Monday morning and other nasties
Well, it is Monday, after all. You have to expect nasty.
My nasty started yesterday of course. Or even the night before that. Saturday night we had duck for dinner as you may recall. And I had Gravy* and Gorgeous Golden Crackly Skin.
And Sunday morning I was 12.37 pounds heavier than I’d been the day before and could barely ( Read more... )
Rugose? :) Amorphous? Antediluvian? Sanguinary? Pseudopodial? Luminescent?
I'm going to be laughing among the rose bushes a lot more this summer. Pity my neighbours. :)
I'd pity them more if your roses had other Lovecraftian adjectives attached, as above. "Gah! The new McKinley hybrid is Iridescently Malevolent!" *arg blargle chomp*
Again, remember, this is **just me**. I am not offering it as literary criticism.
Of course--just as it's just me as well! :) But even if you were offering it as lit crit, I wouldn't be particularly bothered--doesn't make me like Raskin's books less, or question my mental faculties just yet. There's plenty of other things to make me do that.
when I was growing up fantasy-as-we-know-it-Jim didn't freaking EXIST yet.
Though Star Trek came out in your teen years, no? :) Damn it Jim--I'm a doctor, not a fantasy author!
I read fairy tales and James Branch Cabell because that's what there WAS. I read Tolkien BEFORE he was Tolkien. :) But a lot of the comfort-reading series-fantasy now that True Afficionados read . . . I can't get through the first page or the first set-up.
Yes, developing my reading tastes in the late 70's and into the 80's provided me with a fairly fantasy-rich environment... though I think as a little kid my main "fantasy" beyond Tolkien and Lewis was the Brothers Grimm. Oh, and Lloyd Alexander, come to think of it. I knew there was someone else from my pre-high school years. I came across your books much later, not til college or a little after. And I think I've probably missed out on a lot of what the True Afficionados read... as I said before, I'm picky about my fantasy and sci-fi. :)
But I was Already Old when he started publishing, I think.
This may be true. But I would hazard the opinion that his JOKES were already old when YOU started publishing. :) Seriously, that dude has no shame. But I did get a lot of pleasure out of reading his books when I was 16. Can't knock that.
And I find most of my pulp books on the web--I figure that's what it's there for! To connect me with musty bookshops across the country. I like Alibris a lot, as they let me search by title, publisher, format, and print year (Pocket PB, no earlier than 1955) and it's all these little hole-in-the-wall small mystery bookshops that I feel good about giving my money to. Don't know if there is a similar network for British booksellers... there should be. But I suspect I'm near my limit on this post, so the Gardner recs will have to go in another comment!
Reply
Rugose? :) Amorphous? Antediluvian? Sanguinary? Pseudopodial? Luminescent?
*********** Ugly? :)
I'm going to be laughing among the rose bushes a lot more this summer. Pity my neighbours. :)
I'd pity them more if your roses had other Lovecraftian adjectives attached, as above. "Gah! The new McKinley hybrid is Iridescently Malevolent!" *arg blargle chomp*
*********** ROFL! sorry, this completely destroyed me!
when I was growing up fantasy-as-we-know-it-Jim didn't freaking EXIST yet.
Though Star Trek came out in your teen years, no? :)
********** Yes, junior high. And it was an UTTERLY NEW THING and like NOTHING ELSE and everyone who loved it was AUTOMATICALLY A GEEK. And that was *way* before geeks were cool.
I'm picky about my fantasy and sci-fi. :)
************ Good for you. Among other thing you have to choose SOMEHOW. :)
And I find most of my pulp books on the web--I figure that's what it's there for! To connect me with musty bookshops across the country. I like Alibris a lot, as they let me search by title, publisher, format, and print year (Pocket PB, no earlier than 1955) and it's all these little hole-in-the-wall small mystery bookshops that I feel good about giving my money to.
************ My problem is how do you identify the ones who will send you the books and how do you identify the ones who will lose your check?
Reply
That too.
* ROFL! sorry, this completely destroyed me!
Oh goody! (I had this vision of your neighbors glancing out the window, very stereotypically British... "I say, my dear, there seems to be a flesh-eating plant coming up the walk." "You don't say, Basil?" "Mmm, yes. It's just eaten the dachsund." and it just went on from there...)
And it was an UTTERLY NEW THING and like NOTHING ELSE and everyone who loved it was AUTOMATICALLY A GEEK
My parents were a young married couple at the time, and my father who had sworn he would never, EVER buy a TV set.... bought one. Just to watch Star Trek. I was doomed, even before birth, to be a nerd.
My problem is how do you identify the ones who will send you the books and how do you identify the ones who will lose your check?
Well, in the case of Alibris, much like Ebay it has a buyer rating system. If someone sends me something which isn't as advertised (or doesn't send it at all) I can give them a low rating; when I buy, I can avoid the sellers who others have dinged for poor service. There are no guarantees, but I've not had a problem yet.
Ok, the much awaited Gardner recs. Please keep in mind that I am NOT recommending these because they are shining examples of literary craftsmanship, but merely because I think Gardner's fun to read--and is completely unlike Chandler and Hammett, for all that they are in the same pulp genre bucket. All of these feature a decent plot, female characters who--whatever else they may be--are neither Evil Vixens or Bimbos--and Gardner's signature rapidfire dialogue writing style.
1) The Case of the Dangerous Dowager (1937)
2) The Case of the Fan-Dancer's Horse (1947)
3) The Case of the Terrified Typist (1956)
So really, you could read any of them, (or all of them if you have a sudden unexpected burst of enthusiasm) and you will have a pretty good sense of Gardner's approach.
Bonus recommendations are Case of the Velvet Claws (1929, I think) which is the first Mason novel and is far more like standard pulp, very two fisted with scheming women and brutish men. It's good for contrast, though I don't like it much. And if you happen across any of the Donald Lam-Bertha Cool novels by A.A. Fair, you might pick one up, it's the only pulp detective stuff I've ever read with a tough broad character as one of the series leads. (Fair is Gardner's pseudonym, and most of those books are NOT presently in print. They're not as good as the Mason novels, but Bertha's an unusual character in my experience and it's worth a read if you find one in the 50p bin at the bookseller.)
Reply
********* LOL!!!! My neighbours at the top of the hill TO THE LIFE. And furthermore THEY HAVE DACHSHUNDS. And why hasn't either of us mentioned Little Shop of Horrors yet? FEEEEEEED MEEEEEE. :)
And it was an UTTERLY NEW THING and like NOTHING ELSE and everyone who loved it was AUTOMATICALLY A GEEK
My parents were a young married couple at the time, and my father who had sworn he would never, EVER buy a TV set.... bought one. Just to watch Star Trek. I was doomed, even before birth, to be a nerd.
*********** Whereas I had to INVENT it, entirely without help. Oh, well, barring my first boyfriend in 8th grade.
Well, in the case of Alibris, much like Ebay it has a buyer rating system. If someone sends me something which isn't as advertised (or doesn't send it at all) I can give them a low rating; when I buy, I can avoid the sellers who others have dinged for poor service. There are no guarantees, but I've not had a problem yet.
********** I did once several years ago and just stopped using it. Maybe it's improved.
1) The Case of the Dangerous Dowager (1937)
2) The Case of the Fan-Dancer's Horse (1947)
3) The Case of the Terrified Typist (1956)
************ THE FAN DANCER'S HORSE??!??? Okay, read that one (and the first) for the title alone. Now I've read Terrified Typist but I can't remember a thing about it. That's okay. :)
Thanks ! (cutting to salve lj's delicate sensibilities)
Reply
GET OUT! Really??? Oh, that's priceless. I think I picked dachshunds because they seem like easy rosebush prey. :)
And why hasn't either of us mentioned Little Shop of Horrors yet?
"FEED ME, ROBIN! FEED ME SO THAT I MAY BECOME EVEN MORE LOATHSOMELY BULBOUS!" (Really, HPL had a lot of adjectives...)
Whereas I had to INVENT it, entirely without help. Oh, well, barring my first boyfriend in 8th grade.
Yeah, by the early 1980's there were nerd support groups in middle schools everywhere. :) I think they called it "chess club." But still, the boyfriend, that's a start.
On the topic of fantasy-as-we-know-it-Jim, did you encounter Lord Dunsany during your formative period? I am way late to the game on his stuff, but he's on my to-read list.
THE FAN DANCER'S HORSE??!??? Okay, read that one (and the first) for the title alone. Now I've read Terrified Typist but I can't remember a thing about it. That's okay. :)
Oh yes--I think I like Terrified Typist because the ending genuinely surprised me, and because it doesn't start off with the standard "hot girl comes to Perry's office for help with a case" opening that so many of these novels do. Well, let me know what you think, even if you hate them--at least they can't be any worse for you than the Golden Compass movie! I think. :)
Reply
************ Yes. And William Morris. And Charles Williams. And some of the classic horror writers--Bram Stoker, obviously, and MR James in particular.
I am way late to the game on his stuff, but he's on my to-read list.
***************YOU HAVEN'T READ DUNSANY YET???? Good gods, woman, put EVERYTHING down and read him NOW.
Reply
I only found out about him in context of "Where is Lovecraft's Dreamlands stuff coming from anyway?" and the answer was Dunsany. Late to the game, as I said... Do you have a particular Favorite Thing I should start with, or shall I just plunge in?
Reply
Reply
Then, if you're not hooked . . . well, there's something WRONG with you. :)
LOL! There are miriads of things wrong with me, but I suspect this isn't going to be one of them! :)
Reply
Leave a comment