Reference Desk

Are the kids of today abandoning books?

Okay, this has me wondering - and you, standing at the crux of the matter, as it were, can answer.

Are the kids of today abandoning books? (I mean the voluntary, early-to-late teenagers, not the picture lovin' toddler set). I'll even accept readers who lack any taste, such as those who read Twilight and such.

 

Actually, no.  The big ones most people know about these days are the Harry Potter and Twilight series (they’re both popular, that is the only connection I’ll make between them), but there’s more reading going on.  In the older kids it does look like the girls are reading more.  There’s a shit ton of soapy stuff, kinda like if Gossip Girl and Twilight had a bunch of kids.  There’s a new private school, or vampire, or vampire private school series each month it seems.  I’m not sure what the guys are doing.  The younger ones, boys up to about ninth grade or so, are reading a lot of stuff too.  The whole middle school group, boys and girls, has a lot of fiction for it these days and they’re into it.  Wimpy Kid, Pendragon, the Georgia Nicholson books are still popular.  The Maximum Ride series has male and female fans.  And there’s a big, big comics audience.  They check out the mangas by the ton, but I know they’re reading some of the superheroes too, along with me and the dads.  So don’t worry, there is always lots and lots and lots of stuff in the book drop.

You seem to be a karaoke pro.

You seem to be a karaoke pro. Any tips for those just getting their feet wet? Songs to avoid/bring the house down?

 

I can only give you my personal opinion as a participant and audience member, of course.  Above all, remember why you’re there—why everyone’s there.  To drink and sing.  Not to listen.  They’re listening to you while they’re waiting their turn, and vice versa.  So it’s only polite to try to provide a little entertainment.  There’s two extremes, there’s “I love this song but he/she’s AWFUL” and “I don’t know this song at all and he/she’s AWFUL”.  The former is at least cringe-inducingly entertaining.  The latter is just bad. 

 

People like to sing along, especially after a few drinks, so something nostalgically popular will probably get them going, whether you’re nailing it or not, ie. songs off of Pearl Jam’s first album.  There was a cute, petite girl with little pigtails and without a mighty baritone doing “Jeremy” a few nights ago.  She didn’t have Vedder Thunder but we didn’t much care and could barely hear her over our own bellowing.  Being continually half a measure off through the entirety of “Dear Prudence” though…no one’s gonna sing along, just groan and laugh.  I’ve mentioned the great Bad and Obvious elsewhere: Johnny Cash’s “Folsom Prison Blues” and “I Touch Myself”/”These Boots Are Made For Walking” are the respective gender standards.  The men tend to mutter and wander, or drunkenly shout, and the women tend to be acting (and presumably feeling) “sexy” and then pop that balloon with miserably underpowered singing.

 

If one is going to do “Bohemian Rhapsody” or “Under Pressure” then one should be great.  They’re not the biggest clichés but you don’t often get a real tour de force.

 

The bottom line is that it’s better for everyone present if you sing something you can sing, something you’ve checked on before showing up or previously sung in some other situation.  Sometimes the bar is set so low that blowing everyone off the stage is pretty damn easy.  If you do that with a song they don’t know and love, well…at least you know you gave them quality.  If they do know it, you’re a friggin hero, especially if it’s something not everybody else is doing.  But whatever you choose, choose something you can put some oomph behind.  On key but meek but can be a little hard to sit through too.  And I don’t recommend, or at least don’t particularly enjoy, radical reinterpretations.  This one guy did “Creep” and it sounded like Henry Rollins was covering it.  Sing it the way people know it, because that’s why you and they like it!

 

And you’ll definitely hit a wall sometimes.  I’m awful with “Mayor of Simpleton”.  I love that song but tried it once and it just didn’t work.  I can’t sing it like Andy and don’t know how else to do it.  Boo! 

How was Florida?

Here's a question: How was Florida? Discuss at length, please.

 

Oh, as flat and green as ever, pleasant enough though a bit warmer than I’d hoped for.  Rarely is weather ever as cold as you hope.  Still, we left before the temperature peak, which was then going to be followed by weekend rain, which would be no good for anybody (though the mid 60s highs following the rain would’ve been a treat).  Even though a giant cold front was barreling southeast we managed to not get caught in any of the rain all the way back to Atlanta.  The next day it rained for a few hours, which instantaneously became a snowstorm around 1:00 pm.  That wouldn’t have happened in Florida.  Either way I’d known I was gonna need those new tires in one state or the other.      

Why is the Shakespearean "scottish play" bad luck?

 

This is a strange question for someone who has lived and breathed theatre for years, so please don't judge.

Why is the Shakespearean "scottish play" bad luck? I mean, you can't even say its' name in a theatre without having to exorcise in some silly way! I've tried looking it up, but the answers are unsatisfactory. And the people I work with (who would actually know) refuse to talk about it.

I have a show coming up in a month or so and I didn't want to mention the name (just in case). Could you enlighten me?

 

Bad shit happens.  Me, I haven't been in a play since 9th grade, so I'll say it: MACBETH!

Bad shit has been happening around "Macbeth" since OPENING FUCKING NIGHT! 

"Sceptics have pointed out that a play involving so many battles, duels and murders, taking place mostly at night (meaning dim lighting), is bound to cause accidents. Playing “that Play” is emotionally and physically exhausting, and you have to get up and down steps and rostrums, and even with blunted swords, cuts and bruises are only to be expected…"

Oh, really???  And have these sceptics ever staged it and broken their own goddamn leg?  I don't think so.  The Doctor knows the score.  There was juju around Billy.

A quite rich exploration of The Curse of.....................MACBETH!.........can be found here:

http://writinghood.com/literature/topical/the-curse-of-shakespeares-scottish-play-macbeth/

 

Enjoy!  And keep your goddamn mouth shut and make sure you've got a valid insurance card on you. 

Good luck.  Ohhhh, you know what I mean!

Where did the whole "Braaaaiinns" thing start with zombies?

Where did the whole "Braaaaiinns" thing start with zombies? It's not in any Romero but it's somehow linked to the whole zombie culture.

 

This seems to be the rare case where it actually happened (unlike “You dirty rat”)

 

And the wording is also correct (unlike “Play it again, Sam” or “Luke, I am your father”)

 

Yes, it appears the source is “Return of the Living Dead”!

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089907/movieconnections

 

http://www.houseofhorrors.com/rotldpics.htm

Oooh, how about opinions/background on this kid

Oooh, how about opinions/background on this kid who is the new Doc? Just as I was starting to get excited about Paterson Joseph, too

 

 

Matt Smith, then.  The BBC has got you covered:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7807996.stm

Ah, but we want action, not just words.  We need Doctor Who Confidential

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxZPTtmPc58  Available in torrent form from the ever-reliable Mad Martha as well (and without the widescreen UK TV getting squished in the YouTube box).

 

I'm wondering if Tennant, Tranter and Moffat didn't decide to put the word out early and on its own.  Deliberate or not, I think it's excellent PR.  We didn't need to know 10's leaving yet.  He won't even be gone for over a year.  But you've gotta start shooting this summer.  Then Russell had planned to do some headfucking with the Doctor-or-is-he? Christmas episode.  If David says he's leaving and that he didn't get fired and isn't unhappy with the show before that, then when you get to Christmas you might be saying "well who IS 11 then???"  You might even be dying to know.  I certainly was, and, most fortunately, I was already able to mourn 10.  That's what I mean about the PR.  The end of 10 is its own thing.  If it had been a simultaneous handoff announcement I think I'd be pretty agitated, but in this way I can't blame whoever was gonna show up for 10 leaving.  I didn't get a stepmother foisted on me.  Granted, he's got a bit of a bullseye on him anyway, but me myself am not bothered.  Given how goddamnously popular 10 has been I think it would've been disastrous to do a quick swap like that.  

Meanwhile I've been furrowing my brow and sometimes wincing over the speculative hires, and I've found that I'm really glad that the so-last-minute-only-people-at-DWF*-knew-about-it longshot came in.  Given my contrary nature I would've been miffed if one of the mong favorites had been named.  Now, Messrs. Nesbitt, Ejiofor and Joseph are all fine and capable actors I'm sure, but it still woulda bugged me that "great...you chattering assholes got what you wanted" (see also: Anakin Skywalker, another nearly no-win casting problem, and no I don't hate either of those two young men) (See also: how I start simultaneously angrily twitching and disgustedly sighing whenever someone wish-casts Angelina Jolie in a comic book movie.  I don't hate her either but LEAVE IT OUT!)  Plus it DID really bug me that Paterson Joseph was on Satellite 5.  That would undoubtedly require much sillier bullshitting than explaining how Freema and Eve turned back up.  And so...POOF!  This weirdo shows up yesterday, giving me a look at how my nephew's un-partable hair will probably look in the future and generally looking and acting strange.  The pictures didn't sell me but his interview did.  "Okay....this kid's interesting and I kinda like 'im.  Damn, I wish I could see what he's gonna do already!!"  And just like that it's almost like I've gotta "get through" four more episodes of 10 to see what Moff and Smith have for me.  *Russell T. Davies voice and hands* Brilllliant!

I said "almost".  I still expect Russell and David to knock me on my ass over the next year, and I'm prepared to be even more patient than I'll have to be if it means I can have another peek into RIver Song's life (and on both counts I say "FUCKIN A, YOU BETTER!!!").  But I'm excited.  Plus, I just noticed that in "Time Crash" last year, Moff wrote his own 11 defense via 10 talking to 5 long before he needed it (and contrary to his own opinions at the time about wanting an older guy).  Wibbly wobbly...

*That's "Doctor Who Forum", a place that can make the calmest person become King Arthur and shout "Jaysus CHRIST!" and require a visit to Angry Who Fan with no delay.

 

Who Is Best Suited to be Number 11?

Wow, you really will answer anything. I was just being bitter. It is great to see more content on the blog though. Let's get your opinion on the new Doctor. Do I have to phrase it in the form of a question? I love a good gimmick, so I will. "Oh, Great and Knowledgeable Jay! I beseech you! Who Is Best Suited to be Number 11?"

 

Oi, takin the piss!

You know there's no good answer to that, unlike Neal McDonough for Captain America.  I will say that I've got faith in Steven Moffat and most any choice I'd make he'd make as good or better a choice.  I would've never thought of River Song or what it was that the empty child really needed

(excuse me for a moment)

(And dammit, stop playing that Spinanes album, Jay!  It's not helping you!). 

He also knows more about who's currently working in the UK than me, that's for sure.  My only gripe with the Paterson Joseph speculation is that he's been on the show before.  True, Colin Baker was too, but he didn't look like Colin Baker that first time.  And Joseph played a human, which would be harder to retcon explain, if they wanted to, than why Eve Myles and Freema Agyeman had been seen before as different humans. 

However, since my opinion's as real as anybody else's for the moment, let's say, who would I like to see that couldn't or wouldn't?

Jonathan Pryce (and after all he's already played The Master)

Ewan McGregor

Gary Oldman

 

 

How do I get Number One

Dear Jay,
How do I get Number One on Eloquent Eloquence?
Heart,
Optimus 

Would that there were a simple answer to that question.  Aye, I've pondered it myself occasionally.  One could count up the hours of raconteuristic toil and be astonished at how little one is able to reap after soooo much back-breaking plowing and sowing.

That one time I got it?  A throwaway one night while I was at work.  Just a short answer to Ms. Larson vainly inviting me to play a books edition of Trivial Pursuit, with no attempt to be witty.  Prisco said it happened to make him laugh when he read it.  There's a couple of pictures I've taken that have struck people's fancy when they seem fairly unremarkable to me.  Sometimes you've gotta take your audience's word for it.  Not that you should second guess your creative endeavors and think "I've gotta do it the way they like it again!".  That is the deadest of ends, and it's easy to get there.  But you can't argue when something hits.  Your muse doesn't always let you know when she's working, just like my mind didn't tell me I was stressed out and went directly to my abdomen instead.  I thought I had an ulcer but it was just my brain coaxing me to calm down, instead of telling me that it was upset in the first place, like a knuckley punch in the upper arm to say "you're swell!"

See?  You can't trust your own mind, nor its creative pursuits.  And you are not going to just know that this is the one, this is the hit!  So just keep working.  

People always tell you, "write what you know."

People always tell you, "write what you know." How do you write without your writing becoming autobiographical? Who are some solid, contemporary writers of literary fiction that is realistic but not autobiographical?

I won't pretend to say I know what's good, but I can make a few personal recommendations. 

The first question really interests me in that I think it's something both writers and audiences have struggled with.  Me, I think some people take that phrase waaaay too seriously and literally.  Sometimes it sells a hell of a lot of books though, but if you've gone and written your roman a clef, where do you go from there?  There's tons of books that are transparently based on someone's experiences (it's usually right there in the jacket bio).  And thus someone's managed to transcribe their experience and change the names.  I've groused about the number of novels written by publishing publicists about publishing publicists, but it's not an isolated thing.  If I may advise, I think a writer should be inspired by what they know.  You can take that all the way into magical realism and such, in how Neil Gaiman roadtripped around America and explained what he experienced through mythology in American Gods.  But you can also simply take your job, trip, family and give yourself an interesting framework.  Catch 22 didn't happen to Joseph Heller, but he had a world to put a story in. 

Write about feelings that you know, not precisely what happened.  Write about things that happened to other people you know.  Write about an environment that you know, but come up with an interesting story first!  "I was in Chicago in the early 90s, I know where my characters would be in that setting" (something that the relocation of High Fidelity pulled off nicely and unobtrusively).  Write something that's informed by what you know, otherwise, why not just be an essayist?  And there's nothing wrong with that at all.  Me, I can't make up an original story, so I'd be just as guilty of hacky autobiographical fiction if I tried. 

There's simply tons of realistic fiction for children and young adults, adult fiction seems to have a genre majority (although Kathy Reichs and Patricia Cornwell are doing alright writing what they know) and you can probably cherry pick any number of Newbery or Pulitzer winners for plots that sound interesting to you.  I tend to like my realism humorous.  Recent fun has been had with King Dork, I Love You Beth Cooper, Millard Fillmore Mon Amour, Which Brings Me To You and Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist.  Of course there's also the aforementioned High Fidelity and the rest of Nick Hornby's books.  I don't think Nick exactly lived Rob Fleming's life, but he knew where he lived and worked and felt, and I knew how he felt too.  After all, a setting's just a setting--real, relatable feelings and situations are what stick to the reader. 

can the reference desk find me scans or hard copies of the July 10, 1989 Time magazine issue article about Swamp Thing meeting Jesus and how the issue got pulled?

can the reference desk find me scans or hard copies of the July 10, 1989 Time magazine issue article about Swamp Thing meeting Jesus and how the issue got pulled? I've been looking for a clear copy or scan for years without much success at my local library branch... same for the June 26, 1989 article "A Slimy Monster Hobnobs in Heaven, but Not Holy Land" from the Wall Street Journal, and perhaps a Rolling Stone article I recall from the same general time period... I'm trying to assemble something and these type of articles, preferably scans of the printed pages with whatever art was attached would really be a huge help

 

1989 is what the problem is here.  Quoth the WSJ:

He has rubbed elbows with Adolf Hitler, chatted with King Arthur and dickered with Merlin.

But can he meet Jesus Christ? DC Comics says no.

DC Comics, publisher of the "Swamp Thing" adult comic-book series, has decreed that Swamp Thing adventure No. 88 will never go to press. Readers will never see the story of Jesus meeting Swamp Thing nor will they see Swampy, as he's affectionately called, mutate himself into a living cross or watch as he hands the Holy Grail to Christ.

I was able to get that full article through the marvelous Galileo databases here in Georgia, found in schools and libraries.  The short Time article can be read in full on their own site (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,958102,00.html).  I didn't find anything in Rolling Stone though.  However, the trick is that I can get you all these words with no problem.  ProQuest and other databases can get you html text and pdf scans of a lot of periodicals, but not going back that far.  This is microfilm territory.  You can order a reprint from Time, but their "what do you want it for?" options do not include personal use, and they want a whole lot of money.

My suggestion is requesting an interlibrary loan through your local library.  Even though there's no book to borrow, you can ask another library to photocopy or print out a microfilm page of the original Time and WSJ page and mail it to see what it looked like (though I doubt the WSJ had any artwork).  Yes, you'd probably just get a slightly rough black and white image, but that's what's readily possible and probably free.  To go further a visit to the nearest university or big central downtown city library may at least find those microfilms on hand.