There's been a rash of events scheduled this year for aspiring authors to meet and pitch to agents. Again, the well-meaning friends are sending me the links to these events.
I've published over eighty novels and short stories. I've sold five short stories to anthologies. I wrote a magazine column for four years. But apparently, I'm still a wannabe to my friends.
What's worse? When I was trying to get a trad publisher interested way back in the day, trying to get an appointment with an agent or an editor at a writer event was difficult, if not impossible. But now?
The event I saw for Ohio later this summer (no, I will not link to it) had nearly thirty agents. The organizers are begging for people to attend. Why the hell are all these agents making the trip to the Midwest?
Because they're desperate. Since several retailers have opened their doors to indie publishers, these agents aren't getting the slush pile they used to, much less the income from having a full stable of writers. Now days, most agencies are damn lucky to have a couple of ponies in the back yard.
Again, I know my friends mean well, but what is an agent going to do for me that I'm not already doing for myself? I have three excellent and lovely cover artists when I don't want to make the covers. I have a wonderful formatter. And the last thing I want or need is a corporate editor young enough to be my granddaughter dumbing down my stories.
Seriously, a lot of books I see on the market are repetitious and boring. And the trad houses don't get that's why they're losing so many sales. Even worse, I'm seeing a huge amount of indie writers making the same mistakes as the trad publishers.
Granted, there's no perfect method to becoming a career writer, but each writer needs to find the path that works for them. And what I'm doing right now works for me.
Regardless of what my friends think.
Someone clicked on my post from ten years ago when I learned Craig Ferguson was leaving the now gone The Late Late Show on CBS. I sometimes wonder what his thoughts on current events would be in the political chaos of the last decade.
When I'm down, I go to YouTube to play his theme song from TLLS. It still cheers me up!
Director Denis Villeneuve did the smart thing by splitting the sprawling novel into two separate films. The story is simple two massive for one two-hour movie. While Villeneuve stayed fairly true to the book in the first movie, he massively strayed from the story in Part Two.
If Villeneuve does adapt Dune Messiah as Dune 3, how is he planning to fix the problems he's created by altering some of the major storylines in Dune 2?
Problem #1: Paul's sister Alia is the one who kills Baron Harkonnen in the original Dune book. This leads to the Baron possessing Alia, which causes a lot of problems in the two sequels.
Instead, Paul is the one who kills the baron in Dune 2. Alia isn't even born before the end of the movie. Does this mean the baron has possessed Paul in the Villeneuve version? What does this mean for Alia's personality and actions if Villeneuve turns Dune into a long-running movie series?
Problem #2: Paul and Chani's first son Leto isn't born in Dune 2. The baby's death is one of the motivating factors for both Paul and Chani in the attack on the city of Arrakeen.
Again, Leto isn't conceived in Villeneuve's Dune 2, so he isn't born, much less dies. This change doesn't build the bond between Paul and Chani, one of the few things that keeps Paul grounded. In fact, Chani abandons Paul out of anger and frustration at the end of Villeneuve's Dune 2. So, how is Villeneuve planning to get them back together? The Chani he's written isn't going to just walk back into Paul's life, saying all is forgiven.
It's Paul's love for Chani that spikes Irulan's jealousy in Dune Messiah, and sets into motion another series of events. Does this mean Leto II and Ghanima won't be born in Dune 3? Their survival is the reason Paul renounces his throne and disappears.
Nitpick #1: While I'm glad Villeneuve worked in why Gurney hates the Harkonnens, I prefer seeing Rabban getting ripped apart by the civilians of Arrakeen. It's not that I would deny Gurney his revenge, but after the cruelty Rabban inflicted on the populace, it's a more satisfying ending to me.
Generally, I don't have a problem with minor changes or the removal of subplots in movie or TV adaptations of books. However, these a couple of major alterations that will have ripple effects in any subsequent sequels.
Part of me looks forward to seeing how Villeneuve handles the story with such major revisions. Another part worries Dune 3 will suck because Villeneuve didn't think his changes through.
Overall, the stunning visuals and performances still elevate Dune 2 above many other movies in current release at the theaters. I give it 9 out of 10 stars,
Yep, I'm trying to get the dang taxes done. The worst part is reconciling all the medical stuff. I try to keep up every year, but invariably, what the Flex Spending Account says we spent and what Quicken says we spent are two different things.
So, don't expect a whole lot from me for the next 5-7 days. DH and I did see Dune 2, so I'll try to put up a review on Monday. Initial thought--the cinematography is fabulous! Definitely worth seeing on the big screen.
Scratch that. I need a lot of stress relief.
I'm not getting any alone time. Unless I'm asleep. Even then, I have other entities in bed with me.
Anyone know of any car shows I can send DH to for a week? Or even a long weekend?
Or maybe I can send him overseas with GK.
Goddess, I miss the days when DH was gone for months at a time because of his job!
