Comments for Clotho's Loom, by Shawn StJean

Comment on The “D”[iCaprio] Really Should Be Silent: Jackson’s Invisibility in Django by shawnst

shawnst — Mon, 13 May 2013 23:56:08 +0000

Not my most uncontroversial post, I’m sure. My point about Jackson is that he was overacting–on one level, and _within_ the film, playing the role of the “house nigger”–and that below that, the “real” personality of Stephen peeks through in odd moments. And if the two sometimes seem inseparable–well, as Hawthorne put it, A man cannot long show one face to the world and keep another to himself without forgetting which is the true.

This interpretation takes us away from any subjective evaluations of the different actors and toward Tarantino’s concerns over character.

Comment on The “D”[iCaprio] Really Should Be Silent: Jackson’s Invisibility in Django by Alana Woods

Alana Woods — Mon, 13 May 2013 21:22:11 +0000

Shawn, I haven’t seen the film so can’t offer my opinion on it but, like Emily, I disagree with you about Dicaprio — always loved him and think he just keeps getting better. However, as ever, I really like the thought and depth of your article.

Comment on The “D”[iCaprio] Really Should Be Silent: Jackson’s Invisibility in Django by emilymcdaid

emilymcdaid — Mon, 13 May 2013 17:46:00 +0000

I disagree Shawn! I think Dicaprio was amazing in that role and I think Jackson overacted his. For this reason I believe the Academy was in the right. (For once). In Jackson’s defense I’m sure the overacting was Tarantino’s idea/make. But all we need do is see how horrible of an actor Tarantino himself is — he gave himself WAY too big a role in this movie — to see where the flaw in that equation is.

Comment on “Static”: Synthesizing Bad Reviews by Alana Woods

Alana Woods — Mon, 06 May 2013 10:33:27 +0000

I’m about to tweet it as the most controversial novel of 2012!

Comment on “Static”: Synthesizing Bad Reviews by shawnst

shawnst — Mon, 06 May 2013 09:28:37 +0000

Glad to hear it! Press on. . .

Comment on “Static”: Synthesizing Bad Reviews by Rachel Creager Ireland

Rachel Creager Ireland — Mon, 06 May 2013 03:19:16 +0000

I’m really loving it, and about halfway through. I just hope I can write a review worthy of the subject. I’m one of those people who would see “reads like complex history and literature” and “sensory overload” as reasons to buy a book, regardless of how many stars were associated with the review.

Comment on “Static”: Synthesizing Bad Reviews by lgould171784

lgould171784 — Sun, 05 May 2013 16:28:34 +0000

If you wrote the kind of book you enjoy reading, you did well, regardless of what anybody else thinks. “Reviewers” who obviously didn’t bother to finish reading the book should be written off as trolls. Their only purpose is to keep you from succeeding if they can.

Comment on Issues for Indie Authors: What’s in a Title? Your Novel’s Future. . . by Emily McDaid

Emily McDaid — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 13:16:34 +0000

I don’t think your first point was fair: that authors don’t think about their titles. I think a far more accurate statement would be they overthink them. I surveyed many people about titles recently, and the overwhelming opinion was that one-word titles are the preference, not titles that have some kind of half-rhyme or longer phrase. (Which are fine if we’re talking about paperbacks). But if it’s an ebook we’re talking about, one word or two words is all a reader will be able to see on a thumbnail. I never click the thumbnail if I can’t read the title. It is one of my biggest pet peeves. Also, I think cliched phrases like ‘The Last of’ make a book sound old and outdated. I thought Gone Girl was a bad title for a book that stood out from the crowd but the title makes it sound like any old mystery. I do agree with you about Jaws though.

Comment on Issues for Indie Authors: What’s in a Title? Your Novel’s Future. . . by shawnst

shawnst — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 18:47:53 +0000

To say titles are subjective does not mean titles can’t benefit from strategies to optimize or at least improve them, just like any other part/kind of writing. “Preaching” is misapplied here–I’m offering constructive suggestions, not merely decrying some evil I’ve perceived.

Comment on Issues for Indie Authors: What’s in a Title? Your Novel’s Future. . . by Emily McDaid

Emily McDaid — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 13:13:55 +0000

I am not necessarily drawn to the titles you have selected. Titles are subjective just like everything else in fiction. I think it’s important that we avoid preaching to each other as indies. We are all in this together and we’re all clueless, figuring it out. To me, the titles that Claire listed are the ones that draw me in.