Revision of "Werewolf of Misty Valley"

I've just revised one of my horror e books, "The Werewolf of Misty Valley." The revision made no changes to the original story, but added more scary scenes to the story, making it significantly longer (and scarier, I think.). The e book also contains a short story, "The Dweller in Big Misty."
As for the paperback version, I made the same changes, but added a second story making it a dual novella. The second story will be "Frankenstein and the Zombies." So the paperback version now contains two good horror novellas.

Hooray for Cliches

Hooray For Cliches

Donald H Sullivan

The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. (Ecclesiastes 1:9).

Pick up any book on how to write fiction, and you'll find instructions advising you to avoid cliches. Avoid them like the plague, they'll tell you.

     Likewise, the rule to avoid cliches will be found in the writer's guidelines of many speculative fiction magazines. If you're a writer of speculative fiction, it's a good bet that you've received a rejection slip or two with the reason listed as "too many cliches," or something similar.

     Avoid cliched characters, we're told. Avoid cliched plots. Avoid cliched storylines. Don't use the same tired old ideas that have been beaten to death and used so often that it's impossible to add a new twist (as if there's an end to the new twists that can be added to old ideas).

     Some fantasy magazines (fantasy magazines!) tell us to beware of cliched subjects such as dragons, elves, unicorns, wizards, vampires, witches, ghosts, sea serpents, super warriors, sorcerers/sorceresses, fairies, werewolves, and so on. They go on to tell us to send them something new and truly unusual.

     But do cliched subjects and oft-used ideas really matter that much to the average reader? Before I got into writing, I never gave cliches or over-used ideas a thought. When I sat down to read, I looked to enjoy a good, well written story that would hold my interest--that's all. Most of the SF fans that I know are no different.

     If I read fantasy, I enjoy being in a world of wizards, dragons, unicorns, etc. If I read horror, I'm not surprised to find zombies, werewolves, vampires, and such. If I read science fiction I expect time machines, robots, and alien monsters. I've read hundreds of stories on these subjects, enjoyed them all, and I don't recall any two of them being alike.

It may well be that some SF editors cater to nitpicking readers that look for cliches, worn out plots and such, and thus end up with a readership made up largely of said nitpickers. These editors are apparently satisfied to hold the readership they have and don't bother to attract many new readers.

Eventually, these editors may come to think that all readers share the same quirks as the nitpickers.(When these nitpickers were kids, they probably looked for a glimpse of modern power lines in the B westerns, or a wristwatch on a Roman soldier, rather than relaxing and enjoying the movie.

Like many other novice writers, I've ordered sample copies from magazines in order to improve my writing and to get an idea of what they're looking for. After reading some of the magazines that seek fresh and unusual stuff, I had to agree that the story ideas in those magazines were indeed fresh and unusual--but most of the stories were just so much superficial, boring nonsense.

 This obsession with cliches seems to be limited to speculative fiction zines for the most part. Are there any mystery magazines that don't want cops, private eyes, or murderers in their stories? Are there westerns that don't want gunfighters or horses? Are there romances that don't want love triangles, unfaithful lovers, or passionate embraces?

 It seems there are some speculative fiction editors (not all, thank goodness) who are so obsessed with new and unusual ideas that they will reject a truly good story if they deem it to be trite or cliched, but will accept a lousy story if they deem it to be fresh and unusual.

 We've all probably had stories rejected where the editor scrawled a note on the rejection slip to the effect that she "really thought this was a great story and enjoyed it very much, but..." The fact that those editors enjoyed the story seemingly didn't carry much weight.

Does the ultimate worth of a story depend on whether or not the story idea is overused? Or does the ultimate worth of a story simply depend on whether or not the story is an interesting, enjoyable tale that keeps the reader turning pages?

Hal Clement's science fiction classic, "Mission of Gravity," has been cited as a good example of a great story with a fresh and unusual idea. It's a great story, but actually it's based on an old idea: humans meet and deal with a different kind of life form while exploring space. But Clement gives this tired old idea a remarkable twist.

 Don't get me wrong--I'm not against fresh and unusual ideas. If a writer (like Stephen King, for example) can spin a good yarn from an unusual idea, that's great. But what I am against is fresh and unusual ideas merely for the sake of fresh and unusual ideas.

If we forsake every idea and storyline that's been used before, and grope around in our minds for something truly new and unusual, chances are we'll come up with something that's just plain silly. But there's also a fair chance that some editor will buy it from us just because it's a new and unusual idea.

Lots of small press speculative fiction magazines have short life spans, and recently, even a couple of the big zines have folded. Several more of the big ones are reported to be experiencing a significant drop in sales and subscriptions of late. Could it be that their obsession with truly new and unusual (but silly) ideas is at least part of the reason?

 I've always been a great fan of speculative fiction, and I've been happy to see the genre enjoying great popularity for the past few decades. It all started with the pulp era, peaked during the Golden Age of SF, but is in a slow but steady decline at present. Today, there are still a lot of good stories to be found, but I fear that some of the silly fluff now being published may kill the popularity of speculative fiction. Perhaps one day in the future SF will come to stand for Silly Fiction rather than Speculative Fiction.

In many of the stories in today's zines, there is little action, adventure, or suspense to be found. No real conflict. A mere trace of sense of wonder can be found. Some of the stories are probably intended to be funny, but only succeed in being silly. Funny SF can be enjoyable, but there's a sharp line between funny SF and silly SF. Apparently, some readers actually enjoy these silly stories. And some readers probably enjoy reading labels on soup cans.

I love writing and I also love reading. As both a writer and a reader, I'll take good old cliched stories about the likes of wizards, fairies, zombies, time machines, and space aliens any day of the week and twice on Sunday. And I'll end it on that cliched note.

The End

Note: Having said all that, I would advise that when submitting to a scifi publication, follow their guidelines. Send 'em what they want, even if it's a trifle silly.

This article was published in the Jan/Feb 03 issue of Calliope, a publication of American Mensa, Ltd.

Good Samaritin Chic-fil-a

A Chic-fil-a restaurant near !-85 sent its employees out to hand out sandwiches to hundreds of motorists who were stranded because of the winter storm.  Some of those motorists had been stranded for up to 7 hours without food or water.  Employees went up and down the highway giving out food to every car they could reach.  They did not stop until the restaurant ran out of food.

Note:  The employees did NOT inquire as to the sexual orientation of the occupants in those cars, but gave food freely to all.

Hooray for Chic-fil-a!

Gonna Have Snow

Big storm headed this way and it's gonna drop tons of snow on us.  In spite of near record cold and the coming storm, I'm still seeing birds that previously have shown up only in springtime.

Robins in the Winter Time

We've been having unusually cold weather here in Eastern NC.  In spite of this, in the past few days I've seen two mockingbirds, a blue jay, a red wing, and several robins in my back yard.  I have seen all of these birds here in early spring, but NEVER in the winter.  I hope they know something that we don't know.

New Website

I've dropped my old website (Sullivan's Short Stories) due to a major  issue with my server and have created a new one with a new server.  The new site is finished except for a little tweaking.  I'm also trying to retrieve some of the information from the old site.

For anyone who would like to check out my new site, it's Sullivan's Fantastic Tales
The site is all about books and stories.  There are several complete stories posted on the website for the enjoyment of visitors, plus excerpts from my books.

Visitors are welcome, and I also welcome comments about the site.

Book Reviews

I belong to several writer's forums, and one of the most discussed topics is reviews.  Writers are constantly wanting to know how they can get their work reviewed.  There are all sorts of suggestions on the forums on how to get reviewed.  Some suggest professional reviewers who will review your work for a price.  There are reviewers on the forums who offer such services. 

They claim that their reviews are impartial and unbiased.  But at the same time, their offers are worded in such a way that that their reviews will help your sales...in other words they are saying that you can expect five stars from their reviews.  Otherwise how could they help sales?

Other writers suggest exchanging reviews.  I'll review yours if you review mine.  Of course, all writers involved in the exchange would be expected to give glowing reviews.  Any writer who gives his fellow writer a less than glowing review with only three stars can expect the same in return, even if the bad review was justified.

Still another suggestion is to offer your work for free for a specified period, in the hope that if enough people read it, certainly a few will give a review.  But many writers complain that large numbers of their free books were "sold" without producing a single review.

Fact is, the vast majority of readers just don't write reviews.  If they love a particular book they will simply tell their family, friends, and neighbors about it, which is probably as good as or better than a review.  On the other hand, if they hate your book they will also tell their family, friends, and neighbors.

In reading some reviews, it is glaringly obvious that the writers had friends or family members writing the reviews.  Some writers with lots of reviews even admit to having family and friends doing them. However, they claim that they demanded of their family and friends that all the reviews be impartial.  Yes.

Some writers claim to have gotten awful reviews from fellow writers in the same genre who are in competition with them.  Others claim that bad reviews come from enemies trying to hurt them in every way they can.  Still others say that there are malicious people out there who give bad reviews for the fun of it. 

Some people love to review.  They enjoy reviewing books in much the same way that authors enjoy writing them.  Many reviewers are proud of the long lists of books they have reviewed.  They take pride in believing their reviews to be fair, unbiased, and impartial.

Actually every review is biased to some degree.  If the reviewer is partial to flowery prose, she will be inclined to give better reviews to such writing than to tight, unembellished prose.  On the other hand, a reviewer who is partial to tight prose would be inclined to give bad reviews to wordy, flowery writing.

Every writer has his/her own style.  A reviewer may love or hate your particular style, and this will be reflected in the review.  A reviewer may be partial to graphic descriptions of violence; another reviewer may be turned off by same.  Two reviewers may have vastly different feelings about  graphic descriptions of sex.    

My own feelings about reviews is just to publish your work and let the chips fall where they may.  Only a few of my books have been reviewed.  There were several with five stars and one with only three stars. The one with  three stars is among my best sellers.   My #1 best seller has not been reviewed at all.