I’m not going to engage in the topic of whether New Moon is a good movie or not (but if you are interested in my thoughts on it, feel free to read my review at michaelbayistheantichrist.wordpress.com).  I would though like to draw everyone’s attention to the fact that the soundtrack for New Moon is pretty damn good.  Sadly, I think I must add that this is most likely awesome for the Twilight franchise, but not so awesome for these artists’ reputations.  Whatever gets people listening to good music, right?  … Maybe.

NEW MOON SOUNDTRACK TRACK LIST
1. DEATH CAB FOR CUTIE – MEET ME ON THE EQUINOX
2. BAND OF SKULLS – FRIENDS
3. THOM YORKE – HEARING DAMAGE
4. LYKKE LI – POSSIBILITY
5. THE KILLERS – A WHITE DEMON LOVE SONG
6. ANYA MARINA – SATELLITE HEART
7. MUSE – I BELONG TO YOU (NEW MOON REMIX)
8. BON IVER & ST. VINCENT – ROSYLN
9. BLACK REBEL MOTORCYCLE CLUB – DONE ALL WRONG
10. HURRICANE BELLS – MONSTERS
11. SEA WOLF – THE VIOLET HOUR
12. OK GO – SHOOTING THE MOON
13. GRIZZLY BEAR WITH VICTORIA LEGRAND – SLOW LIFE
14. EDITORS – NO SOUND BUT THE WIND
15. ALEXANDRE DESPLAT – NEW MOON (THE MEADOW)

Maybe this video expresses how she feels about being involved with Twilight?:

Watch out, this video is themed:

I love this song:

Pay attention to the speech bubbles at the start; they are kind of funny:

Title track from the aforementioned Editors album.

Standout track from the transitional, third album that has the agression and passion to become an instant Editors classic.

Listen on Tumblr

Ok, try to picture the scene. You’d burst onto the music scene with your critically acclaimed debut album, you’d then followed that up with a shiny, well-produced second album and now you need to release a third one push up to the next level. What do you do?

Well if you’re in Editors, you break out the synths and release In This Light and On This Evening.

Unfortunately, the 80s revival doesn’t come together quite as well as planned and often lacks the power and melody of previous efforts. Lead guitars are mixed lower, drums are less intense and despite lead singer Tom Smith’s best efforts, the songs are ultimately suffocated by the need for retro sounds.

However, it’s by no stretch a bad album and it’s clear that this a band who aren’t happy to produce the same material over and over. Title track and opener In This Light and On This Evening has an aggressive, almost dirty bass that drives the song and results in what is arguably one of the finest Editors track to date and first single Papillon features an uplifting chorus that could have happily featured on more mainstream second album An End Has A Start.

Other highlights include the industrial darkness of Eat Raw Meat = Blood Drool and album high point Bricks and Mortar, one of the rarer times when the lo-fi sound really gels with the band’s passionate style.

All too often however, In This Light and On This Evening sounds incomplete and feels more like a collection of experimental demos rather than a new direction for the band.
Beneath the layers of retro noise, ballad The Boxer has a real fragility about it that is suffocated by the need for a synth at every opportunity and a lo-fi drum sound that has all the musicality of somebody sneezing.
Similarly, Walk The Fleet Road is overpowered by the use of electronics and although it doesn’t feel as forced as The Boxer, it still sounds muddy and again suffocates Tom Smith’s vocal melody.

Overall In This Light… is an album from a band in transition and is bold step, but ultimately one that doesn’t do the band the justice they perhaps deserve. It has some chilling moments of darkness and Editors should be applauded for pushing themselves and their sound in new places and nearly making it work.
Deep down inside is an impassioned beast waiting to emerge with what this album could have been, had the balance been struck.
Editors will be more successful, that’s for sure, but with In This Light and On This Evening as the necessary stepping stone, true success won’t come until next time around.

Visit them – http://www.editorsofficial.com

Or buy on iTunes

It can’t beat the recent free Mac Heist giveaway (what could?), but a new Mac software bundle does offer a lot of good applications for a steeply discounted price. The somewhat awkwardly named MacGraPhoto bundle provides seven graphics applications for the same amount that one alone would normally set you back, $39.99.

The seven apps are all new to me, but they seem to have garnered favorable reviews and even some official accolades from Apple (s aapl) itself. They also cover quite a range, meaning that no two really duplicate the functions or features of the others. Here’s a brief rundown of the apps you get in the bundle.

• GraphicConverter – Does what it says. You can open basically any image file, and then save it as another. You can also do some light editing, organize your photos, run a slide show, and automate your image processing to make working with large batches of files easier.
• Picturesque – Provides a lot of easy, 1-click or simplified image enhancement abilities. Great for those who don’t have the patience or time to learn more advanced programs like Photoshop, or who want really quick turnaround times for time sensitive activities like blogging.
• ImageFramer – Add frames to your pictures. A little weird, in my opinion, but if you’re looking for something different for your photos, this could be it.
• Funtastic Photos – Photo correction and enhancement which automatically preserves your original. Also packs a number of sharing features, and a rich print layout system.
• Graphic Designer Toolbox – Combine building blocks to create crazy new graphic effects and images. You use the unique interface to marry various elements together in a non-destructive process that is both deceptively simple and incredibly deep. Weird but cool.
• DrawIt – A vector image editor and drawing app. Tons of shapes are included in the default set, and there’s support for user-created ones, too. A nice little app that will have you creating Mac-friendly icons and more with relative ease.
• HoudahGeo – Add geolocation data to your photos. HoudahGeo lets you specify information like latitude, longitude, altitude and viewing angle in an image file’s EXIF, XMP or IPTC tags.

All of the apps included in MacGraPhoto have apparently been Apple Staff Picks except for Graphic Designer Toolbox, which won a Think Different award for graphic image editors. At the very least, you’ll probably shave a few steps off of your current process for doing light image editing by picking up the bundle. Plus, if you tell three people about the deal and they buy the pack as a result, the price of your purchase is refunded and you get it free. The bundle pricing expires in a little over five days.

Children’s Writing Mentoring Workshop

Where:  Princeton Theological Seminary - Princeton, NJ

When:  January 17th, 2010

Mentors: 

Allison Wortche, Asst. Editor, Knopf and Crown
Adriana Dominguez, Agent, Full Circle Literary
Kelly K. Smith, Senior Editor, Children’s Dept. Sterling Publishing

Cost:  SCBWI Member price: $195, Non-member price: $235

Includes:  One-on-one critique – Full Picture Book critique or the first 30 pages of novel with a synopsis with mentor, group critique, breakfast, lunch, Q&A and First Page Session.

Please note:  Due date for manuscripts is December 14th, 2009.  So sign up before you get involved in the holidays and forget.

For registration and more info go to:http://www.newjerseyscbwi.com/events/100117.shtml

Hope to see you there.  These workshops have been the catalyst for many contracts.

Kathy

In my now burgeoning capacity as an editor and adviser to other writers, I’ve been struck lately by how many writers still have issues with introducing background information into their stories. When writers create characters, it’s only natural that most of these invented people have invented histories to go along with them—it helps the characters seem more real to readers. And as with real people, those histories influence how those characters should act in the situations presented in the narrative.

The problems in stories begin when the author just lays it all out for us. In the writing business, this is known as backstory, and it’s so easy for writers to fall into the trap of delivering it when it doesn’t need to be. Writers want their readers to know and understand their characters as well as they do themselves. But is that how we learn about the personal histories of people we know in real life? Do they just sit down one day and tell us everything they’ve lived through?

Of course not.

The critic James Wood, in How Fiction Works, makes the argument that we learn about the people we know gradually, after meeting them in the middle of their lives. We discover some parts of their past, and a little more as we move forward. Even if the character in question is a story’s protagonist, the reader must learn gradually who this person really is through his/her actions and thoughts, not by having it all laid out for us in advance of the plot.

Chekhov put it another way. The following is an excerpt from an article in The Writer’s Chronicle, by Frederick Reiken:

…a Russian priest by the name of S. Shchukin, who had come to Chekhov with a manuscript of his work. Picking up the notebook, Chekhov said: “Fledgling authors should frequently do the following: bend the notebook in half and tear off the first half.”

I looked at him in amazement, Shchukin wrote.

“I am speaking seriously,” Chekhov said. “Normally beginners try to ‘lead into the story,’ as they say, and half of what they write is unnecessary. One ought to write so that reader understands what is going on without the author’s explanations, from the progress of the story, from the characters’ conversations, from their actions.”

The best advice I’ve heard regarding backstory is for writers to determine what readers need to know to make sense of the story, as well as when they need to know it.

Dumping backstory when it isn’t absolutely necessary is overkill, because readers don’t want to have everything explained, they want to participate in the story and be challenged by it.

Three songs. Three feelings. Three beats.

Adam Pasick

Publisher Atlantic Media (THE ATLANTIC, GOVERNMENT EXECUTIVE) has hired Adam Pasick as managing editor of a new digital media brand launching in early 2010 and “targeting global business executives,” per a press release.

This mysterious website came to light about two months ago when the publisher announced that Michael Kinsley, the founding editor of Slate, would serve as editor-in-chief of “a new digital media property launching in early 2010.”  A company spokesperson only admitted that it will be “a separate property under the Atlantic Consumer Media umbrella.”  And, it was not “The Atlantic Wire,” that the magazine then had just launched.  The current press release did not bring any more revelations, so – for now – the mystery continues.

Pasick was previously with Reuters, most recently as US editor of Reuters.com.

[Descargar][Escuchar en Spotify][¿No tienes Spotify?]

In This Light And On This Evening es el tercer álbum de los británicos Editors. Con él, han decidido dar un paso más allá para no encasillarse en su anterior estilo, tan criticado por ser muy similar al de otros grupos como Joy Division o Interpol, y han subido el volumen de la electrónica y disminuído el de las guitarras eléctricas.

Este nuevo álbum, lanzado el 13 de octubre de 2009, se separa del anterior modelo de guitarras electricas + épica y se sumerge en un ambiente más oscuro y profundo, un ambiente creado por una electrónica perfecta utilizada en los momentos perfectos. El primer single, y el único hasta ahora, es ‘Papillon‘, cuyo videoclip podréis ver un poco más adelante.

Tracklist:

1. In This Light And On This Evening (4:21)
2. Bricks and Mortar (6:21)
3. Papillon (5:24)
4. You Don’t Know Love (4:39)
5. The Big Exit (4:44)
6. The Boxer (4:40)
7. Like Treasure (4:52)
8. Eat Raw Meet = Blood Drool (4:53)
9. Walk The Fleet Road (3:47)
10. This House Is Full Of Noise (6:24)
11. I Want A Forest (4:01)
12. A Life As A Ghost (4:36)
13. Human (3:14)
14. For The Money (5:54)

De entrada, la primera track, la que le da nombre al disco, nos abruma con la nueva oscuridad creada por Editors en este álbum. ‘In This Light And On This Evening‘ fue inspirada, según el vocalista y letrista Tom Smith, en un cierto momento del día en el que se encontró a sí mismo mirando unos edificios de Londres, y supo que era lo más bonito que había visto en su vida, y de eso trata la propia canción. A continuación podéis ver un directo, en el que se aprecia muy bien que no son sólo buenos en el estudio, sino espectaculares en vivo también.

Poco después en el tracklist, nos encontramos con el single: ‘Papillon‘. Esta canción es la que más mantiene el parecido con los esquemas seguidos en el anterior álbum, An End Has A Start (2007).

‘You Don’t Know Love‘ es una más de las esenciales del álbum. Aquí se observa quizá mucho mejor el cambio que han dado que en el resto de tracks. La electrónica y la profundidad de la voz de Smith son claves.

A partir de ‘This House Is Full Of Noise‘, son todas bonus tracks, ésta incluída, que sólo se pudieron obtener en las tiendas de UK cuando el álbum salió a la venta. Os dejo con esta por último ya, para no extender mucho más, pero escuchadlo en Spotify al menos, que no tiene desperdicio.

November 18, 2009
Reject me, please

By Chris Rodell, a freelance writer and author who blogs at www.EightDaysToAmish.com

I’m nostalgic for the days when I used to gauge my how hard I was working by the frequency of my rejection letters. I knew I wasn’t working hard enough unless I was getting at least one rejection a day. This made sense because if the rejections were coming with regularity it meant that my stuff was being considered elsewhere and would by the law of averages produce a positive result. These days I rarely count on getting either the rejection or the positive result. It’s a Twilight Zone existence where I spend my days yelling down a long canyon and hearing no echoes. After a fun and fruitful decade as a freelance magazine writer, I’m using the godforsaken downturn in that field to sharpen and pitch four book proposals (an upmarket satirical novel, a downmarket non-fiction humor book, a memoir and a fantasy tale about how the world would be better a place if Dick Cheney was a kindly undercover superhero). The general reaction has me thinking maybe it’s time to come up with a fifth book proposal. I spend about half my time sending out fastidious query letters to agents and publishers and the other half wondering why no one bothers to respond. The obvious answer is, of course, I’m a unqualified hack and that my ideas suck.

But there is evidence to the contrary. I’ve worked with some of the snazziest magazines in the country — and I’m talking about ones that still exist and actually lived up to their commitment to pay me. My ideas have earned flattering interest from top ranked industry people who tell me my offbeat stuff’s great, but just not quite right for them. “Just keep pitching,” they say, “You’re bound to find the right person. Good luck!” So pitch I do. I pitch the way the sweaty guys in the locomotive coal pits did when they wanted the train to make it up a really steep grade. I just keep on shoveling. But despite all the evident energy, the wheels on my locomotive just keep spinning. There is no progress. No advancement. I get a real surge of satisfaction after I’ve spent a couple of hours pouring through the top dealmakers at Publishers Marketplace until I’ve found 10 worthy targets and tailored my lively query letters to their specific interests. How can it miss? I never do it like this, but I wake up those mornings feeling like I ought to shave and put on a really nice shirt.

I’m sure two or three of the recipients will respond with hosannas about my proposals, ask to see more or — hallelujah — offer me a contract on the spot. But no one responds. Never. They don’t say yes. They don’t say no. I don’t know whether they got them and are considering them, if they rejected them outright or if they didn’t get them and are sitting there banging their heads on their desks and beseeching, “Why on earth won’t somebody send me a proposal about Dick Cheney in cape!” It’s worse than even prom time in high school when at least I knew by the hysterical laughter that I’d earned yet another rejection. Then there are one’s like this that came last month from a top editor: “Thanks for sending this! I’m going to read it tonight and get back to you tomorrow.” I still haven’t heard back. Has she been abducted? Should I call? Send flowers? Form a search party? If she has been abducted and I succeed in saving her from lost time space ship experimentation you’d think she might look favorably on my proposal — or at least respond to my query with a crisp, “No thanks.” I guess maybe I was raised differently. If someone asks me a question, I answer. I respond to all my e-mails, even ones from students or fellow freelancers who are struggling and seeking veteran advice. I tell them what I can but always include the Bob Dylan line from the 1997 song “High Water” to add necessary perspective: “Don’t reach out for me, can’t ya see I’m drowning, too?” Pity my poor wife. She sees no result and certainly no income. In weaker moments, she counsels that maybe it’s time for me to find what she calls “crap jobs,” as if my professional existence could possibly become any crappier. Bless her heart, she just doesn’t have a clue.

There are no crap jobs and it’s too late for me to pack a lunch pail and head to plumber school. I’m in it up to my neck. The only thing left for me to do is to continue to fail at a more spectacular level. I can’t quit. I have to believe I have good ideas and one of them is soon bound to bear fruit. And on that happy day there will be a grand party. There will be extravagant booze, cigars, succulent seafood and dances of mutual joy until the sun comes up and the band slams the trunks on their battered instruments and heads for home. It’ll be one of the world’s greatest parties. And, by God, you’re all invited. Just be sure to R.S.V.P. It’s only proper.

Taylor Tomasi – Style and Accessories Director, US Marie Claire

Source: TFS,jak&jill

I got back from London yesterday, where I attended the PTC New Journalist of the Year Awards 2009 in Southbank’s top spot Vinopolis. The event started with a master class with interesting presentations by leading figures of the magazine publishing industry and idea workshops in smaller groups.

After a delicious lunch the award winners were announced. Three of last year’s graduates of my course, MA in Magazine Journalism, had been shortlisted in the category ‘Most Promising Student of the Year’ – but unfortunately none of them won.

Lonely Planet Magazine editor Peter Grunert was highly commended in the category ‘New Editor of the Year’. I took the chance to congratulate and introduce myself to him after the ceremony, as I am going on a work placement at Lonely Planet Magazine in March.

You can find lots of pictures of the event on the PTC website. Click on this image to open a gallery:

I hope I will find time to write a bit more about the master class presentations soon.

I wrote in an earlier post that Michael Graeme had decided to break with his long-standing resolve, and try to get something published in the printed press this year.  His reasons were obscure. His free online offerings had received positive reviews from his readers, and the download rates were beyond his expectations, which is as much as any writer can hope for, but a residual part of him still wanted the approval of that most mythical of creatures: an editor,… so he thought, why not?

He sent a couple of stories out, one of them back in April, which he’s still waiting to hear from – the other back in October. The latter was rejected by e-mail this morning, while the former seems to have been sucked into a black hole, which has happened before and is a sort of implied rejection, a bit like the regular variety, but without the punchline.

Rejection is a funny business. As a writer, I think you tell yourself to expect it, but as time passes following the moment the post box swallows your submission, you eventually allow yourself to harbour vague hopes, warm feelings, spurious intuitions. You watch the mail, though you tell yourself you’re not watching, or waiting, while at the back of your mind you are.  You’ve enjoyed writing a story, creating characters, watching them develop a relationship over successive drafts, and then you send it off, expecting others to be equally warmed, enthused or whatever.

And they reject it.

Editors never go into detail. Why should they? They have to read hundreds of stories every week. So, the writer never knows what it was they didn’t like about the story. Was it completely unintelligible? Were you so caught up in the story you forgot about the basics of grammar? Was your punctuation alarmingly eccentric? Or was the story basically okay, but not quite the right sort of story for the type of magazine they’re running? To be honest you will never know. Take my word for it, you can read the publication guidelines all you like, but  you’ll need to be psychic as well to really know what it is they want.

So,… even though you’re half expecting your story to be rejected, you’re also half expecting it to be accepted, and the result, when it comes – no matter how hardened, how achingly old, or embittered a scribbler you are – is a kick in the balls. Michael Graeme actually felt a bit glum this morning, and that’s something his writing hasn’t done to him for a long time – it was also childish and pathetic and trust me, he chastised himself for it.

So. You’re a writer. It’s happened to you. What do you do about it?

Well, I stripped the beds, put the covers in the washing machine, then swept the kitchen floor and mopped the counters after number two son had made his porridge. I washed up, dried the pots and put them all away. Then I emptied and cleaned out the fridge after number two son had somehow managed to spill milk all over it. And between chores, I sat a bit and thought a bit – had a jug full of very strong Java coffee, did a bit Qigong,… then, on a whim, tried to decipher the Chinese writing on my practise sword,… read some poetry,… the usual things really.

Then, by mid-afternoon, my thoughts were turning to the novel I’m currently writing – the one I’ll never submit to an editor in a hundred years, and know damned well that even at this early stage in its genesis it will be going straight up on Lulu.com. Why? Well, I have a choice now – I can either spend the next twelve months finishing it, then the next three or four years hawking it round the print publishers, before giving up on it and feeling bad about it, or I can let people read it straight away, feel good about it, and move swiftly on to the next project. My last novel, “Push Hands” is achieving about three hundred downloads a month.  It’s being read. And really that’s the whole point!

It’s just that it’s taken him since April, and that first submission to remember this very old lesson.

So, the editor didn’t like my story, but what would it have changed if the editor had liked it? A cheque for fifty quid? What ’s that? The price of a week’s petrol? Forgive me Michael, but that’s not enough reason to be feel miserable over anything! Is there a touch of ego there, I wonder? A touch of attachment?

Let it go.

Writer’s write. That’s all there is to it.

As for you, dear reader – you must forgive this temporary aberration. Also, check out the Rivendale Review and  Feedbooks for updates – there’ll be a couple of new short stories appearing soon – well three actually if I can resolve the ending on the last one!

So, how do you deal with rejection? It depends on you, the writer, and what sort of writer you are, but I’d say you should allow yourself the luxury of no more than ten minutes disappointment.

Then get over it.

And get on with it.

When: 4th December

Where: Alcatraz, Via Valtelina 25, Milano

Info: www.alcatrazmilano.com

Am Samstag ging es für mich bekanntlich in die Hauptstadt zu einer der großartigsten Bands, die in meiner kleinen Welt existieren. Hier nun ein kleiner Konzertbericht.

Um es gleich mal vorwegzunehmen: Der Abend war göttlich. Nie hätte ich damit gerechnet, dass die Editors eine so gute Live-Band sind oder die Fans derart mitgehen. Hier nun die Ereignisse in Chronologie:

Pünktlich zum Einlass um 19 Uhr und nachdem wir uns erstmal gehörig verlaufen hatten, schlugen wir an der Columbiahalle auf – und waren erstmal überrascht, wie klein diese doch eigentlich ist. Ich hatte sie mir in etwa wie das Haus Auensee in Leipzig vorgestellt, aber sie ist meines Erachtens noch ein Stück kleiner. Aber das macht ja nichts, umso besser sieht man die Band seiner Träume und immerhin war das Konzert auch ausverkauft…

Eine halbe Stunde vor ausgeschriebenem Beginn kam dann die erste Vorband auf die Bühne: Wintersleep. Die Jungs haben ordentlich gespielt, allerdings empfand ich die Stimme des Sängers als etwas unangenehm und viele Lieder bestanden nur aus monotonem Refrain-Wiederhole und Nanana-Gesinge. Trotzdem: Ich habe schon wesentlich unpassendere Vorbands erlebt.

Es folgten The Maccabees, die etwas verlegen auf die Bühne traten, uns letztendlich aber sehr positiv überrascht haben. Wunderbar verspielte Rockmusik, die auch das Publikum begeistert und für die Editors angeheizt hat. So muss das schließlich auch sein.

Nach neun gingen dann plötzlich die Lichter aus und die düstere Melodie des Album-Openers In This Light And On This Evening ertönte. Nicht gerade ein optimales Stück als Einstieg, da schon ziemlich bedrückend. Gleich das nächste Lied zeigte dann aber die Tanz- und Ausflippbereitschaft der Fans: An End Has A Start. Ich war voll und ganz der Meinung, dass der Bombast-Sound der Studioversion des Liedes niemals auf die Bühne übertragen werden könnte – und wurde eines Besseren belehrt. Dass man zur Musik der Editors pogen und ausflippen kann, hätt ich auch nicht für möglich gehalten, aber Nummern wie The Racing Rats, Blood, Escape The Nest und ziemlich am Ende Papillon haben das Gegenteil bewiesen. Einfach irre, was die Editors auf der Bühne für eine Energie versprühen.

Selbst eher mittelmäßige Titel vom neuen Album wie etwa The Big Exit oder Eat Raw Meat kamen ziemlich gut rüber; überhaupt wurde jedes einzelne Lied von ITLAOTE gespielt, von der Bonus-LP leider gar keins. Dafür befanden sich zwei Titel in der Setlist, die ich überhaupt nicht kannte, einer von beiden You Are Fading, der andere mir nach wie vor unbekannt.

Sage und schreibe anderthalb Stunden haben die Jungs aus Birmingham letztlich gespielt (inklusive einer Zugabe). Somit haben sie wirklich alle guten Songs von ihren drei Alben abgeliefert, vom neuesten zudem alle Titel. Das ist schon eine ordentliche Bilanz, wie ich finde.

Einen einzigen Kritikpunkt hab ich dann aber doch, nämlich dass einige Sounds bei den neueren Titeln aus der Konserve zu kommen scheinen. Live ist es mir nicht aufgefallen, aber wenn man sich die Aufnahme von Papillon anschaut, sieht man, dass zeitweise keiner am Keyboard oder der Gitarre ist. Kann man verkraften, denn sicher kams der Hörbarkeit zugute. Gerade Papillon ging nämlich nochmal richtig ab:

Was bleibt mir nun noch zu sagen? Vielleicht, dass der Abend unglaublich war. Oder dass die Editors live noch mal einen Tick besser sind als von der CD. Oder dass ich mich nun endgültig in diese Band verliebt habe. Auf jeden Fall kann ich sie jedem nur ans Herz legen, nun noch mehr als vorher schon.

YouTube-User spinschlumpi hat übrigens einige qualitativ astreine Aufnahmen vom Konzert hochgeladen; meinen Dank dafür, falls sie oder er einmal über diesen Bericht stolpern sollte:

Walk The Fleet Road
Bullets
Munich
Smokers Outside The Hospital Doors
Like Treasure (Empfehlung!)
Blood

I usually don’t like linking to articles at the Wall Street Journal, since they are hidden behind a paywall, but the old trick of googling the article title and clicking on it enabled me to read this article.

I stopped editing Wikipedia long ago. I’ll correct a typo or a minor mistake, but I won’t publish any new articles. Not everyone has that much free time available to write encyclopedic articles for free. Still, the WSJ reports that droves of editors are fleeing Wikipedia. Should we be worried?

Okay, I have to admit it. I’m hooked on figure skating. I watch the nationals and all the grand prix events like Skate Russia, America, China. I can’t wait for the Vancouver Olympics.

And I look forward to the day I can watch the Stars on Ice live, in person, front row. That is, when I’ve made a million dollars (I can dream, can’t I?).

My favorite skaters though are the most artistic, usually the professionals: Kristi Yamaguchi, Scot Hamilton, and my all time pair, Ekaterina Godeeva and Sergei Grinkov…and when he died, I cried. When she remarried, I rejoiced.

Here are some lessons I’ve learned from the skating world:

1. Amateur skaters have to work exceptionally hard. Amateurs are the ones who have to adhere to the rules or fail. In the short program, the focus is on technique. There are specific requirements: so many jumps, a combination triple jump, straight line sequence, spiral and spins. Even in the long program whose focus is artistic, there are specific requirements and these tend to make skaters tense.

In much the same way, beginning writers face many “do’s.” Agents and editors give us rules from how to write a query, how to avoid “be” verbs, passive, semi-colons, etc. etc. These rules can hinder creativity, much like how they affect amateur skaters.

2. Amateurs don’t get paid unless they live in Russia, in which case the state gives them just enough to live on. The only way amateurs make decent money is to medal and get endorsements.

In much the same way, writers have to polish their craft, working with peers and editors until the manuscript reads like a bestseller. It’s the only way to stand above the crowd and receive some financial compensation.

3. Amateurs have to take the chance on inventing new moves, like the Bielman’s spin where she reaches behind her and pulls one leg while spinning on the other, or the tunnel jump invented by Brian Boitano, raising one arm. In the same way, writers have to take chances and set trends.

For instance, I heard agent after agent tell me they weren’t sure my memoir would take because no middle-class African woman had written a cross-cultural memoir involving immigration. I’m sure the first vampire novel suffered rejection until someone decided he/she liked one.

Now there’s a glut. Same with teens who possess superpowers. Now, it’s almost impossible to find average young adults who aren’t zapping whole universes just by pointing. If you have an idea that’s untried, don’t be afraid to go for it. Set a trend rather than follow others.

4. Professional skaters have programs that are far more innovative and fun. Once skaters make the switch from amateurs to professionals, their skating takes on new artistic heights. They are simply breath-taking, especially when they’re just doing shows.

Ekaterina Godeeva barely does any jumps, but God, can she mesmerize! A man only has to watch her skating with Iliak to fall in love with her. I still gasp when a male skater does flips.

In much the same way, a writer who has achieved publication discovers the freedom to create and explore, the confidence to express one’s true voice. While many of us are amateurs, we can still write with passion and abandon. Within reason. Rules help us to develop our skills.

Ultimately, we must listen to the voice within,
the ‘thing’ that’s uniquely us.

~ Bisi

Did you know the “S” in Harry S. Truman’s name and in Ulysses S. Grant’s name stood for nothing?

My blog entry about L Hawthorne and the origin of his single-letter first name got me to thinking about these two U.S. presidents with single-letter middle names. Both have ties to Missouri.

Ulysses S. Grant was born in Ohio in 1822 and named Hiram Ulysses Grant. When he was appointed to West Point in 1839, he discovered that the congressman who had appointed him—apparently confused about his name—had listed Grant’s middle name first and  his mother’s maiden name, Simpson, as a middle name. While his friends and family continued to call him Ulysses, it is believed the other cadets nicknamed him “Uncle Sam” for his initials and eventually shortened it to “Sam.” Ulysses himself told people the “S” in his middle name stood for nothing.

Grant’s connections to Missouri began when he was assigned, upon graduation from West Point, to the Fourth U.S. Infantry at Jefferson Barracks, south of St. Louis. Frederick Dent had been one of Grant’s West Point roommates, and the Dent family farm, named White Haven, was not far away. Grant began visiting Fred’s sister, Julia, at White Haven when he was on leave. He eventually married her in 1848. The couple settled in Missouri for a time before the Civil War, but sadly, much of that time was marked by financial trouble. Grant went on to serve as general-in-chief of the Union Army, and in 1868, was elected the 18^th president of the United States. Today, the area once farmed by Grant in Missouri is a tourist site and popular family attraction.

Sidenote: Ulysses and Julie had a son named Ulysses S. Grant, Jr., and yes—this time his middle name apparently really was Simpson.

Our 33^rd president, Harry S. Truman, was born in Lamar, Missouri. His single-letter middle name has sparked controversy among editors since the 1960s, when Truman told reporters—perhaps jokingly—that there should be no period after his middle initial since it didn’t stand for anything. But although Truman sometimes ran his names together in his signature so that no period is apparent, archives at the Harry S. Truman Library contain other examples where the period is obvious. Today, most style manuals, including The Chicago Manual of Style, suggest that middle initials should be followed by periods even if they are not abbreviations of names.

Sidenote: Harry was given the single letter “S” for his middle name in honor of both of his grandfathers, Anderson Shipp Truman and Solomon Young.

BUSINESSWEEK began laying off reporters, editors and columnists this week in preparation for the transfer to new owner, Bloomberg LP, on December 5.

Among those losing their jobs were media columnist Jon Fine, community editor Shirley Brady, 23-year veteran tech writer Stephen Baker, online Innovation Design channel writer Damian Joseph and technology columnist Steve Wildstrom.  Other columnists being let go were Inside Wall Street writer Gene Marcial and longtime Business Outlook columnist Jim Cooper.  Three of the top BW writers, Pete Engardio, Rob Hof and Steve Hamm, are gone.  Michael Mandel, chief economist, is out.  Other casualties include Lauren Young, personal-finance editor; Heather Green, tech reporter; Kenji Hall, Tokyo reporter; Jay Greene, Seattle bureau chief; Dean Foust, Atlanta bureau chief.

The online video news operation headed by James Leone was also bumped, and half of the 18-person copy desk are gone.  Many of the people on the finance team were offered jobs within Bloomberg News, but not with BusinessWeek.

Hamm told Talking Biz News: “I will miss the culture of BusinessWeek, with its smart and collegial people.  I think the acquisition is good for BusinessWeek and for its readers because it will keep serious, long-form journalism alive.  As for me, please buy my book, ‘The Race for Perfect: Inside the Quest to Design the Ultimate Portable Computer.’”

I swear to God, I heard the earth inhale moments before it spat its rain down on me. I swear to God, in this light and on this evening [the Editors'] become the most beautiful think I’ve seen.

F mag so einige Bands und findet manche davon auch ziemlich toll, aber es gibt nur zwei Bands, die F persönlich etwas bedeuten. Eine davon sind die Editors, gesehen am Samstag in der Columbiahalle.

Was war geschehen?

• halbe Stunde mit dem Bus im Stau gestanden
• zehn Minuten vor Ansage da gewesen, erste Vorband spielte schon (ziemlich geiles letztes Lied….)
• die “Klolady” dort ist immer die gleiche
• zunächst neben einer sehr dicken weiblichen Person gestanden, die mir übelst auf die Pelle rückte – Platz gewechselt
• in der nähe eines riesigen Typen gestanden, der immer klatschte, wenn keine klatschte und zwar über’m Kopf, zwischen die Takte
• hätte nie gedacht, dass man bei “Papillon” so krass abgehen kann
• am Ende doch wieder neben der dicken weiblichen Person gestanden
• zwischendurch mehrmals gelächelt(!)

Anm. vom 25.11.: Habe noch einen anderen Bericht vom Konzert  gefunden. Da gibt es auch ein Video von “Papillon” zu sehen.