Cover Art

So I was recently reading through the blog and Facebook page of fellow blogger Matthew Quinn, and he has been making some excellent observations and notes regarding the writing industry. Recently he made a number of good points about cover art.

Cover art is essential for any story. Think about it, one may write an excellent story but without a catchy title and some flashy cover art it is all but impossible to grab the attention of potential buyers. Cover art can almost be as important as the story itself. It's been said that first impressions are the most lasting, and if someone does not get a good first impression of your book then they simply won't even pick it up.

I'm going to look at some bits of cover work and examine them to give people an idea of what can be good for cover work and get people's attention, and then examine some terrible cover art which should best be left on the drawing board.

First is Mr. Quinn's upcoming e-book Melon Heads.

At first glance it is simple, yet engrossing. We have a good title which leads potential buyers to question what it is about. The style is eye grabbing and also let's us know this is a work of horror with what must be a rather unique creature set. In one glance we get genre, ideas, and interest. Effective as advertising as it leads to great potential for people to pick it up. I for one am buying this book and I would encourage readers to do so as well.

So for another bit of the horror (or more comedic) genre we have Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

This of course is the first film poster, but on the most recent mass market paper bound copy I purchased it was also the cover art. At a glance we have a moon lit scene with a shadow shrouded Lincoln with his signature hat at a jaunty angle. We get a view of his signature weapon from the book and a basic idea of what he is doing. Again it is informative, a good visual and gives the reader an idea of what to expect.

Moving on to a more recent mainstream selection we have Stephen King's most recent novel 11-22-63.

Now we know first off that this is a Stephen King novel (his name is larger than the title) and under that we see the image of JFK and a newspaper article proclaiming him slain in Dallas. This of course is not very informative and leaves readers wondering what exactly the book is about. It of course grabs attention and encourages someone to pick it up. The main selling point though is the authors name which will grab any longtime fans immediate attention.

Now here's one by one of my favorite authors. David Weber.

The first book in the grand Honor Harrington series. Simple cover, shows off the science fiction aspects of the story and of course we have the famous authors name. We get a good look at the main character and even some visual ideas of the general uniforms of people in the series.

I've been examining the cover art for various science fiction stories in order to formulate a rough idea of what I think would be an appropriate cover for my Service to the State series. More on that later.

Now for bad cover art we have a culprit none other than SM Stirling.

I've always been rather disgusted with the cover work for the Emberverse series. While it grabs attention it has always been rather tacky and generic, doesn't give you any idea of what is going on in the stories and has some ridiculous elements in it. For instance the two draft horse pulling the bus up there (a bus which, as my friend noticed still has its lights running). The series is a constant repeat offender of this and I sincerely wish Stirling would find a different cover artist.

Yet another is Micheal Z. Williamson

This book is marginally related to his Freehold verse. The title is rather awful, gives you no idea of what is going on and depends on a scantily clad woman to attaract attention. In any respect that is a sign of poor work and a desperate grab at the male audience.

So some good some bad. I think that a writer looking for good cover art should have a snappy visual, an intriguing title and of course a good story behind it. Good cover art should have images directly related to the story at hand, not something eye grabbing just because it looks cool. For instance if your writing a story about a starship captain stranded in space don't have your cover image of a man in a spacesuit standing on an alien planet. Nor should you put a picture of an alien in it just because you think it looks cool. Make the cover art about your story, not just another picture of a scantly clad woman.

So in pondering on cover art for Service to the State and for the first book I have decided I would like to find someone who could attempt to illustrate the male and female leads (Jessica and Laurent) in front of a generic world image. Since there are space battles in the book perhaps have an exploding ship in the background (rule of cool after all dear readers). I think with a snappy title and good visuals that would draw potential readers in.

So with this look at cover art and my thoughts on the subject I once again bid you adieu until next time readers, and return to writing my own stories.

The Weapon, By Micheal Z Williamson

Now as readers here should know I have already reviewed Williamson's first novel Freehold in which I gave middling marks as it was a good debut story and one which I had liked and looked forward to reading. Knowing it was his first novel I had decided to give his other works a look over. While I highly reccomend him, especially to anyone with libertarian views on the world or anyone that likes military sci-fi, I am skeptical of reccomending this book at all. I will endeavor to adequetely explain why.

The story is set both before and during the events of Freehold and is a sort of sequel, but I really more like S.M. Stirling's Tears of the Sun in explaining events that happened simultaniously in Freehold but follows a once mentioned character.

The Weapon follows Freehold operative Kenneth Chinran who is a badass motherf**ker and wants the whole galaxy to know it. We begin following his gruelling training to enter the special forces of the Freehold. These montages (unlike the ones in Freehold) are well placed and flow fluidly and actually give depth to the plot as they describe the harsh and demanding process which it takes to become a special forces soldier. There are a few jabs at the squeamish UN observers, but in this case they also work quite well as it shows that anyone who disgaree's with this harsh training doesn't know how to make a special forces operative. Mind you I do know some of the training that goes into making a special ops soldier and the standard the Williamson sets is rather...harsh by comparison and might fly in the face of what a civilian government would be willing to allow. Then again that is the point he is trying to make.

But back on track the story follows his training, his years as an operative, and some engagements that his forces get themselves involved in coupling with their eventual great mission; to attack Earth.

The Good:

The story does follow a believable spec ops training cycle, missions and actions that special forces operatives would be sent to engage in. It shows them taking on terrorists, training with other governments and practicing with their own forces. All something that goes in real life.

Williamson also explores the galaxy at large, something I enjoyed, and does some creative world building in the effort. There are a few planets with distinct cultures that are shown wonderfully and also their militaries. One world we spend a great deal of time looking at is Caledonia, a planet settled by the British. I enjoyed the look into their culture and the examination of their military views and society. Brits in space basically but it read well and as a Brit lover myself I was happy with it.

Then he describes the conflict on Mtali, a major backstory component in the first book, and gives depth to the war and the people who fought there. This is something I was glad of, for it was only sketchily mentioned in the previous novel.

The Bad:

Unfortunately I have a lot to criticize with the book.

One thing of course which I will get out of the way now is that I don't agree with the books politics, but as an open minded reader and person in general I am willing to let that slide. What I cannot let slide is the outright hyporcrasy of the main character.

Also, Kenneth Chinran is not nor will his character in this book ever be a likable person who can be forgiven for his actions. The man is also a hypocrite through and through and should be tried for multiple counts of murder, and not to mention the various war crimes he commited. The man thinks he is a badass and acts as though he is superior to everyone else while treating himself as nearly God incarnate by being judge, jury, and executioner in all aspects of his mission. Emphasis on executioner.

One of his first missions is to hunt down a terrorist who killed a small child and the passengers of a space liner. He and his team proceed to do so and capture (quite amazingly on the first try) the head terrorist and his compatriots. Chinran then proceeds to torture and mutilate the man within an inch of his life and castrate him. This not only doesn't prompt any retaliation by the terrorists at all but in fact ensures no other Freehold civilians are attacked by these terrorists! Amazing!

My suspension of disbelief is still intact by this point, but I'm sad to say that doesn't last long.

We then move on to Caledonia, one of the most interesting venues in the book, where we have some low level spy activity and training with the allies of the Freehold. Unsurprisingly Chinran and his team proceed to thoroughly trounce the forces of an entire base only to end up in a messy hostage situation before being wiped out by an SAS (yes I said SAS) response team, but not before killing half the response team of course. So yes it proves the operatives are dangerous individuals and can go on dangerous rampages just because they have superior training, and come from a heavier gravity world. All reasonable but the fact that save for being massacred by the SAS at the end they manage to pull everything off without a hitch is ridiculous to me.

Then of course comes Mtali. The first chapter describing it goes into a long hateful and racist (incredibly so) rant about how Muslims (specifically Sunni and Shia) are evil raping, murdering, war mongering, and genocidal bastards. Also Baptists (sorry an off-shoot of them) are just as bad. There probably isn't a single religion (except paganism) which isn't listed or mocked in a certain way. I was personally disgusted by the rant and how narrow minded and stereotypical it was. I could forgive this as something of a character flaw or so, but it was astoundingly uncessesary and I couldn't help but feel the authors own personal prejudice seaping into it. It was shocking, offensive, and not well written which simply added salt to the wound. And of course by this point Chinran is still perfect.

But the long and short of it is this. Mtali is basically a stand in for war torn Africa or even some part of the Middle East, but mostly Africa. You see the Freehold Military Forces (FMF) are sent to partake in peace keeping (read making) operations. Yes he details his approach to this, but not before completely breaking my suspension of disbelief. You see when they land they are met by US Marines, that's right United States Marines from a world dominated by the UN. Chinran then proceeds to intimidate them. Ladies and gentlemen we are five hundred years in the future and the world is controlled by the UN but the US Marine Core is still standing strong! Hoo-rah! This I found as an unforgivable destruction of the suspension of disbelief, as you cannot convince me that US Marines are still in operation under the same name or colors on a UN dominated Earth! Give me a break!

Then of course we have Chinran's treatment of the locals. Here we are treated to an unflattering display of how Sunni Arabs are filthy and live in their own garbage and go out of their way to antagonize the FMF. Chinran, in what doubtless in his mind constitues a Napoleon-esque strategy, orders his soldiers to act like animals. They urninate and deficate in the streets, harrass Muslims, and dump loads of garbage whever they feel like it. They also preform admirably by encouraging the locals to attack them then kill them. This becomes their routine until (thanfully in reference to realism) Chinran is over confident and someone slips and gets killed.

Now in real life this would result in an inquiry about Chinrans operations and why after such a long period of success he managed to incur a casualty and why he screwed up. He would also be withdrawn from the field and replaced, as in all likelihood his unit would not be fit for combat.

But no Chinran proceeds to perpetrate a war crime while his commander looks the other way. He massacres the entire village down to the elderly, the women, and the children. His excuse? It will prevent further reprisals, and the kids would have just grown up to extremists anyways.

This incurs no repercussions whatsoever. On a planet where the modus operandi is vengeance for killing others no group carries out a revenge raid against the Freehold forces, no group turns to a less risky insurgency tactic and no one bothers to prosecute Chinran for war crimes. What is worse is that this is presented as not only the right thing, but a solution that works. Unfortunately history has shown us this is not the case, as massacring a single village has never reduced the overall determination of an insurgency. From Ghengis Khan, to Napoleon to Hitler, massacring villages has never worked. Oh it did work for Ghengis Khan, but that was because he would kill everyone who opposed him.

From this point on I could not sympathise, care or even root for Chinran. When you hate a books main character this will somewhat ruin the book for you.

To sum up, Chinran then participates in the war where he carries out the master stroke attack against Earth and resorts to the terrorist tactics he mocked and loathed earlier in the book. Instead of realising he's a hypocritical mass murderer who shouldn't be proud of what he's done, he has a daughter and tries to rationalise his actions. Instead of a good book about he who fights monsters and the consequences this entails or what one must do to survive, we end up with a broken aesop critique of terrorism, and then its outright glorification as a necessity, which the author makes worse by justifying it in a section at the end!

Chinran had the possibility of being an interesting, well developed and sympathetic character who goes from the moral high ground, to questioning why he fights and what lengths he is willing to go to in order to keep his nation safe. Instead we have an unlikable jerk who cheefully commits war crimes and genocide but justifies it because 'it is for a just cause'.

Bullshit Mr. Chiran, bullshit and you know it. In fact you said so yourself many times. His character had potential, but he didn't grow from that potential! Even though he seemed nervous, and somewhat repetent after helping kill six billion people I couldn't care less about him. All I remembered was the village of Sunni's he gleefully slaughtered back on Mtali and then every action regardless of his feelings seemed normal. His regret was pitiful and impossible to sympathize with. The man was a monster plain and simple.

The Verdict.

Great potential, but a massive disapointment. The point could have been made better, the actions (especially those in the earlier parts of the book) less glorified, and the main character less of a psychopath that the reader couldn't sympathise with.

It reads somewhat like a John Ringo novel, but fails to capture its essence and instead of a regular or good soldier we get a murderer.

In the end I could not like this book no matter how much I liked the authors previous book. I will still read some other works in the hopes that he has improved since then. But I cannot in good standing reccomend that anyone read this book. Despite some pleasurable moments I was left with raging stomach pains after digesting this monster.

0.5 stars out of 5.

The Pagans!

Now aside from the slightly inflamatory title this is not a hate piece, but rather a short opinion piece regarding my views on the subject. You see in a recent browsing of the internet I came upon a few pagan sites, as well as discussions in which Christians quite ruthlessly bashed pagans for being 'devil worshipers' and 'idolitors' which I found extremely disapointing. So here I intend to set the record straight on 1) my own view of paganism 2) why the 'Christians' here were acting unacceptable and 3) what Christians should do in these kind of situations.

Now to begin Neopaganism (or contemporary paganism) is in essence a recreation of old pre-Christian religious traditions by modern groups. This is really an umbrella term as it can describe anything from Wiccanism, Adonism, or Radical Faeries. These are diverse movements that can encompass almost any form of pre-Christian belief, generally trying to capture the old timey feel of the pagan religion from before the time of Christianity in pre-modern Europe. So pinning down the movement for any one defining feature is difficult at best, and like trying to give a cat a bath at worst. Though they do share some elements such as polytheism, animism, and pantheism. So one could end up in a group which believed that Zues was the king of the gods and his brother Thor wished to stoke our warrior spirits to gain energy for the gods or something like that. Mind you most groups do have a definate theology and a series of complex and traditional rituals. This means that unlike some would like to think these groups are very well organized and have a fully functioning system and a solid set of beliefs. The set ideas will inevitably vary wildly from group to group though so one should not be surprised if they go to one Wiccan group that has one set of ideas about morality then to another which has entirely different ones.

With that I begin to offer my own view on the subject. Being originally a country boy from a very small conservative community I admittedly have had little to do with any large pagan groups nor have I seen much in the way of practicing paganism. Though growing up I did meet many teenagers who were *ahem* 'practicing pagans' which meant anything from belief in animal spirits to asking Thor for guidance, as well as one kid who believed he was a vampire. Now this was interesting (though in some cases hilarious since it was evident these kids had no idea what they were talking about), but really had nothing to offer on the subject. Now I have met some true practicing pagans and they really are quite nice people and very agreeable to be around. Can't really say anything bad about them, nor did they seem to bear me any ill will for being a Christian, nor did I really bear them any ill will for being pagans. On my own I am generally disinterested in the subject and mostly regard it as interesting and beyond looking into it out of curiosity have never felt that there is much interesting in the movement outside of sociological study and historical trends.

The 'ressurected' forms of long dead polytheistic religions dreamed up by the spiritualists of the early 20th century does have a fascinating significance as a social movement though. The spiritualists themselves were men disenchanted with the normal religious values of the time and  thought that a greater 'spirit world' was out there. The movement was extremely large in the aftermath of WW1 and gained great following well into the 30's and 40's of the last century. Though it largely ceased to fascinate the public thanks to many members of the movement being exposed as petty con artists (those of the crystal ball variety, remember that) many actually went on to write about interactions with Hectate, Odin, and what have you. This did gain some popularity and as evident by this article has survived as a fringe movement to today. It is one of the very interesting, if overlooked, effects of the Great War in that Western Culture was so shocked by its barbarity and furiosity that so many different religious and political movements evolved from those crazy times. I think that it was one of the more interesting (and far less bloody) items to pop up.

Now I think anyone who has read anything by Micheal Z Williamson or S.M. Stirling will no doubt have had some fictional Wiccans  shoved in front of them, I think that as literary characters they are perfectly wonderful and offer some variety. Though some of their 'values' (considering that each of the above authors likes to focus on the sexually loose idea of Wiccans for some reason) are jarring to me personally, they are quite fun.

But I digress and continue to the reason for this post. I stumbled across an online discussion where members of certain evangelical Christian sects were quite happily insulting the beliefs of some Neopagans for a contrived reason (having to do with military religious rites) and saying such lovely things as 'suffer not a witch to live' or 'devil worshipers burn in hell' and other such intellectually vacant remarks. While the 'suffer not a witch to live' is a direct Biblical quote it misses the point that 'witch' in that context is basically one of thise crystal ball hoaxers who tricks people out of money or attempts to curse someone with magic. Hence why a 'curse' earned a death sentence in the Old Testament. Applying this to modern pagan groups is, well, erroneous at best, and completely ignorant at worst.

Now the Christians here were saying that military service members who were worshiping pagans should not be allowed to use the military chapel as they weren't really religious apparently. Now I personally am indifferent to what a pagan group does or where they worship (unless it's in my basement) and feel that the argument is absurd here. A military chapel is available to all service members regardless of belief. Though the majority may be Christian this does not mean they get a monopoly on the use of a government installation, which is what a military chapel is. The name calling and insulting were completely uncalled for and patently ridiculous. There was no reason for those actions. As Christians they were 100% in the wrong. Christ never suggested we go out and harrass those of other beliefs. He suggested that we love our neighbors regardless of creed or belief and instead focus on spreading the Word. In this case words were exchanged and they were absolutely the wrong ones. I don't care if these people are Wiccans, atheists or practicing Satanists, they deserve the use of that chapel as it was not a private facility and was set up so members of all faiths could have time to worship. This is not exclusively the right of Christians in the military.

Mind you, this issue was going on in the US so as  Canadian I am a 100% outside observer. I have respect for military veterans and servicemen and seeing members of the military insulted and looked down on for simply not having the right religious ideas is something which makes my blood boil. They are serving their nation and being insulted and belittled just because they are not among the majority is ridiculous! We as Christians are supposed to be tolerant of one another and accept each other despite our faults and disagreements! Not go on some petty vendetta because you feel that they are 'devil worshipers'. The actions of these so called 'Christians' here left me disgusted and appaled.

Here is what a Christian should do in this sort of situation. Firstly realise that a) this is a government run facility and that the country is not a theocracy where one religion has a monopoly so you can't say that the 'devil worshipers' are not allowed to use the chapel, b) BE TOLERANT, Christ did no go around belittling those who did not believe or held different ideas to him. In fact those He did belittle were the religious authorities of the time and those who had seen miracles yet still did not believe c) we as Christians have to love our neighbors regardless of who they may be. Yes I said have to, in fact it is what the Lord commands us to do. Sermon on the Mount anyone? If we don't act tolerant, loving and caring towards those who believe differently how are we to emulate Christ or show people the way? Christ didn't make converts by attacking people, He made them by caring for them. d) when interacting with pagans or those of other faiths be polite, repectfully disagree with their views, discuss your own, and of course wish them well! It is what you should hope for after all.

I encourage Christians out there to remember this! If you wish to spread the Word remember why you are spreading it! John 3:16 people, that's why.

Freehold by Micheal Z Williamson: A Review

Though it may seem that this blog is becoming something of a review site I am mostly reading books that are interesting and don't exactly conform to my own political views which makes them both interesting reads, and important learning material for an author. It can help an author avoid littering their work with his or her own political beliefs. And while Freehold is an author tract, it doesn't exactly read like one, which is why im comparison to my previous review of the book "Enemies Foreign and Domestic" this stands out as a superb example of how one can avoid serious author tract and write well at the same time. So I feel that it is important to follow up a resoundingly bad novel with a, while not A grade material, a novel that is still miles ahead of the previous work I read. So without further preamble I present to you Freehold.

The Story:

Set in the 26th Century we are treated to the view of Earth after it has been united under the administration of the UN as a one world government. We have a brief, well done and to the point opening describing the main character Kendra Pacelli and her mundane and mainly bureaucratic role in the UN Protection Forces. As the novel begins she has just returned from Mtali (a world divided by a multi-sided civil war) and is returning to her mundane job in the megacenter of Minneapolis. However, she is alerted by a guard and former lover that she is going to be arrested and interrogated regarding a scheme which involved selling millions of dollars worth of war material to the competing sides on Mtali. Kendra, having been involved with the logistics unit which the material was from is going to be rounded up with many others. She flees and in the midst of the investigation decides to run to the only planet where the UN cannot reach her, the Freehold of Grainne. After forcing her way into the embassy she is granted asylum and sent to Freehold where she becomes immersed in the society and deals with both her own struggles of getting used to Freehold and with the looming threat of the UN coming after her and the Freehold itself.

The Good:

The story is reasonably well paced and only drags at some inopportune moments. The characters are well fleshed out and believable and rarely the type of cardboard cut out caricature's that ideological rants usually present (Atlas Shrugged, Enemies Foreign and Domestic) people as. Rob Mckay, the books main love interest, is an interesting example. He is a typical Freehold man who is polite but extremely forward in his approach and has some grope happy moments but is otherwise an ok guy. He is a military veteran and has many friends because he 'saved their ass on Mtali' which shows a connection between society and the military in a pleasant way, Kendra herself has to go through almost 400 pages of a learning curve when she gets to the Freehold and never does get quite used to it and the culture shock is written well and very believable. It is attacked from all angles and it shows you how really alien this society would be. I liked that Williamson emphasized this fact instead of, as many authors do, simply assume that society will always be familiar and much like the 21st Century Western World (or mostly America) as we know it. It made for good friction between the characters and for excellent plot points.

As for its ideological tract the novel is not in your face about it. Naturally the society is portrayed as superior to Earth's for a variety of reasons. But it strikes you as a (somewhat) believable society that is fun to read about and interesting to examine, and might be one that a few people would want to live in. I'm not one of those people, but to each his own.

Then we have the character dialogue which is well done and thankfully actively focuses on the plot as much as it does the ideological talking points. Each character is fleshed out and given some screen time to establish their ideas and views on a particular situation. There is even one heartbreaking scene which shows a soldier from the UN with similar values to Kendra later on in the novel who you can actually feel sorry for and emphasize with, a rarity in most idelogical rants.

Then we have the brilliantly written battle scenes. Williamson puts you right in the thick of the fray and makes each individual firefight a gripping experience and has a well done great big battle near the end. I literally could not put the book down during this point and stayed up a considerable portion of the night finishing it. So points to him there for sure. War is described in the most brutal and unflattering of terms so I enjoy the fact it is not glorified and the intellectual honesty of the author on that front.

The Bad:

Unfortunately the book doesn't get a complete pass. While I understand this was his first novel there were some bits that were completely uncessesary. For instance the middle of the book consists of what seems to be the obligatory boot camp montage in great detail for over a dozen chapters. It was well done but it still seemed needlessly detailed and stretched out. If this were a book completely dedicated to military science fiction (ala Starship Troopers) then I would be more understanding, but it is not and thus the scenes were long, somewhat boring and had effectively little to do with the plot at large. I was irked by these after the swift beggining and pace up till that point. It is stated that this intense training is different from the UN, but this could have been shorter. Similarily with the obligatory sex scenes that seemed to pop up out of no where. Kendra is seduced inside a week by Rob and is having threesomes with another character, Marta, by the end of the first quarter. Kendra has had sex before but is portrayed both as unused to lesbianism and as a practicing Catholic to boot. They seemed more devoted to just pointless sex for emphasising the 'free love' ideology of the Freehold rather than anything else.

Speaking of Marta, this character seems to embody the worst about Freehold society. She is completely intolerant of any society other than her own, has a moral superiority complex, and is extremely naive. Marta, like many Freeholders, is completely convinced of of the moral superiority of her society and many times she seems to stop just short of reffering to other cultures as barbaric. Many other Freeholders hold a notion of themselves as being superior to other cultures and lay ridiculous criticisms on the representatives of other worlds. As author tract goes this is insulting to the reader and is especially annoying when the Freeholders criticize societies for not coming to their aid when they explicitly mention that other planets have no ability to intervene militarily. So any criticism seems hollow at best and petty at worst.

And unfortunately the UN is portrayed as evil almost exclusively for the sake of being evil and antagonistic towards anyone else with values other than their own. While I can agree on the point that too much berueacracy is a bad thing, and to much political correctness would have horrible effects on society I just can't find the incredibly polite, sexually sensitive, and almost pacifist (since most UN soldiers and people respond with horror to the idea of killing people) society as one willing to engage in the kind of imperialism that the UN attempts to enforce. They made for poor villains but it still gave a narrowly defined enemy for the reader to wish defeated. The other villain of the series, Tom Calan is just as poorly characterized and ironically highlights the extreme mercenary attitude that would most likely be prevalent in Freehold society. That of an extremely cuthroat and the ability to hold a grudge. He is simply badly portrayed and is genuinely uninteresting to read about, much like any unsypathetic secondary character.

I could go into other critiques of the Freehold system and various political ideas but that is not really applicable here.

In the end the book is a good read and I did enjoy it minor issues aside. It is good science fiction even with the ideological motivation. Libertarian science fiction would probably describe it best. Although jarring at points it is still a good read and I recommend it to anyone looking for a bit of easily read escapist science fiction. All in all I give it three point five stars out of five.

An aside:
The best part is one does not even have to buy the book as it was published by Baen and can be read for free online or downloaded as a PDF and is available here:
http://www.baenebooks.com/p-162-freehold.aspx