actor can play gay without committing career suicide, but for some kids living their own lives in Kentucky or Louisiana (where this book is set), that hardly matters. Still, when those boys and girls are pacing around a Barnes & Noble in 2010, the book they finally hand to the cashier is at least much more likely to have a happy ending.

Stop the presses!

My dream job is to be the editor of an independent, moderately successful magazine similar in content to Rolling Stone, but with the focus on books rather than music. Our noble, unattainable goal each issue would be to lift young writers to rock-star status. Printing would be done on-site in the basement of the office, on presses run, like the starship Enterprise, by a harried Scotsman who coaxes every last drop out of the decrepit machines. The result would be a modest living, a lifetime supply of free books, and the sweet smell of ink on my hands at the end of the day.

Unfortunately it's not 1985, and print is kaput.

I'm subscribed to exactly one magazine, the above-mentioned Rolling Stone -- and in fact my subscription expired last fall but they've continued sending it to me, perhaps because there's not a lot of difference between "free" and what they charge for a one-year subscription.

Often by the time each issue arrives I've already read the articles on the Rolling Stone website, but it's fun getting mail.

On page 2 of the issue I got yesterday I found this ad, done in partnership by a bunch of magazines, which reads, in part:

Barely noticed amidst the thunderous Internet clamor is the simple fact that magazine readership has risen over the past five years. ... Think of it this way: during the 12-year life of Google, magazine readership actually increased 11 percent. ... What it proves, once again, is that a new medium doesn't necessarily displace an existing one. ... Just as TV didn't kill movies. An established medium can continue to flourish...

My first thought was Ouch. My second thought was that I don't believe that magazine readership can possibly be up, and I wonder what numbers they massaged to get that result. Third was a feeling of discomfort -- the ad makes me squirm. If you have to join forces with competitors and take out an ad to assure the world you're still relevant, then you're not.

There are some things I'll never accept. I'll never accept the idea that reading a novel on a screen is superior to a paperback book, humankind's greatest invention. Screens and magazines, though, were made for each other. I think rather than sputtering about the continued relevance of print magazines, these organizations should spend their time trying to come up with a business model that will let them make money on the Web, something that apparently no publication has figured out how to do yet.  Maybe someone whose dream job actually matches the calendar year will lead the way.

Kindle Drawbacks

I hate the idea of reading any type of fiction on a screen (and any nonfiction longer than an article), but this blogger uncovers a drawback to the Kindle and its progeny that I hadn't even considered:

Matt is reading David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest on his Kindle, which is pretty convenient for a book that weighs in at more than 1,000 pages. But Matt doesn't get the signaling benefits of the dead-tree edition; that is, he doesn't get to show the rest of the world that he's reading such a hefty, ponderous tome.

Riding the T would get a lot more boring if I wasn't able to make snap judgments about people based on their literature of choice...

In Hardcover

I had a coupon for Borders (30% off) and I'm a sucker for coupons. I went over during lunch to see if there was anything I couldn't live without. It seemed like a good chance to buy something I otherwise wouldn't.

Maybe that's why I ended up browsing the new hardcovers. Usually I avoid hardcovers. They're inferior to paperbacks in every way: they're heavier, difficult to hold with one hand, too expensive, and present the reader with the conundrum of what to do with a jacket that wants to slip off every second.

But when I spotted a new release from Alastair Reynolds, my favorite sci-fi author, I found myself quite willing to tolerate its hard cover, and, with the help of the coupon, its price. That's high praise.

But now I'm in a paperback pickle. Reynolds has a new hardcover out every June; the previous year's hardcover hits paperback each June, too. I've always been on the paperback schedule, for reasons mentioned above. Now I've crossed over onto the hardcover schedule. Which means next June I'll have to buy hardcover again, perpetuating the hardcover cycle, or miss a summer in Alastair's crazy brain.

Darn coupon, messing me up.

Dead Until Dark: Sam

Maggie: Do you like Sam? Like Jacob, I find him very likeable but I want Sookie to be with Bill more than I wanted Bella to be with Edward.

Ben: I dislike Sam. I was suspicious of him throughout the whole book. It may be too late for me to like him. Something about his description was missing for me right away, too, and in the absence of whatever details would've made him more of a viable candidate for Sookie's affections, I filled in his looks as being older, overweight, unattractive, and lecherous. A greasy, sketchy bar owner who hit on the waitresses.

Maggie: I pictured Sam exactly as you described him and then had to adjust my image as we learned more about what he looked like. I pictured him much older, short, balding but hair arms and chest, wearing a grease-stained white wife-beater and holding a spatula. But the actor who plays him is young and cute - I guess for a TV show he had to be in order to be a believable love interest.

Ben: First impressions are maybe even more important in books than they are in real life... Once I get an image of a character in my head it's really hard to change it. I feel like when I see the TV show I'll think of that Sam as a prettied-up, bizarro version of the true, greasy spatula-holding Sam. Like a biopic starring a good-looking actor playing a person who was rather homely in real life.

Dead Until Dark

Maggie: Thank you for loaning me the True Blood book! Should we call the series Dead Until Dark (DUD?)

So, here we go again: let's tawk vampires. Let's start with sex. Then let's talk about how Bill compares with Edward.

Ben: I'm glad you liked the book! Don't you love Sookie? I like when she gets sassy in her Southern way.

The insta-sex was a relief after Twilight. When they were doing-it in the graveyard I was like, "I don't think we're in Forks, anymore, Toto!"

Maggie: The sex scenes were well done. I reread the first one and was impressed that it didn't contain any of the phrases and words typically used in sex scenes. And yet it was incredibly sexy. I love that though Bill is a gentleman and from another time, he is less concerned with Sookie's honor and chastity than Edward was with Bella's.

Aside from the general feeling that Bill and Sookie are more adult (which is in part because they are older and in part that it's an adult book), their relationship is similar to Edward and Bella's in a lot of ways. Do you agree? What else do you feel was stolen from DUD for Twilight? The love triangle, the hearing other people's thoughts except the one you are in love with, the other vampires being scarier.

Ben: I liked how well developed the book was. Even from the first few pages the world of the story felt rich with lots of interesting details. Everything with the synthetic blood, the drainers. It was clear the author spent a lot of time thinking about the implications of being a mind-reader and stuff too. It all seemed fully explored... That's one of the things that bothered me about Twilight, how a lot of things were just shy of being creative. Like, for example, vampire baseball. *Shiver*

David Sedaris

A good story.

Twilight Poems: Edward Meets Charlie, Officially

Edward said, "Baseball will be fun,
And I'll bring her right home when we're done."
If he knew Bella smelled delicious,
Charlie would've been more suspicious
and done a lot more than clean that old gun!

Twilight Poems: Just Do It

Edward stirs a feeling that lingers
All Bella can do is make zingers
Bella wants sex
It's not that complex!
But Edward says not till he blings her.
-Ben

There once was a girl named Bella
her coordination wasn't too stellar
until her husband bit her
after he finally did her...
Oh man, he is one sexy fella
-Maggie

Twilight Poems: The Volturri's Hypocrisy

They claim to have no toleration
For exposing vampirization.
But at home it seems silly
How they feed willy-nilly!
Ate thirty tourists there on vacation!


-Ben

Action Auction

With the stock market the way it is, I figure now is a good time to invest in something that's guaranteed to grow in value. That's why I'll be buying the Action Comics #1 currently up for auction. After only a few hours, the bidding is up to $225,200 -- but there's still almost two weeks left, so I figure I'll wait till the last minute to put in my winning bid. Just to give other bidders (I'm talking to you, Seinfeld and Shaq) time to imagine they have a chance at getting their grubby hands on it.

What I haven't decided yet is where to keep it once I own it. It'll have to be kept at an undisclosed location, at least on a long-term basis. But for a little while I'll display it in a special light-blocking frame.

If you want to see it, let me know. I'll be selling tickets.

Twilight: Spoiler-Free Imaginings of an Alternate Breaking Dawn

Maggie: Seriously, did they have to ______ a ______? Couldn't they have just ______ ______?

Ben: Ugh, the ______. Yes, they could've and should've just had tons of ______. Surely there was a better, funner way for ______ to get ______ but still show ______. How about this: In a ______ with the ______ (you know, the one that ______ ______, hehe), Bella throws ______ in the way to save ______. Then, as she's about to ______, ______ ______ her. Then they ______ sex. Then ______ seek ______ in the ultimate climactic ______ in which Edward and Bella ______ and ______ the ______ and ______ the vampire ______ together with a ______ ______. Then how about Jacob ______ into a ______ with ______ that's ______ carefully ______ enough to keep ______ from looking like a total ______. He becomes an ambassador to ______, ______ the werewolves at the ______ of mythical creatures. And everyone lives happily ever ______.

Maggie: ______ ______ ______!!

What's new, Arthur?

My favoritest collection of short stories ever -- a twisted, lovely bunch of stories called Dogwalker -- is by a man named Arthur Bradford. The stories are about mutant puppies and all manner of crazy dreamworld ridiculousness told with a hilarious and touching matter-of-factness. Every once in a while I check his name on Amazon in hopes of finding a new release, but, to my dismay, aside from a few blips in McSweeneys, he's never published anything else.

His real interest seems to be in working with mentally handicapped adults at a place called Camp Jabberwocky. His project How's Your News? involves a team of handicapped campers doing man-on-the-street interviews around the country. There's a great documentary about it, and it's newly a series on MTV.

Seeing Bradford's name in the news made me Google him once again in my eternal hope of finding a new book, and I was happy to stumble across his baby blog, called Diaper Bandit, in which he chronicles his life as a new father. There's almost a year's worth of posts and I'm looking forward to reading them. Babies may not be as interesting as the cat-faced circus freaks in Dogwalker, but I'll take what I can get.

Explore the Hut!

Click here to take a tour of the fort where Roald Dahl wrote all his books. It looks exactly like something that sprung out of a Roald Dahl book -- but I guess it's actually something that went into them.

A Darn of a Yarn

“Both Rowling and Meyer, they’re speaking directly to young people.... The real difference is that Jo Rowling is a terrific writer and Stephenie Meyer can’t write worth a darn. She’s not very good.”

--Stephen King, speaking the truth. And yet...

Twilight is further proof of how good writing and good storytelling often are two totally separate things.

Quote of the Day

"On Saturdays he would type -- ejaculations of clatter after long foreplay of silent agony."

--John Updike, from A Month of Sundays

Zombies in Literature

As I may have mentioned in the past, I love spoofs, often more than I love the originals.

This is sure to be the case with this book, which may horrify the literati in more ways than one.



I always felt embarassed that I could barely force myself through Jane Austen. As an English and literature major - and feminist - shouldn't I love her? I plan to give Austen another try when this version releases. I mean, check out this snippet from the summary:

Feisty heroine Elizabeth Bennet is determined to wipe out the zombie menace, but she's soon distracted by the arrival of the haughty and arrogant Mr. Darcy.

I was in a book club whose theme was books that had movie equivalents. We'd get together, talk about the book, then watch the movie and compare. We had a dozen movie versions of Pride and Predujice to choose from, and opted to watch one set in modern times, in a Mormon community in Utah. It was funny, but the threat of zombies would have been better.


Will someone please make a movie from this version of the book?




P.S. - In addition to spoofs, I also love zombies.
P.P.S. - Thanks, Rasimick.

John Updike, 1932-2009

This one hurts. He'll be missed. Probably my second-favorite writer after Steinbeck. I've read his novel The Centaur, about a father & son caught in a blizzard, every December since college -- except this year, when I was distracted by Twilight. I hope my missing a year didn't contribute.

Willard Scott's Birthday Wishes

When Willard Scott presented birthday wishes to a 100-year-old man on the Today show this morning, my first thought was: "That's how Edward Cullen should look - frail and wrinkled."