|
"All Finn, No Shark"
1 Comment - Show Original Blog
Francis, I hesitated on whether or not to even comment on this, but there are a few things I wanted to clear up.
[[Is it right to publish reviews of rough drafts and represent them as being reviews of the finished book? Mark Finn’s June 9, 2008 review of an earlier draft of my book in The Cimmerian is, by contrast to the OK review at the Robert E. Howard United Press Association site, pretty scathing and downright venomous. It also seemed rather premature to issue such a catty review of a book I was still working on.]]
Francis, I can only go on the book that was sold to me on Lulu.com. If the book was a draft, as you say, then why on Earth did you upload it and make it available for sale when you knew it wasn't ready? There was no mention of this "draft" version on Lulu. I just clicked it and bought it. Done deal. However, I am now curious as to the text changes that have occurred between the draft I reviewed and the finished copy.
And speaking of drafts, I know you won't believe or listen to me, but the current cover of the book is unrecognizable as it stands. The other cover was 1000 times better.
[[If you’re looking for a direct response (Lord give me the strength to do the classy thing here) then I can only offer this: When a man hasn't written many books, he is more apt to defend what little writing he has with an amazing, tunnel-vision zealotry. Finn was so hot to blast me that he got many things wrong. His own cribbing of de Camp (which he labels as my cribbing of him, as covered at the start of Chapter Four) is just a sample. Yet on and on he went, reviewing my rough draft as if I had approved it for distribution.]]
Well, Francis, it was up there. So, yeah, I was going to review it. And it's not a question of zealotry, but rather, who are you, anyway? No one in Howard-dom knows you. There are a number of people close to sources of information (like original copies of the letters, for example) who are actively involved in researching and cataloging the known biographical information about REH. It's not hard to get to know these people (they are all on the email lists) but you have to demonstrate intent. That is, you gotta join the lists and talk to folks. You came out of left field. Most of us just wanted to know what you knew. And we were disappointed that you weren't some long-lost relative with a stash of papers that none of us had ever seen before.
[[I hope it made him feel better. It’s a stage every writer has to go through, to one degree or another, and I’m sure he’ll consider this edition just some gussied-up version of previous ones, and quite possibly attempt to leave more bad reviews.]]
For a guy who painted me with an overly-familiar brush, you've got a pretty thin skin yourownself, Francis. Look, Howard fandom, and by extension, Howard Studies, is a Killing Floor. There's not a lot of us doing this work, and we all know each other. If you want to throw some work out in so public an arena, you need to expect to be fired upon. For the record, I was dead-serious about you having some good ideas that need to be developed into essays, and about you joining one of the several online groups, or participating in the offline groups like The Lion's Den or joining REHupa. You will get up to speed real quick on who's doing what, and whether or not you're repeating old info, or trying to do something that hadn't been done before.
[[When I ordered his book, Amazon had it listed at 400 pages, but upon arrival it weighed in at about 250. Then I saw that stuff on the back cover about Howard living all his life in Cross Plains, and of course I noted several five-star reviews at Amazon whose degree of removal from the author seemed dubious to me (such as one from Austin, Finn’s location.)]]
Yeah, that's what happens with small press, sometimes. It's been a while for you, I know, but I didn't have control over a number of aspects of the book. When you deal with publishers, that stuff sometimes happens.
[[I could have overlooked that one, for about ten years ago my wife left a review of one of my books, but then I came across the solitary Barnes & Noble review from “Richard,” which instantly reads like a giant resume: “About the author: Mark Finn is the recipient of the 2005 Cimmerian Award for Outstanding Achievement in Robert E. Howard studies, and a critically-acclaimed scholar, author, essayist and playwright. Finn is an expert in 20th century pop culture and genre studies, and is not to be trifled with.” It goes on like that. Again let me say that for an author who hasn’t written many books, this sort of thing is common, and in my mind I equate this kind of self-promotion to an adolescent masturbating: it’s flashy and it’s messy and it’s not even done very well. ]]
If you want to know who the "ringer" is at Amazon, I'll tell you: my pal, Jess Nevins, who got an early copy of the book and really liked it. All the rest of them are people I don't know. Believe it, or not. But a little detective work will reveal that the Richard at the Barnes & Noble website and the Richard on Amazon are the same guy--both plugging One Who Walked Alone. Richard just copied pieces of the back cover and the dedication together to make the B and N review. Nothing more.
[[Nonetheless, I still mention what I perceive to be the good points to his book, which is well worth the read and indeed well done. It is certainly more of an overall mainstream biography than this book, but Finn felt compelled to declare that this book was NO biography at all (okay, chief).]]
Francis, come on, be realistic. What new data and information did you uncover? Did you pore back through the de Camp notes at the Ransom Center? Did you publish any primary or secondary quotes that had never been seen before? Did you even attempt a biographical structure? Okay, that's not fair, if the book online is the final draft and not a rough draft. Again, I can only go by what I saw. The original ideas you had in the book were essay-able, certainly, but it wasn't some unified field theory that held the rest of the book together. Heck, what slant you presented in the book leaned BACK towards the de Camp stuff.
[[I got the impression that if it were not beyond refute Finn would have denied this book’s capacity to exist. I was quite disappointed to see a “Howard scholar” act so pettily. After all, we’re all just trying to do our best without devolving into a hopeless state of pissiness, aren’t we? My “cobbled together” disjointed little book is the best I can do. I’m truly sorry you hated it, Mark, and I thank you for at least conceding that I might have a few interesting essays in here—if, of course, I work real hard with an editor to polish them. As if the eight different drafts I’ve updated to this book do not count as editing. To Finn they probably don’t.]]
Oh, hogwash. I want to see people writing favorably about REH, throwing out different interpretations, and in general giving him some of the credit that has been denied him for over sixty years. If I seem a little over-protective of Howard, it's because myself and several other folks are trying very hard to run down and eliminate the "back handed compliment" syndrome that has plagued Howard in literary circles for the past sixty years. So, yeah, when someone writes a biography that starts out professing to emphasize Howard's suicide, then I come in with my shields up.
But know this, Francis: an editor (or a colleague, or a fellow writer) will always be able to spot things that you don't. As a veteran author, you surely know this to be true. So, yeah, I think you do need to work with *someone* who can offer you feedback and ask you questions. Had that person been someone plugged into Howard studies, most of this could have been avoided.
[[I never really expect anyone to like what I’m writing, but I also don’t expect them to go all Planet of the Apes on me, either. With age and over twenty books written, let me be the first to shout from the rooftops that I don’t know a damn thing. All I can do is explore my perception, and all I can offer is what I perceive. And for those who have now gotten some impression of me, let me further add that Finn’s Cimmerian review suggested that I was trying to swindle money from fans and collectors by writing this. It either shows how little he researched me, or how much he decided to overlook.]]
Your Internet footprint is pretty small, Francis. I don't know anything about you, save what you wrote on your website. But nevertheless, I never called your project a swindle. Perhaps in the future, you would do well not to post drafts on Lulu.com?
[[In the course of creating The Supreme Moment, I have studied every piece of material of which I could avail myself, including the excellent research and essays of current Howard scholars such as Rusty Burke, Don Herron, Patrice Louinet, Leo Grin, Gary Romeo, Frank Coffman, and so many others. However let me be clear that I do not claim to know these people personally, as some folks are bound to accuse me of name-dropping for the sake of insinuating I buy these guys beer every Saturday night. (Much as I would like to do it, I’m just a horrendous crank and an overall schnook.) While writing this book I also kept in mind the vastly important contributions of older Howard scholars such as Glenn Lord and L. Sprague de Camp. I have also spent more hours than I would care to admit going through thousands of files at the Library of Congress in order to locate dozens of relevant photos, such as the 1927 “Pageant of Pulchritude” which Howard attended in Galveston (and REH might even be in the crowd). Photos like this represent a new discovery in the field of REH research.]]
And let me be clear: you could have access to a LOT more information if you even made overtures to plug yourself into Howard fandom. I know, I know, you don't like to foist yourself on folks, but for essay writers, and non-fiction writers, you sometimes have to scare up sources. If you're polite, you'd be surprised what avenues open up to you--even online.
I'd like to see tha Pagent of Pulchritude photo, but I am NOT going to buy the book again. And can you blame me?
[[My objective is to write the best Howard book that I am capable of writing, poor and tawdry conduit that I am, without it reading like most of the stuff out there. If that makes it bad and incomprehensible to some, maybe there is a slight chance it also makes it refreshing and worthwhile to others.]]
Francis, this was nothing personal. I took umbrage at the cavalier way you threw my name around in a biography of Robert E. Howard, never mind people that I know personally and consider friends. That is only part of what constituted what I perceived to be an overall lack of professionalism in the work. I know you have mentioned before that you are not a non-fiction writer, and some reading in that arena would have served you well in this instance.
I *did* like "going Planet of the Apes," though. That's one of the coolest things I've ever read in regard to a review.
Again, no acrimony intended, but the offer to join REHupa is open anytime.
Respectfully,
Mark Finn
|
|
