Puck You All

By -
My first novel, PUCK, will be published soon. I just received the publisher's comments on my manuscript, and I share some excerpts to whet your appetite:

"The manuscript is a unique blend of the writing styles of William Shakespeare (without the Old English, of course) and the later works of James Joyce. The author takes a post-modern approach to the classic Joyce novel Finnegan’s Wake.

"This is the kind of classic work that would require a semester’s worth of study at a University... just as James Joyce 'put in so many enigmas and puzzles that it will keep the professors busy for centuries.'

"Lovers of modern and postmodern literature will enjoy this book immensely.

"I suspect that each time the reader reads this manuscript, new subtleties and nuances will appear. This is 'classic literature'... [It is] a complex expression of [the author's] worldview that rivals the greats."

Comments

  1. Bob Murphy8:30 AM

    That's great Gene! (Umm, are those comments real?) Any news on your 2nd novel, Slithead?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous9:46 AM

    uh, ehm, the bard wrote in modern English,
    not old or even middle english. But I'm
    sure Puck will just as juicy to read...
    How do I buy it?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous10:19 AM

    Great news!

    Jim H.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous10:23 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous4:58 PM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sheldon Richman7:17 PM

    Wowzers! Other than that (and that) I'm speechless. I am without speech.

    ReplyDelete
  7. TT Tom4:01 AM

    A conundrum, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  8. gcallah5:50 PM

    Rob,

    PUCK will be available on Amazon. Of course you're right about Bill -- I think what she wanted to say was older English.

    ReplyDelete
  9. gcallah10:52 PM

    Bob,

    My second novel is named A Song of the Past. The filthy references are only a small part of the meaning of the title PUCK.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous12:15 PM

    Applause! Applause! Gene

    Let us know when we can pre-order from Amazon. I've never actually owned a signed first-edition of a classic, so make it come true!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous1:09 AM

    Great article! Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous7:11 AM

    Nice Blog!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous7:11 AM

    Thanks for interesting article.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous8:13 AM

    Thank You! Very interesting article. Do you can write anything else about it?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous6:22 AM

    Very interesting site. Blog is very good. I am happy that I think the same!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous8:37 PM

    Excellent website. Good work. Very useful. I will bookmark!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous9:42 PM

    i like buy potbs Doubloon

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more