Category Archives: Fiction

I Am Legend Coming Next Month

Will Smith is in another sci-fi novel adaptation, this time I Am Legend by Richard Matheson, which has been adapted twice before. Apparently, a four writer team undertook this adaptation. Either that or two writers adapted a previous two-writer adaptation. Matheson has many stories in the public mind, in part because he worked on The Twilight Zone, in part because authors like Ray Bradbury, Stephen King, and Dean Koontz have praised his work highly. Another adaptation from him, one of a script seen on The Twilight Zone, is coming in the movie The Box. Still another in The Incredible Shrinking Man.

From what I understand of the story, I Am Legend can’t be called a vampire tale, though there are vampires in it. It’s better described as a post-apocalypse story, focusing on a man as a representative of all mankind. Speaking of the Matheson’s book, Dan Schneider says it focuses “on human loneliness. . . Its insights into what it is to be human go far beyond genre.” (Spoiler warning on that link.) It could be a good movie. Probably is a good book.

You’re No Fun Anymore

Harrison Scott Key complains that novels are boring and short stories are worse. He says, “My general claim is that fiction is in the dumps because fiction isn’t fun like it used to be. Somewhere after Cervantes, novelists forgot that it was okay to be funny.” Woody Allen on the other hand . . .

‘Not At All Cute’

Frank Wilson reviews Charles Williams’ All Hallows’ Eve, written in 1945. He says it focuses on real, cosmic evil in the streets of London. “In Williams’ vision of Halloween,” he says, “we are our own goblins – and not at all cute.”

Piccadilly Jim Doesn’t Burn It Up, As It Were

calon lan (Bonnie) of Dwell in Possibility reviews P.G. Wodehouse’s Piccadilly Jim–not the best. She loves Wodehouse, but this one just doesn’t burn it up, if you see what I mean. The problem? “There’s just too much going on. I couldn’t keep track of the characters, and frankly didn’t find them interesting enough to keep track of.”

Warning on following the link: music automatically plays (but at least the controls are easily found at the top of the page).

Rowling: Dumbledore is Gay, Books Are Christian Inspired

J.K. Rowling has been talking about her books lately, and in New York someone asked a question about Professor Dumbledore’s, the headmaster of Rowling’s Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, love life. The author answered hesitantly, “I always saw Dumbledore as gay.

According to at least one report, the audience loudly applauded that revelation, to which Rowling responded she would have revealed it earlier had she known it would be well received.

Of course, this doesn’t sit well with me, but I guess we’ll have to live with it. Rowling appears to be in her right mind and not slipping into loony post-story “revelations,” ala George Lucas. When I first heard of this news, I doubted it. Even if she did say Dumbledore is gay and it isn’t an inference drawn from an unclear statement, I thought we may have to wait to hear what other statements she makes about her wildly popular series. If next year we hear her tell readers the hero of her stories is actually Hagrid, then we’ll know she’s flaky. But this appears to be genuine backstory, never before guessed or hinted at in the books. In a few decades if these books are still popular, many readers will probably doubt Rowling ever said this.

In related news, Rowling said the books have Christian inspirations. The Telegraph reports:

At one point Harry visits his parents’ graves and finds two biblical passages inscribed on their tombstones.

“They are very British books, so on a very practical note, Harry was going to find biblical quotations on tombstones,” [Rowling] said.

“But I think those two particular quotations he finds on the tombstones …they sum up, they almost epitomise, the whole series.”

She confessed that she does have doubts about Christianity and the afterlife, but she has not given up on her faith. To the reader who responds to this by asking how she could be Christian and have a major character, admirable in many ways, be a homosexual, I recommend practicing a bit of Christian tolerance. Did the Lord say, “Ye will know my disciples by their stance of current issues?” No, he said his disciples would love each other, even when we disagree.

Cornish’s Foundling

A while back I meant to link to a review Mr. Holtsberry did on his jolly good blog, which could only be improved by short, coffee-related posts, IMESHO. Since I’ve been making good on my thoughts lately (note the radio interview Dr. Bertrand landed after I thought about suggesting it. (I didn’t know he was a doctor. Did you know he had a doctorate?)) Anyway, I saw this review of Foundling, by D. M. Cornish, and having seen the book before, I have faith it’s a good one.

Kevin says the book is both Dickensesque and Tolkienesque. “The Dickens reference obviously comes from the orphan plot line and the semi-Victorian feel. But also from the strong characters,” he writes. “The Tolkienesque aspect comes from the complexity and detailed nature of Cornish’s creation. The world of the Half-Continent has a depth and level of detail that is rare in YA fantasy.” Very interesting, though the hardback has a scary cover. The website is Monster Blood Tattoo, which has a short excerpt from the book.

Harry Potter and the Christian Critics

In First Things, Mark Shea writes:

The magic of Harry is, as John Granger points out, “incantational,” not “invocational,” exactly like the magic of Gandalf. Born with the talent for magic, Gandalf says the magic words and fire leaps forth from his staff, just as from Harry’s wand. No principalities or powers are invoked in HP. Indeed, if any words are “invocational” they are the prayer to Elbereth and Gilthoniel uttered in Middle Earth. Yet nobody accuses Tolkien of promoting the worship of false gods. That’s because we understand Tolkien’s fictional subcreation and its rootedness in Christian thought. I suggest Christian critics try to extend Rowling the same charity.

Spoiler warning. [via Mars Hills Audio]

Is Wodehouse Like the Energizer Bunny?

The Scott Stein, who teaches a course on humorous writing at University of Pennsylvania, said that he read P.G. Wodehouse’s The Code of the Woosters before any other Bertie and Jeeves novel. “It was one of the funniest, most entertaining novels I’d ever read,” he said. He read three more and “each has been less entertaining than the previous one. The last one I read, just recently (Jeeves and the Tie that Binds), was even a bit tedious.”

Frank Wilson pointed out Scott’s post and has yet to say whether he agrees with Scott. Not that it really matters, but hey, it’s a detail to point out, and Scott–that is, The Scott Stein–discussed his thoughts further on Frank’s blog.

I haven’t read the books Scott read. Of the Bertie and Jeeves stories, I’ve read Carry On, Jeeves, Very Good, Jeeves, Right-Ho, Jeeves, and The Inimitable Jeeves (I think). Each were hilarious. The story of Aunt Agatha and the Pearls was ripping funny, in part, because we knew about Bertie’s relationship with his aunt, “the one who chews broken bottles and kills rats with her teeth.” I haven’t gotten to The Code yet, but what do you think of Scott’s premise? Do these stories get old after a while?

Voted Most Influential Fictitious Character

Who are the top three most influential fictitious characters in your life? They are probably listed in a new book, The 101 Most Influential People Who Never Lived: How Characters of Fiction, Myth, Legends, Television, and Movies Have Shaped Our Society, Changed Our Behavior, and Set the Course of History. Three scientific authors wrote up their subjective list, including Frankenstein, Mr. Hyde, Prometheus, Jim Crow, Siegfried, and J.R. Ewing. Their top three are The Marlboro Man, Big Brother, and King Arthur. (No, no, the legend of Arthur which transcends whatever the reality was. No, I’m not going to argue over it, because you’re probably right.)

I think my personal list would be:

  1. Bilbo Baggins, who left his comfortable home to apply his skills in ways he could never have foreseen
  2. Winnie the Pooh, who is fun and compassionate if nothing else (I should learn more from him)
  3. Wolverine, an angry man who has been a bad influence on me. I should work to replace him with The Man who was Thursday, who strove after God.

Who are the characters on your list?