A Jewcy Assignment

While I was away, my brother Tod actually got paid to read Harry Potter fanfiction…and he lived to write about it for Jewcy.com.

I haven’t read much fan fiction over the years; saddled as I’ve been with student writing, I figure reading stories about Kirk and Spock gang-banging a Romulan cum slut or Scooby and Scrappy taking it to a whole new level with "Scooby snacks" probably won’t enrich my life much. But it’s summer, and I’ve got some time.

What he found is absolutely hilarious…

Catching up

I finally saw LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD and BOURNE ULTIMATUM.  DIE HARD was over-the-top, by-the-numbers, and dull. BOURNE ULTIMATUM was fresh, invigorating, and exciting…I loved it. I wish more movies were as smart and exciting as the BOURNE trilogy.  The geek in my can’t wait to get ULTIMATUM on DVD so I can watch all three movies back-the-back in one sitting (as if I will ever have the time for that).

I also caught up with the last five episodes of THE SOPRANOS. They were definitely a big improvement over last season’s episode, a real return to form dramatically and comedicly for the series. But like everyone else, I don’t really get the point of the abrupt ending that felt more like a technical/broadcasting error than a scripted, dramatic moment.

Next on my Tivo… JESSE STONE: SEA CHANGE and the last five episodes of the season of HEROES and LAW AND ORDER: SVU.

Some Velvet Morning

I was saddened to learn today that Lee Hazlewood, one of my favorite singer-songwriters (and guilty pleasures), has passed away. He was famous for his work with Nancy Sinatra ("These Boots Are Made for Walking," "Summer Wine," etc.), but for me, his best stuff was the obscure albums he recorded after Nancy and during his years in Sweden. Even his bad songs were strangely interesting. I’m going to miss him.

The New York Times Publishes Morons

Craig Mazin beat me to the punch and perfectly skewers Brooks Barnes’ inane editorial about TV & movie residuals in The New York Times. Barnes starts off by saying:

Jasper Johns isn’t paid based on the number of years his flag paintings remain popular attractions at museums. Rem Koolhaas doesn’t cash a check every time an architecture fan takes a trip to Seattle to see his space-age public library. So why should the writers, directors and actors responsible for box-office bombs like “Gigli” be able to pocket some cash every time somebody buys the DVD?

That just gives you a hint of the stupidity to come.  Barnes doesn’t seem to grasp the difference between looking and selling. If someone wants to reproduce Johns’ painting in prints or t-shirts, Johns gets a royalty.

Unfortunately, this is only the beginning of Barnes’ idiotic rant which Craig does a wonderful job skewering, point by point. I just hope Craig sent his post the the NY Times as well.

LiveJournal Pounces on Potter “Slash”

CNet reports that LiveJournal has created an uproar by deleting blogs that feature  sexually explicit drawings of Harry Potter doing the nasty with other men.

The users’ journal entries contained "drawings depicting minors in explicit sexual situations," which represented a violation of LiveJournal’s policies, according to copies of the letters posted by their recipients.

In ponderosa121’s case, the offending image depicted an unclothed Harry Potter of ambiguous age receiving oral sex from sometimes-villain Severus Snape.

[…]the latest episode has fanfic devotees once again encouraging livid LiveJournal users to switch to "clone" sites in protest and to register their discontent through feedback emails.

Predictably, and laughably, the irate fanficcers are trying to equate Harry Potter porn with larger social issues in an effort to gain mainstream support. Good luck. The blog Darkside Rainbow says:

now users are wondering: who’s next? Will a mother be suspended for posting pictures of her baby’s first bath? Will a gay male be suspended for posting a photograph or even a drawing of himself and his boyfriend kissing? Will a closeted lesbian be suspended for using LiveJournal as a safe haven to discuss her erotic thoughts about other women? Will artists and writers be censored in their creativity because LiveJournal believes that writing or drawing about an act – be it sex, violence, etc. – construes endorsing and promoting it?

I don’t know what’s scarier…that these idiots can’t see the difference between Potter Porn and a picture of a mother bathing her child…or that the so-called "artists" of the Potter Porn are considered "respected members of the fanfic community."

Handselling Joe

I was standing in line at my local Barnes & Noble when I witnessed an amazing thing: A woman was buying several mysteries, and as the salesguy was ringing her up, he asked: "Have you read J.A. Konrath?"

She said no, she’d never heard of him, and that’s when the salesguy pointed to a stack of Konrath books right there on the counter.

"This writer is amazing," The salesguy said. "I sent him an email and told him so…and look what he did." The sales guy picked up a book and pointed proudly to a blurb on the back.

"That’s me!" the guy said.

"Wow," the woman said. And bought the book.

The saleguy did it with the next customer, too. And sold another one of Joe’s books.

I was stunned. It was hand-selling in action…and positive proof that Joe’s unique approach to promoting himself and his books works. I told the guy that I knew Joe and that I’d let him know about the salesguy’s hard work.

"Great," the saleguy said. "Would you like to buy a copy?"

Now I’m wondering if Joe is also paying a commission…

A Lulu from Lulu

Publisher’s Weekly reports this week that Lulu.com is,and I quote, "Turning Bad Books Into Big Bucks."

"We publish a huge number of really bad books," admitted Bob Young, the Canadian entrepreneur who founded the digital publisher Lulu.com in 2002.

He doesn’t care whether the books he publishes are are good or bad. His job is to play on the ego and despiration of aspiring authors who are eager to see their unpublished (and usually unpublishable) manuscripts printed in book form so they can delude themselves into thinking they have been published. Lulu, like most vanity presses, makes the vast majority of their money on authors, not readers. 

Andrew Pate, Lulu’s vp of global fullfillment (now there’s an interestig professional title….I wonder if his wife agrees with it?), provides a statistic that puts Lulu’s business into sharp perspective: 80% of their orders are for ONE copy of a book. Can you guess who is buying that copy? The author, of course.

"Retail is still a low percentage of sales," said Pate. About one million people have signed on as members, with about 60% of those buying an item from the site and 40% using the site to create a product.

The company is heading towards revenue of $30 million this year

Back in the USA

I got back to the U.S. late Sunday after nearly four months in Europe and it feels good, though I was wide-awake at 4 a.m. this morning.

I’ve already starting wading through the unbelievable mountain of mail I’ve accumulated while I was away…it’s like the back room of the post office. It’s also like Christmas…the boxes I’ve opened so far include maybe 100 Emmy screeners, some copies of the Polish editions of my MONK books, and stuff I forgot that I ordered on Amazon, DeepDiscount DVD, and eBay.

But I am not stowing my suitcases just yet.  I’ll be returning to Germany in about four weeks to finish post-production on FAST TRACK and to be a keynote speaker at the Cologne Conference 2007, along with guys like Steve Bochco and Paul Haggis. And I may be hitting the road with Action Concept’s international sales team to help secure worldwide presales for FAST TRACK in advance of the broadcast of the pilot in Germany (which will happen some time before the end of the year).