J.G. Ballard has died.
What a loss. I think he's not only one of the three or four most important science fiction writers, I think he's simply been one of the best post-war novelists to come out of Britain.
His insight into media and our culture were profound and very influential on me.
Bruce Sterling describing Ballard's status:
In the circle of American science fiction writers of my generation — cyberpunks and humanists and so forth — [Ballard] was a towering figure. We used to have bitter struggles over who was more Ballardian than whom. We knew we were not fit to polish the man’s boots, and we were scarcely able to understand how we could get to a position to do work which he might respect or stand, but at least we were able to see the peak of achievement that he had reached.
Is Watership Down as scary as Harry Potter?
Yes, but it's not as bad as The Plague Dogs. Richard Adams really liked the traumatizing animal stories, I'll tell you what.
I think I was 12 or 13 wen I read Watership Down, but I can't be sure. suspenseful,sad, but I don't think I would have used scary . And I didn't touch anything like horror 'til college.
Now I want to reread it.
Yes, but it's not as bad as The Plague Dogs
Oh god,
The Plague Dogs, yeah. Nobody should read read that.
suspenseful,sad, but I don't think I would have used scary
I was terrified of the cat.
Can you run? I think not.
I was afraid of The Owslafa too.
I really liked
Traveller.
Especially at the end how
he thought they won
.
Kill.
Me.
Now.
Jane Austen and Adam Campan's JAMES FAIRFAX, a gender-bending stylish dance-of-manners version of Jane Austen's EMMA, with matchmaking Emma Woodhouse trying to find a suitable husband for her lover Harriet Smith, and exploring the gay secrets of the relationship between the mysterious and accomplished James Fairfax and the handsome Frank Churchill, to Vera Nazarian at Norilana Books, in a nice deal, for publication in August 2009.
With Austen listed as a co-author, no less!
Barb, all I can say to that is "what the hell?"
Edit: All I can say is that I bet there are a dozen Austen fanfics that tread similar ground, and no doubt do it brilliantly. But the chutzpah of lising Austen as a co-author on a professionally published story? NO.
But the chutzpah of lising Austen as a co-author on a professionally published story? NO.
Maybe he uses actual passages from the original as a framework?
I'm not sure I'm appalled, really. Think of
Wide Sargasso Sea
or
H,
which was the story of where Heathcliff went for all those years while he was away. I can't help it -- I'm usually fascinated by a new perspective on some of these classics.
Yeah, we're naturally predisposed to want to know what's been left unsaid with respect to these characters and in some cases, it's been done rather well. And of course, there's a long literary tradition of reimagining stories-- (West Side Story, Clueless, etc.).
But here's the thing about the majority of this current lot of Austen knock-offs. By and large, their primary selling point is the Austen connection. (Or Bronte, because there was one of those in this week's Pub Lunch as well.) Without that connection, it's just another gay romance or a romance about a cranky, remote man who needs good lovin' to mellow him out, or a story about a couple who've started out in a blaze of romantic glory and several years later are looking to rekindle the flame or a story about a spinster author of romance who has an illicit affair for two glorious weeks, or zombies or whatever.
So what makes it so special then? Is the story good enough and original enough to stand alone without that construct? That, I don't know.