THE NEW PULP ERA

Posted by John F. Allen Author on September 30, 2013

WHY THIS FICTION FORMAT IS MAKING A COMEBACK IN A BIG WAY!

From the time I was a child I’ve loved Pulp Fiction. No, not the movie (although I enjoyed that as well), I’m talking about the Pulp Fiction genre! Whether it was in the form of Men’s Action/Adventure novels such as: Don Pendleton’s Executioner series (featuring Mack Bolan), Nick Carter, The Destroyer Series (featuring Nemo Williams) or magazines such as: Eerie, EC Comics, Savage Sword of Conan, Tomb of Dracula or Deadly Hands of Kung Fu.

Of course the ORIGINAL Pulp fiction icons like Doc Savage, The Shadow, Tarzan, etc…started it all! I discovered them a short time later and fell in love with them as well!

Some of my earliest reading experiences were with the above mentioned books and magazines, something that has had a definite impact and influence on my writing. I grew up in an era before the internet and when video games weren’t a standard fixtures in homes around the world. My friends and I would read comic books, adventure novels and then reenact those bold scenes outside in the backyard or at a nearby park. We fashioned weapons from sticks and boards, or any other materials we could get our hands on. Our greatest asset was our imaginations!

This is precisely why Pulp Fiction is making a comeback in a BIG way!

Reading those stories of whirlwind excitement, death defying feats and bold adventure sparked our imaginations like other forms of fiction never could. We could get lost in becoming our favorite heroes and escape to distant lands and exotic locales, be surrounded by beautiful women (or handsome men according to your fancy). You could make all of the troubles in your life melt away as you slipped into another world and embarked on the adventure of a lifetime!

With the dazzling special effects in movies and video games, it becomes easier than ever to escape reality. The problem is that unlike reading, movies and video games can only give you the visual and the audio. Those formats fail to engage your senses and ease you into another world where you can become the hero in your mind’s eye. The viewer or player, respectively, is relying upon the imagination/vision of the directors, writers and/or animators to do the heavy lifting for them, thus depriving them of developing their own imagination muscles.

Bearers of the Pulp Torch are bound and determined to carry on the traditions of their fore-bearers and bring to readers the imaginative and pulse pounding adventures that have all but gotten swallowed up in movies and video games.

Authors and Artists such as:

Derrick Ferguson

Adam Shaw

Tommy Hancock

Kimberly Richardson

Rob Davis

Nancy A. Hansen

Fuller Bumpers

Lee Houston Jr.

Ron Fortier

Andrea Judy

& Charles R. Saunders to name but a few.

They are the voices of The New Pulp Era!

Rising from the ashes of Pulp Fiction, they are spearheading a Pulp Renaissance. Through modern innovations such as the internet, Print on Demand, and a steady growing interest, Pulp is re-surging more and more each passing year. This movement consists of quite a number of writers, artists and publishers who have dedicated themselves to creating GREAT Pulp Fiction!

Their work is as diverse as the American Culture and yet readily recognizable, innovative, but not just a fresh coat of paint on previous stories. These works are bold, original and surreal, though they often take their inspiration and influence from the Pulp of yesteryear. This gives the stories a freshness born of new minds, yet spiced with the familiar flavors of the past. A GREAT example of this is an anthology titled, “BLACK PULP,” published by Pro Se Press.

This anthology features stories from several brilliant authors and Pulp supporters and features characters of African origin, or descent, in stories that cover various genres in fiction! The concept was developed by noted crime novelist Gary Phillips and this volume includes a forward by the legendary Walter Mosley himself!

(Click the book cover to purchase!)

As this phoenix called The New Pulp Era burns ever so brightly and hurls itself across the sky, many readers (including longtime fans and newly indoctrinated ones) are taking notice. Quite a few conventions and venues are recognizing the value and impact that Pulp has had in the shaping and molding of Pop Culture. Pulp never truly went away, as it has lived in the hearts of longtime fans and readers for decades. It is only now that a new generation of creators are producing material and new readers are being exposed to this Cult phenomena and apparently they can’t get enough!

I would like to take this opportunity to announce that “yours truly” is also throwing his hat into the Pulp Fiction ring. I only hope that I can live up to the legends of my fore-bearers and help to move Pulp forward alongside the talented men and women listed above.

STAY TUNED & REMEMBER TBIYTC!!!

SO YOU WANT TO BE A WRITER?

Posted by John F. Allen Author on August 12, 2013

FIVE THINGS TO ASK YOURSELF BEFORE YOU BEGIN A CAREER AS A WRITER

Many people who aren’t writers or who aspire to one day write the “NEXT BEST THING” have absolutely no idea what a writing life entails. It is because of their skewed and/or misguided ideas on what being a writer is about that they often suffer from severe delusions of granduer. It is the intent of this particular post to dispell the erroneous notions many have about the writing life and what it means to be a writer.

I’ve had people actually ask me when I got my book deal, “So now that you’re published I suppose you’re going to quit your job and move to a big house in the hills?”

I was astonished at first…did they know something I didn’t? Don’t get me wrong, every writer wants to reap the rewards of their work, but extreme changes in lifestyle, affluence and riches are not in the cards for the vast majority of us. The fact is that only 1% or less of (fiction) writers are able to live off of the revenue generated from the sales of their writing endeavors. This is further compounded by the fact that an even smaller group of that meager 1% are well off, let alone wealthy.

Some folks think that all published writers own some measure of noteriety and I suppose that’s true to some extent. However, very rarely does it result in an easy, carefree lifestyle like the allusions created in the minds of those who don’t know any better. Even those wealthy writers like Stephen King, James Patterson, Danielle Steel or JK Rowling, didn’t get their rewards overnight. Sure, there are a miniscule number of virtually overnight success stories, but believe me when I say those are very far and few in between and it didn’t exactly happen overnight.

The following is a favorite quote of mine from best selling fantasy author RA Salvatore and it happens to be in my opinion the best advice for an aspiring writer to consider when contemplating a career as a writer.

There’s way too much pain in this business (writing) for anyone who doesn’t have to write. I always tell beginning writers, “If you can quit, then quit. If you can’t quit, you’re a writer.”

~ R.A. Salvatore

_____________________________________________________

Five questions to ask yourself before embarking on a career as a writer.

1) Do you like to write?

I know that this seems like a given, but surprisingly there are a number of people who don’t like to write and still aspire to do so. These folks may have an idea that they think is great (and it might just be), but have absolutely NO PASSION for the craft. While I’m not one to discourage anyone from their dreams and/or goals, I think that folks who answer no or even “not really” to this question, should think long and hard about perhaps finding something more fulfilling and rewarding to do with their lives.

2) Can you quit writing?

This question is very much tied to the Salvatore quote and is a very legitimate question to ask yourself before pursuing a writing career. If you can go days, weeks, months, years without writing or at least thinking about it, then perhaps you should find a more attention grabbing and fulfilling vocation. But if you can’t (and you answered yes to question #1), then by all means I encourage you to proceed.

3) Do you want to write because you want an easy, carefree lifestyle with wealth and adoration aplenty?

If you answer “yes” to this question, PLEASE don’t continue to pursue a career as a writer…YOU WILL BE VERY DISAPPOINTED! Again I will acknowledge those rare overnight success stories, but the odds of becoming one of those fortunate few are very slim to none. Even if that sort of success eventually finds you, that shouldn’t be what drives your writing. This is a prime example of those delusions of grandeur I mentioned earlier.

4) Are you a storyteller?

For a fiction writer, this is essential. If you aren’t a storyteller then regardless of what your answers to the above questions are, it is my opinon that you might want to find something else to do with your life. The very essence of fiction writing is to convey a story and if you don’t have stories to tell, then what’s the point? Many people enter into writing (or at least attempt to do so) and have not one story to tell. They’re under the impression that stringing a few sentences into paragraphs and putting together some dialogue constitutes a story. Well, the sobering truth is that it takes a lot more than that to make a story, let alone a good one. Stories generally start with an idea, but an idea alone does not a story make!

5) Can you write only when inspired or in the mood?

Some may argue that it’s still possible to be a writer who writes only when inspired to do so and I’d have to respectfully disagree. I can assure you that if I only wrote when inspired, I’d never finish a damned thing! Being a writer (especially a novelist) is about writing whether you’re inspired or in the mood, because deadlines are deadlines and the story WILL NOT write itself. The following quote from successful, best selling author Neil Gaiman, I think says it all.

“If you only write when you’re inspired you may be a fairly decent poet, but you’ll never be a novelist because you’re going to have to make your word count today and those words aren’t going to wait for you whether you’re inspired or not.
You …have to write when you’re not inspired. And you have to write the scenes that don’t inspire you. And the weird thing is that six months later, a year later, you’ll look back at them and you can’t remember which scenes you wrote when you were inspired and which scenes you just wrote because they had to be written next.

The process of writing can be magical. Mostly it’s a process of putting one word after another.” ~ Neil Gaiman in conversation with Chris Hardwick. (via terribleminds)

_____________________________________________________

In closing, I want it to be clear that in writing this post I am not attempting to dash the dreams and goals of new and aspiring writers. My intent is to merely dispell the very problematic and misguided ideals that some pepole pursuing a career as a writer might have. I’m the first to be very encouraging to new and aspiring writers, but please consider the questions I’ve posed and answer them truthfully before you devote yourself to the writing life.

WRITE ON!

MAN OF STEEL MOVIE REVIEW

Posted by John F. Allen Author on July 5, 2013

MORE THAT JUST A FRESH COAT OF PAINT ON AN ENDURING CHARACTER!

2013

Warner Bros. Pictures/Legendary Pictures/DC Entertainment

Directed by Zack Snyder

Produced by Christopher Nolan, Charles Roven, Emma Thomas & Deborah Snyder

Screenplay by David S. Goyer

Based on “Superman” created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster

___________________________________________________________________

There was a great amount of anticipation and tentativeness for me as I walked into the theatre with my family to see “MAN OF STEEL.”

I was a fan of Richard Donner’s “Superman: The Movie”‘ and after the horrendous thing which was “Superman Returns,” I was leery and at the same time excited to see where DC would take the character. It is in my humble opinion that Zack Snyder and writers David S. Goyer and Chris Nolan have delivered a Superman for a new generation with “MAN OF STEEL.”

Let me first say that this depiction of Superman/Kal-El aka Clark Kent was one which I found I was most able to identify with. We see a character who embodies what it might mean to be a stranger from another world, in search of their destiny. Although the film was a bit action heavy and dialogue light, you could feel (or at least I could) the emotions of the protagonist and somewhat relate to him.

The special effects and cinematography were quite extensive and brilliantly rendered. The scenes on Krypton were very much EPIC LEVEL SCI-FI stuff. The Krypton scenes were—in my opinion—some of the greatest things depicted in the movie. This vision of Superman’s home world was I think more in line with an alien environment than just an Antarctic backdrop which was what we saw in previous Superman films. We see an alien culture where the architecture, technology, costuming, creatures and architecture were much more robust and science fiction like than any from the previous films. I applaud the filmmakers on that.

The movie score—provided by Hans Zimmer—was very different than prior films, but I think that it was necessary to break out from the all too familiar John Williams score. While I’m a fan of the original score, the tone and atmosphere of MOS needed something more updated. Zimmer gave it a feel that was epic, solemn, tranquil, and at times thunderous when it needed to be—re-invented music for a re-invented hero.

Henry Cavill as Superman

As to Henry Cavill’s portrayal of Superman/Kal-El aka Clark Kent, it would be pointless to compare it to Christopher Reeve’s turn as the iconic hero. It would be like comparing Adam West to Christian Bale…not even in the same room. That’s not to diminish Reeve’s turn as Superman, which will always be magically classic for me and countless others who grew up in awe of it. I think that in this interpretation of Superman, it is apparent from the onset that Cavill OWNS THE ROLE! He embodies every aspect of the character and takes him out of what I call, ***“The Rocky Balboa Syndrome.” ******This is where the main character gets the snot beaten out of him within an inch of his life before finding his “GLOW” and defeating the villain/opponent.

It made sense that trained warriors from an alien planet would be more versed in combat than one raised on a farm in Kansas however, in this film Superman for the most part, gives as well as he gets. This was especially refreshing in regards to future films and a proposed Justice League film.

I must also say that despite being humble and introverted, Cavill’s portrayal of Clark Kent didn’t come off as the buffoonish caricature that was Reeve’s version. This was the one thing which I hated about the original Superman films. Even George Reeve’s Clark Kent had more swagger and that was the 50’s!

This film had breathtaking action, stunning visuals, commanding performances and albeit subtle nods to both the comic books and previous films incarnations. I feel that this film marks the return of Superman to the BIG screen and opens the door for other films about DC characters—other than Batman!

Michael Shannon as General Zod

Michael Shannon (Premium Rush, The Iceman) was perfectly cast as General Zod. He portrays Zod with the intensity and relentlessness due the character and what we’ve come to expect from this fine actor. I found that with this incarnation of Zod (no slight to Terrance Stamp’s performance) was easily more relatable and definitely much more intimidating. Here we have a former war hero genetically engineered to live for the safety, well-being and continued survival of his race, BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY! Unlike Stamp’s version who suffered from great arrogance, a case of Napoleon syndrome and simply wanted revenge because Jor-El sent him away to the Phantom Zone for being a murderer. There is much more to Shannon’s Zod and that was VERY refreshing!

Russell Crowe as Jor El

Russell Crowe was also perfectly cast, as he embodied a similar air of aristocracy that Brando brought to the character in the original film, but also a “Gladiator,” flavor which spoke greatly to the spirit his son Kal-El would inherit. I’m so glad that unlike Brando and Reeve, Crowe and Cavill DID NOT share the same hairstyle!

Kevin Costner as Jonathan Kent and Diane Lane as Martha Kent

Kevin Costner and Diane Lane gave admirable performances and Jonathan and Martha Kent. They fit into their roles and gave us enough emotion to suspend our disbelief. Of course Costner was born to play someone’s father after, “The Bodyguard,” while after pining after Lane in, “The Outsiders,” as a kid, it was kinda hard to see her as Martha Kent, but she pulled it off in the end.

The other performances were well executed and fit the film nicely I think.

Laurence Fishburne as Perry White

Lawrence Fishburne as Perry White was a decent portrayal. I didn’t get all upset that the character went from being white to black as others did. He was never anymore than a guy who yelled at his staff and smoked cigars to me. A city as BIG as Metropolis is bound to have a black person somewhere…everybody can’t be white.

Henry Cavill as Superman and Amy Adams as Lois Lane

To speak on what I think didn’t work with this film, was the casting and character development of Lois Lane. While Amy Adams is assuredly more appealing both visually and as an actress than Margot Kidder, she’s NO Teri Hatcher either. What I mean here is that Hatcher’s turn as Lois on “Lois and Clark,” was not only prettier, but she had a greater chemistry with her leading man, Dean Cain. I just didn’t feel the chemistry between Cavill and Adams. Hopefully in future films it can develop.

I also didn’t like that they failed to integrate more of the overall DC Universe into the film. They did to some extent (albeit sparingly). I understand why they were as tentative as they were about it (what if Man of Steel flops like Green Lantern), but it still would’ve been really cool to see, imo.

Another problem I had wasn’t with the film itself, but with critics of the film saying that Superman didn’t save everyone. Well re-watch the Avengers people, neither did they! Although it was more gingerly implied in The Avengers film than in Man of Steel, let’s be real here…PEOPLE DIED IN BOTH FILMS!!!

Comparing the human death toll of both films is so inherently asinine and preposterous that it should go without saying. THIS IS FICTION! None of this is real because I can assure you that had it been, you’d have seen a lot more deaths and there wouldn’t have been a damned thing Superman and The Avengers combined could have done about it!

I digress…

I THOROUGHLY ENJOYED MAN OF STEEL! I recommend it to anyone who is a fan of Superhero films, although I warn you….THIS AIN’T YO DADDY’S SUPERMAN!

I’m just sayin’….

***SPOILERS***

____________________________________________________________________________

If you haven’t seen the film, please don’t read any further! With franchise films such as this one, particularly Comic Book movies, I like to give my take on the sequel.

For Man of Steel II, I think that having saved the planet and acquired his place in Metropolis, Superman begins to patrol the world and safeguard humanity (particularly Metropolis).

Since LexCorp vehicles and the building itself featured prominently in the film, it stands to reason that Luthor has been observing the events in Man of Steel and is none to happy that some “Alien” is hogging the limelight and stealing away the admiration of the city.

Here is where I’d have Lex procure remnants of Kryptonian technology left behind in the battle between Superman and General Zod and his followers. He would of course use his considerable wealth to clean up the aftermath and destruction the battle caused, while playing devil’s advocate to whether Superman is a liability to the city in lieu of the vast destruction he left in his wake.

Lex holds a press conference and is interviewed by national talk show host Gordon Godfrey to speak on how Superman is a potential threat to humanity and cannot be trusted. Meanwhile, LexCorp is studying the Kryptonian tech and discover two significant finds.

1) An artificial intelligence module (with three blinking red dots) beyond anything human scientists have ever conceived.

2) A crystalline substance that emits an odd radiation.

Luthor reverse engineers the Kryptonian tech to create battle armor and sells watered down versions to the US Military. Special liaison Amanda Waller in particular is interested in seeing what this tech can do. She and her elite task force want to stock pile the weapons in case Superman ever goes rogue or there is another alien invasion (preparing for an alien threat from Darkseid perhaps?)

Luthor also vows publically to protect Metropolis and the rest of the world from the alien threat which is Superman. He selects the head of his private security force—John Corben—to head up a special task force to work with Metropolis Police in cracking down on the city’s crime and arming themselves against Superman.

Superman attempts to speak with Luthor and reach some sort of accord, but Luthor provokes him to use his powers against him and records the whole exchange. He then alters the footage to make it appear as though Superman attacked him and severely injured Corben. Luthor releases the footage to the news media and in particular Gordon Godfrey and soon the public sees Superman as the enemy.

Superman keeps a low profile hoping that things will blow over. Meanwhile, Luthor uses the Kryptonian tech to configure a metal endo-skeleton and the strange radioactive substance his team found as a power source to create a new body for Corben after he is lied to about how he was injured. This new body contains some level of Kryptonian DNA and gives Corben strength and endurance on par with Superman.

As a result of this new found power, Corben becomes increasingly unstable mentally and Luthor is no longer able to control him. He goes on a rampage and tries to take over the city. Superman confronts him and in the battle and during the course of the fight, Corben’s synthetic tissue is ripped away and exposes his power source.

Superman finds himself weakened by exposure to the glowing substance and is forced to retreat. The US Military arrives and using new weapons supplied by Luthor, are able to force Corben into fleeing.

Corben is on the run and Superman is dealing with the result of their confrontation. He goes back to his Fortress and attempts to piece together what happened. He soon realizes that what happened to him was the same effect he experienced when he first boarded the Kryptonian ship in Man of Steel. The substance was somehow tied to the environment regulators of the ship.

Superman approaches STAR Labs—who also procured some of the Kryptonian tech—on how to best defeat Corben. They have discovered that lead is the only substance which appears to neutralize the radiation emitted by the substance. The scientists at STAR Labs construct a lead based exo-skeleton armor (similar to the armor worn by Zod in Man of Steel) that Superman can wear during his next encounter with Corben.

Superman confronts Corben and eventually defeats him. He begins to question him about his involvement with Luthor when he self destructs. Superman takes the scraps which were Corben back to Luthor and confronts him. Luthor is dismissive and challenges him to prove his complicity in Corben’s actions. Superman cannot and is vexed.

Luthor tells Superman that together they could accomplish so much and nothing on earth could stop them. He offers for Superman to join him and Superman declines. He tells Luthor that he’ll be watching him and when he slips up he would expose him for the criminal he truly was.

Angered, Luthor tells Superman to leave unless he wants to be escorted by his private security force and have the incident leaked to the news media and a formal complaint made to the authorities.

Superman leaves.

Luthor goes down the basement of the LexCorp building and observes a large tube containing a young blonde woman cryogenically frozen. We also see the Kryptonian Artificial Intelligence with its three red dots blinking. He vows to unlock the secrets of Kryptonian technology and use it to rule the world.

This is the bare basics…of course Lois Lane, MaKent and the Daily Planet would figure into the story.

Feel free to comment and let me know what you think! I’d also love to hear your takes on how a sequel might go. Until next time remember TBIYTC (The Best Is Yet To Come)!!!

URBAN FANTASY AND PARANORMAL ROMANCE

Posted by John F. Allen Author on June 24, 2013

What’s the difference?

If I were asked—as I often am—to name a genre which my forthcoming novel The God Killers fits in, it would be urban Fantasy. I suppose this is mainly because the city in which the protagonist currently resides and the one of her birth, play an integral part in the story and because the protagonist’s ultimate goal isn’t a romantic relationship. However, when it comes to the genres of Urban Fantasy and Paranormal Romance, I’ve given some thought as to what the main differences are. As I write, I also read, therefore I’ve read plenty of urban fantasy novels as well as paranormal romance.When I think of the differences between them, I first come to their one and only concrete commonality, PARANORMAL ENTITIES.

Every urban fantasy or paranormal romance I’ve ever read had some form of paranormal creature/being as main characters and/or supporting characters. Whether it is vampires, werewolves, zombies, wizards, angels, demons, mythological deities, etc… something of the sort was present. How they differ is a gray area to be sure, but I’ve thought about it for some time and I’ve come to certain conclusions.

PARANORMAL ROMANCE

PARANORMAL ROMANCE

By definition, a paranormal romance focuses on romance and includes paranormal elements. Usually—like in a contemporary romance—the story starts out with the eventual lovers meeting, acknowledging a powerful mutual attraction, yet something stands in their way.Whatever the reason their lives are complicated, midway through the story things change in some way or they decide to live dangerously. Eventually, our intrepid couple determines that they’re hopelessly in love.

Paranormal romances can contain action and also have some graphic scenes of horror, but at its core it is a romance. While many novels in this genre have plenty of action, horror, and suspense these things are not as of great importance as the love story.

Recently, Paranormal Romance has become one of the largest selling subgenres of science fiction and fantasy.

Also, unlike urban fantasies, a paranormal romance isn’t necessarily tied to a large, modern day city. (see below)

URBAN FANTASY

URBAN FANTASY

In my opinion, urban fantasy must contain something other than the love interest as the protagonist’s main goal. This subgenre is considered steroid addled cousin of paranormal romance. As I mentioned before, paranormal romance is fundamentally a romance, while urban fantasies are fundamentally fantasies.

A large portion of the tale must take place in a city. The urban fantasies I’ve read almost always take place in a large, modern day city where paranormal creatures exist.

That said, there’s no law that says it has to be a modern city, and the timeframe could be one from the past, the future, or possibly on another planet altogether.

Similar to the paranormal romance, urban fantasies must contain one or more characters that have abilities and/or origins far beyond those of mortal men. Vampires, witches, werewolves, oh my!

Unlike a paranormal romance, the urban fantasy can contain elements of romance, but romance is NOT the main focus and/or goal of the protagonist.

In conclusion, while I admit to enjoying both subgenres, there is a difference between them. Something to think about when writing a paranormal novel or choosing one to read!

URBAN FANTASY HAS ROOTS

Posted by John F. Allen Author on June 10, 2013

While I’m not a big fan of romance novels, I don’t mind them nearly as much when the characters are gritty and preternatural creatures are involved, downplaying the sappiness associated with most novels where the word romance is used. Paranormal romance novels are the next big thing and filling the bookstore shelves in record numbers. Spurred on further by young adult novels such as Twilight, this newly developed niche genre has been spreading like wildfire.

When I first heard the term urban fantasy used to describe a sub-genre of fantasy, I wasn’t exactly sure what the term meant. Most times the word urban brings to mind things associated with black people. I know that the word actually means, ‘relating to or belonging to a city’ however, urban radio, urban news, urban plight, the urban center are merely PC ways of referring to things associated with blacks.

The first novel I read—remotely fitting into this genre—was Guilty Pleasures by Laurell K. Hamilton, featuring vampire hunter Anita Blake. The novel was originally billed as a horror/mystery novel, which is as accurate of a description as any. The novel contained all of the elements of a mystery and read like a Robert B. Parker mystery novel which is a BIG compliment coming from me. However, the paranormal elements were present as well. Vampires, werewolves and zombies, oh my!

Another urban fantasy author named Jim Butcher popped up with a novel titled Storm Front, which introduced us to Chicago wizard Harry Dresden. The most common links between Hamilton and Butcher’s novels was:

a) both were set in major US cities, and

b) they both featured paranormal creatures.

I would also like to bring to light another commonality of the two novels—which is true about most novels in the genre,—in that the main characters were white. I have no problem with either author having predominately white characters because the authors are white and you often write what you know. However, shortly after I discovered these authors, I was introduced to another author named L.A. Banks. I was pleasantly surprised that a black author was writing in this genre and the novel featured a black main character. I found other black authors in the genre, yet those I did find such as Seressia Glass and Maurice Broaddus—were far and few between.

Another problem for blacks writing in this genre is the whitewashing of their book covers. Far too often you see books with black protagonists who aren’t featured on the book covers. Why is this? It’s almost like in the sixties when blacks weren’t allowed to be on the covers of their albums because the white mainstream wouldn’t buy them. I’m happy to say that Banks, Broaddus and Glass feature their black characters prominently on the covers of their books, which is as it should be.

The sad truth is there just aren’t that many black authors writing in this genre. As a writer whose work fits within the urban fantasy genre, I intend to add my voice to the fold with my debut urban fantasy novel, The God Killers due out this summer and published by Seventh Star Press. Over the years, I’ve spoken to countless people who are hankering for more works from black authors. Which lead me to believe that we should be working towards bringing black urban fantasy writers to the forefront of people’s minds and the bookstore shelves. I know there’s a market for black urban fantasy novels and that urban fantasy has small black roots which we must nourish and help to grow.

THERE’S NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN

Posted by John F. Allen Author on June 3, 2013

When I was a child, my grandmother told me one day, “There’s nothing new under the sun.” At first I didn’t understand what she meant. Later, as I got a little older I refused to believe her, and was determined to prove her wrong. Finally, when I began focusing on my career as a writer, I accepted her nugget of knowledge as fact, and learned to embrace it for the truth it is. However, if the above observation is true, then what makes any story different from the next?

The answer…

LIFE EXPERIENCE, IMAGINATION, VOICE AND STYLE.

As most fiction writers will agree, we are products of our environment and individual life experiences and therefore, it stands to reason that many of the seeds for our story plots originate from said life experiences. This can be from what we’ve dealt with on a personal level, what we’ve heard from others, or seen around us including—but, certainly not limited to—what we’ve watched on television, read in books or learned in school. These personal life experiences give our stories a unique flavor which cannot be exactly cloned due to the intricate variables in our individual lives.

I believe that there is a collective consciousness which extends to us all, as we tap into our imaginations and creativeness. We must also accept the fact that the possibilities for formulating scenarios involving larger than life creatures, myths, epic heroes and monsters is finite, just as our voices and styles are infinite. As writers, we sometimes find in the course of plotting a story that we read stories from someone else who came up with very similar ideas for their already published work(s). It is because of this, I continue to work against the truth stated in the title of this post, in order to produce unique stories. I feel in doing this, I can delve deeper into the recesses of my imagination, creativity and life experiences to produce my very own individual story. It is here that we begin to use our imagination to find a variation of the themes we draw from our life experiences and formulate creatively new and exciting takes on tried and true scenarios and themes. It is then that we brand our stories with distinctive twists and turns and imbue it with our own individual spirits and personalities.

As a writer, I’m constantly thinking up new story ideas and using my voice and style to tell the stories. All writers have their own unique voice and style, which separates them from other writers. When it comes to certain elements of storytelling, there are no new ideas. Often, writers of genre fiction ultimately come across elements in another author’s work that closely resembles their own. While this is a common phenomenon, it doesn’t mean that we can’t separate ourselves from other storytellers using similar scenarios and/or themes; it merely means we must work all the more harder at imparting our own essence into our work in order to make it exclusive to us.

Just as there are finite possibilities in regards to scenarios and themes, there is again something to be said for voice and style. I’ve read books that had such similar plots that if you broke it down to the bare essentials it could be the same book. However, what separated the books was the differences in how the authors delivered the story, developed the characters, and the language used to breathe life into the personalities of the characters. How we tell a story, and how much of ourselves we put into our works, is what sets us apart from other writers with similar ideas and themes.

Always remember the old Vulcan axiom from the Star Trek series, Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations (IDIC), the philosophy which celebrates the vast array of possibilities and variables in the known universe. And while there are finite themes when stripped down to their essential cores, when we take into consideration the life experiences, imagination, voice and style of the storyteller, the possibilities are indeed infinite and quite fascinating.

STAR TREK FRANCHISE DISCUSSION:

Posted by John F. Allen Author on May 20, 2013

To boldly go where we already boldly went before, while giving a dying franchise a shot in the arm!

THIS ISN’T A REVIEW OF THE STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS FILM!!!

I saw a special screening of Star Trek: Into Darkness, prior to its official debut and while I really enjoyed the film and got a little more than what I expected, it wasn’t new and mind-blowing, which to me means that they did it right. The following is MY OPINION on what this reboot for Star Trek is and what it means for the franchise. This explores why I think director JJ Abrams has done a GOOD job with the franchise reboot and why the different direction/changes were necessary in my opinion. While this is an opinion piece and open to comments, let’s keep any disagreements civil and courteous, with the idea that I’m in no way trying to convert you to my way of thinking/opinion. That said, fellow Trekkies please refrain from tossing bottles and rotten tomatoes at me during a convention/conference or other such public event!

Quite a few Star Trek fans affectionately known as Trekkies (some of which I happen to KNOW and LOVE) were up in arms when JJ Abrams was tapped to direct the Star Trek reboot/reimaging. I have to admit, I was skeptical myself and I consider myself to be a more open minded Trekkie than most of my brethren. That said, if you look at box office receipts alone, the first film was VERY successful. This and the fact that it is an established franchise is the reason we have the sequel out in theaters right now.

Recently, I had an online discussion with some of my friends and fellow Trekkies about ST:Into Darkness and they weren’t impressed. Of course, some of them weren’t impressed with the first film in the reboot and neither they or I expected any different result. Besides the complaints of obvious plot holes (it’s not like any of the other Star Trek TV series and/or movies had them, lol!), there was the lack of respect they felt was given to the source material. This is the meat of this special, Star Trek Franchise Discussion!

It is my opinion (and therefore not law or any attempt on my part to sway you to my line of thinking) that while I’m a fan of Star Trek, I think that it was only really thought provoking sci-fi when and because the content was relative to the period in which it was spawned. (This is my personal opinion, so again don’t throw bottles and/or rotten tomatoes! =D). The core idea behind the TV show was Wagon Trail to the stars…most of today’s audience doesn’t even get that reference. The franchise had to reset and reinvent on some level just to be relevant to today’s audience (outside of Trekkies). Honestly, (again in my opinion) JJ Abrams has done just that. If he hadn’t, it would have been the same stories told the same way and I personally didn’t want that.

The Space Age is said to have officially began in 1957 with Sputnik, which was nine years prior to the debut of Star Trek: TOS. Something must be said in regard to the leap in sci-fi fanfare during this time as man was coming into an age of real life space exploration and this show was the inspiration for much of the fascination with space exploration and modern technology we take for granted today. ST:TOS was cutting edge for its time with wireless handheld communicators, wireless headpieces, pneumatic doors, portable computers, artificial intelligence, two way communication screens, needle-less injections and portable medical scanners. Guess what? We have all of those things as a reality today. Back then, our reality was Science Fiction and we’ve come a long way indeed. So, how do we take things that seemed so cool and FAR OUT (I know I’m dating myself) and make them new and fresh and hip to today’s audience?

I think JJ Abrams had no choice but to do things the way he did to make the concept and the imagery relevant to today’s audience, much to the chagrin of diehard Trekkies. There’s a reason that the deck of the Enterprise looks like the inside of an Apple store as opposed to how it looked on the show…relatability! Today’s generation knows what the Apple store looks like inside and they get excited by being there, a replica of the ST:TOS set…not so much. Abrams had to make the set look inviting to a new generation, while achieving a similar configuration to the original set. I would think this would be a VERY difficult undertaking to say the least (and for those whining about it, can you do any better?).

Another aspect of the lost of relevance ST:TOS is the idea of an international community. Most people 40 and over can remember a time when the world wasn’t at your fingertips and news from the other side of the world came in days, if not weeks, as opposed to seconds. Gene Roddenberry envisioned Star Trek as “Wagon Trail to the stars,” essentially a space western (is it any wonder Captain Kirk has such a cowboy-esque attitude?). He also addressed issues such as The Cold War and the Civil Rights Movement. It was very socially conscious to have a Russian and an African American (a woman no less) as main characters in the show, not to mention giving television its first interracial kiss! The show gave the world a glimpse of a world where we had moved beyond the constraints of race, creed, color, religion and even species, in an effort to be equally accepted. These were VERY hot bed issues of the time…not so much today (although, we still have a VERY LONG WAY TO GO!).

I say all of this to make the point that Abrams had to find a way to take a sci-fi franchise, steeped in past social and historical issues/relevance and relate that to a generation that had never experienced (even a little bit), what was very much a part of everyday life back then. Let’s be real, today’s kids (anyone 30 or younger) have not lived, breathed and otherwise experienced many of the struggles society had with the themes ST:TOS explored at that time. Ask them about the Cold War, the Civil Rights Movement or laws against interracial dating/marriage and you’ll likely get a blank stare as this is VERY common today.

The Star Trek franchise made another attempt in the late 90’s to revitalize itself and try to capture the spirit of ST:TOS, when they introduced a TV show called Enterprise. The show depicted the early days of Starfleet (pre Kirk) and while it resonated with some, it’s reception overall was lackluster compared to the series and movies that proceeded it. There is a reason (imho) that Enterprise failed to capture the audiences beyond a handful of seasons and was never revisited, and chief among them was it’s relatability to the audience/generation. That group of folks had grown up with Star Trek:The Next Generation as their (in some cases only) exposure to the Star Trek franchise and to quite a few of them, Enterprise was boring.

We also have to take into consideration that ST:TNG was best able to capture the audience with social issues of the time and cool technology (that had not yet been produced for public consumption). ST:TNG had holodecks, badge communicators, voice recognition software for computers, touch screen computer consoles and tablet PC’s. Kids today have all of those things now…it’s not anything to be excited about anymore and definitely not so cool and wonderful as it was in the mid 1980’s. Another thing about ST:TNG was that it didn’t have to try to establish preceding mythos of the franchise, it jumped right into the fray and won the admiration of Geekdom by providing a setting in the future , more advanced tech/weaponry, new species and special effects on par with anything the Star Trek movies ever produced.

The above opinions all work to illustrate the following: How could Hollywood take ST:TOS (a sci-fi franchise that had been struggling for years to crossover and reach larger audiences in the theaters), make it more mainstream and reach a newer, broader audience? They had to reinvent the wheel and that is a VERY difficult thing to do and impossible to please everyone in the process. I think that this is something the diehard Trekkies should take into consideration a bit more (or get their ideas at doing it better out to Hollywood). In my opinion it all boils down to taking the canon of a TV show made in the 1960’s which addressed the social and historical issues of that era, featuring technology that (about half of) is common in today’s world and making it resonate with today’s generation. A different direction had to be taken, love it or hate it, Abrams did that. He didn’t make a perfect movie(s), nor did he necessarily capture the charm and sense of wonder that ST:TOS had (although in my opinion that’s impossible), but what he did do is make films that introduced beloved characters to a new audience, took elements of the franchise and wove them into something new and relatable to said new audience. An effort which I personally salute!

In regards to the underwhelming box office numbers for the latest foray into the Star Trek franchise, I think it has far less to do with disgruntled fans of the genre and franchise, than it has to do with BOX OFFICE COMPETITION!!! With Iron Man 3(already a billion dollar franchise) having been recently released, and The Great Gatsby still at the box office, it’s no wonder (at least to me) that Star Trek didn’t earn as much as the studio had hoped. But, in all honesty, earning only 25 million short of what they wanted to see, against Iron Man 3 (a movie that had made a billion dollars already by the time Star Trek came out) was VERY impressive and respectable, imho.

In conclusion, I think that the Star Trek franchise accomplished its mission in that it:

A)Rejuvenated a beloved (but dying) sci-fi franchise while utilizing enough source material so that it wasn’t entirely foreign.

B)Reached a new audience with the summer blockbuster feel, and

C)Received enough box office receipts to be monetarily successful and competitive.

Was it a hit with everyone? Obviously not, but it did get everyone to take notice and whether you are with the new program or lamenting about the days of old, you’re doing exactly what the folks at Paramount are wanting you to do…TAKING NOTICE!

STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS FILM REVIEW COMING SOON!!!