Category: books

Posted on

The Weird

Over on Strange Horizons, there’s a new essay by Zachary Gillan, The Brackish Pool: Towards a Critical Practice of Reading Weird Fiction, which caught my interest. It’s a scholarly yet approachable overview and reflection on what we call “weird fiction.” I found myself nodding at some parts and overall appreciating the ways in which Gillan–using examples from the works of other authors and theorists on the genre–attempts to explain and/or reframe less what “weird fiction” is than what it does. More the how than the what. In particular I liked this:

The film historian Jeanine Basinger, in her book on Anthony Mann (1979), wrote that noir is not a genre but a “virus” which “attacks healthy genres and makes them sick, dark, discouraged, and disillusioned.” This is how we should think of the weird as well. Noir sickens, the weird weirds; both are verbs, active critical perspectives brought to bear by writers but also readers (and critics, who are nothing if not readers who write).

I think this is a wonderful way of looking at the weird; it’s steeped in something we cannot quite understand, and likely are incapable of fully comprehending outside of its immediate, oft unsettling manifestations. I highly recommend giving this a read if weird is your thing.

Just a quick note to those readers or writers who might be intimidated by pieces such as this (that is, essays that are full of literary references as a way of making their point): don’t worry if you haven’t read stories by Thomas Ligotti, critique by Maureen Kincaid Speller or novels even by those as esteemed as Toni Morrison. I’m not going to say that you will easily absorb the points being made without having read all the authors referenced within Gillan’s essay, but a good essayist–even if it’s for a dedicated audience of a genre–will get the point across of what they’re trying to convey without it being contingent that you’ve read all they’ve read. For the record, I’ve only read a few of the authors mentioned within, and even then not extensively (arguably, that’s the job of someone setting out to do what Gillan does–to synthesize). As it goes, I’m not the world’s biggest Jeff Vandermeer fan, but I can work with what Gillan is saying. There are other authors that aren’t mentioned in this piece, like Robert Aickman, whose works are absolutely to be added to this genre. I make this point because, as I mentioned, sometimes essays like this can be intimidating, and they don’t have to be; hell, if you walk away with only curiosity about some of the authors you don’t recognize then I’d say that’s a success.

Another author not mentioned is Mark Fisher. He certainly isn’t an writer of weird fiction, but rather a cultural and political theorist who released a rather slim tome called The Weird and the Eerie, which takes a guided stroll through similar territory, going so far–as you might guess from the title–as to separate the two (the weird, the eerie) into separate subgenres. His book turned me on to Aikman, but also tied in bands such as The Fall (who I adore) and even Boards of Canada into his explication. One of the points of his focus was the British movie Quatermass and the Pit, and the original television series it’s based on. I spent the latter part of 2025 watching all the Quatermass material, thanks to the Internet Archive. It’s easy to see how Quatermass is eligible for inclusion in the weird (broadly speaking–Fisher might qualify it more as “eerie”), given how there are these spectrous forces from outside our world, often faceless but always nameless, whose ultimate goals are ultimately left to the imagination of the viewer (unlike, say, Star Trek, where everything is made very matter-of-fact, similar to how comic books of a particular era couldn’t have things be borne of the supernatural).

I wouldn’t say that, as a writer, I’m firmly in the mold of weird fiction, but it certainly creeps into my work, depending upon what you’re reading. While not self-consciously so, Radioland certainly affirms itself as weird fiction, as does my linked short stories Somewhere in a Dead Field, and Wesley Evonshire. It’s certainly not like I sat down one day and said to myself “I’m going to write weird fiction” but rather, in so many words, it was where my internal weather vane pointed me, and I certainly didn’t fight the temptation.

Share
Posted on

Goodbye 2025

Here we are: December. As years go, 2025 was a challenge on several levels.

On the writing front, it was quite productive in some ways; I polished and finalized a very good satirical short story for submission, and did a lot of hard labour on a personal essay that I hope to have finalized and doing the rounds early in 2026. The latter packed an emotional toll, given that it’s about my murdered uncle and the sometimes discouraging relationship between myself and my father. It would be fair to say that working as hard on this as I did threw me off my game for awhile; it was using a very different sensitivity than any nonfiction I’ve written previously. My third novel, The Stars Align for Disco Santa, remains on submission since March to various publishing houses. While the essay was challenging in its content (unknotting its story from my very subjective defences), having the novel out in the world in an undefined state–especially not knowing how it will do and whether it will find a home (let alone a good home)–also weighs on me quite a bit. I tell people that it’s like holding your gut for many, many months. I would like to breathe easily again.

Given all the above, it should come as no surprise that 2025 was perhaps the most challenging year for my confidence as a writer. I’ve had a good run since 2014, but I’m experiencing a lot of doubt these days, and this impacts my ability to push myself. I feel in some ways that a break might be in order, to get perspective and perhaps to take pressure off myself. I sometimes worry that Radioland, my second novel, did me no favours. It wasn’t The Society of Experience, which, while not a blockbuster, made a mark on readers and writers alike. Released during the tail-end of the worst of the pandemic, I have no clue who bought Radioland and whether it resonated with anyone. I’m not sure it was a comparably good seller, which isn’t necessarily surprising for a book that, while not nihilistic, is unapologetically dark and weird in nature. There’s a cliché about the sophomore novel, and I was well aware of this while I was readying it for publication; the cliché being that they tend of disappoint, or zag when readers are expecting it to zig. On more insecure days, I worry its overall lack of impression might’ve marked me as a novelist publishers might not want to take a chance on. So yeah, there’s that hanging around the periphery of my thoughts. It’s also entirely realistic to just accept what comes, and carry on. The good news is that I’m generally a “brush yourself off and get back on the horse” person.

It wouldn’t be much of a year-end encapsulation if I didn’t also mention the terrible situation with the United States under its current administration. The ridiculous tariffs sent a swift blow to the economy, and I felt it in my psychotherapy practice, what with people being less likely to open their wallets until there was a sense of stability. I’m managing that well enough, but what I can’t get over is how entirely avoidable all of this was. Not that Kamala Harris was a fantastic candidate, but people ended up choosing petty self-interest over any sense of common good, and now we get to spend the next three years dealing with a political self-own that is many times greater a disaster than UK’s Brexit. I could go on, but I feel I’d be preaching to the choir on this one.

In happier news, there were wonderful discoveries of music this year, and I look forward to spending the holiday break catching up on Shazam’d artists I’ve picked up on my travels. I also look forward to increasing my proficiency on guitar and maybe cracking open a couple of good books along the way. The rest will do me good, as I hope it does to you.

My best to you xo

####

Update:

Of course, within a week of writing this, I had a very persuasive idea for a new novel (this would be #5 I think?) and sat down one day and churned out 1,200 words in the space of two hours. So, yeah, it looks like it’s hard for me to step away from the craft…

####

Share
Posted on

Me & Genre

What do I like in a book?

I like to feel immersed, whether it be in an environment, or character, or perhaps only a sustained tone; mix of any of the above is even better. I like books that make the everyday somewhat strange, or alternately making the strange seem ubiquitous. As a writer, I think this is what makes so-called genre books (typically sci-fi, fantasy, horror, western, etc) that much more challenging to pull off satisfyingly. I mean, sure, a lot of writers can pull of a few paragraphs or even pages of a genre story, but to do so in a sustained way, with a determined consistency…that’s hard. It takes a lot of work to do it well. Yes, yes, the literary small town book with the domestic intrigue also requires much of the above, but go ahead, you add menacing tentacles and see how far you can go.

I have a complicated relationship with the genre universe. I work in genre but I’m not wedded to it in as totalizing a way as many writers so firmly are. To the far end of what annoys me about genre works are tired tropes (laser guns! robots!) left unexamined, and to the far end of what what annoys me about what we call literary fiction, is the sense of an author proceeding to insert their head up their ass. I actually expressed this at a author talk in Winnipeg and I don’t think it went over well, but I reserve the fact that the other author I was supposed to appear with got his calendar mixed up, leaving me, the organizers, and the local audience (more than half expecting the author who didn’t make it) high and dry. In retrospect I wished I’d engaged more with the host–a much more committed author of genre than I–so that it was less about solo author me and my book, and opened up the discussion so that it was more a conversation and less what ended up being a short Q&A. That handful of author talks I did while publicizing The Society of Experience across the country (okay, Ontario and the prairies) were a learning curve for me, mostly in terms of learning to take more consideration of what an audience wants to hear, versus whatever thoughts are occurring to me while I’m in the spotlight. First rodeo, etc.

When you write a book like The Society of Experience, which riffs on a couple of genres–namely sci-fi, but also western (Derek’s The Lonely Cowboy stories)–but remains steadfastly literary, it can be easy to find oneself unsure upon which patch of the ice floe to stand on. I certainly felt more at home in literary circles because it’s largely what I read the most, and the novel was firmly that, however in the handful of more genre-forward appearances I made–conventions, reading series’–I found myself more often not seeing myself in the audience. They tended to be more capital-G genre readers, and I felt a bit like an imposter. I mean, there are worse problems to have in life, but being an artist is about connecting, and when you don’t see yourself in the room it can be weird, as if you’re doing something wrong.

With my novels, I’d like to think I’m doing something different. I’m kinda saying hey literary folks, you don’t have to make it so kitchen sink realistic, like The Diviners or Of Mice and Men, although those are excellent works (and knowing how to render a realistic environment is a huge skill). And at the same time I’m also saying hey genre folks, you can have three dimensional characters wrestling with things that aren’t literal tentacles. I have a suspicion Stanislaw Lem liked detective stories because so many of my favourite short stories by him involve the solving of a crucial riddle, often involving a terrifying event. And while he wrote almost exclusively in genre (sci-fi) his curiosity and want to mix these influences with his scientific  preoccupations make for fascinating reading. One story I would use as an example of this would be Ananke from the collection More Tales of Prix the Pilot; its use of a line from an Edgar Allan Poe story as a clue to an unravelling investigation on Mars is Lem firing on all cylinders. I swear it’s like taking a drug reading something like that; you just want to savour the rush for as long as you can.

A book is a book. A story is a story. It doesn’t need to correlate to any categorical expectation, other than it be worth the reader’s time and intelligence. And yet publishing–like any creative practice which survives on scant government funding and word-of-mouth– can get caught up in pettiness sometimes, which I find frustrating, and I don’t doubt, especially doing something different, that I’ve been the recipient of some sniping. I know I’m not a provocateur or some self-styled controversialist aiming to upset norms; I’m not trying to upset anything other than to demonstrate a hybrid style that is sometimes weird and different. Like most arts you need a thick skin for this, and I’m not just talking pub rejections.

Share
Posted on

Lou Reed: The King of New York, by Will Hermes

Lou Reed is like a magic uncle to me. His voice was there in my teens when I was very alone, feeling vulnerable and misunderstood. My real entry point was a best-of cassette, Rock and Roll Diary: 1967-1980 . It was there that I not only discovered his solo material (uneven a collection though this release was), but discovered his seminal early band, The Velvet Underground (with John Cale, Sterling Morrison and Moe Tucker). His voice managed to cut through the bullshit and yet was supernaturally intimate. It was through this intimacy–the inherent heartbreak in his poetically-charged lyrics and his speak-sing voice, the lurid provocation of (what we would now call) his queerness–that I fell under Lou Reed’s spell, and I count myself among many. Another best-of (I was a teenager, forgive me) was Walk on the Wild Side: The Best of Lou Reed, which was a more even introduction to his 70s solo material. I told myself, there was no way you could listen to his live version of Coney Island Baby and not feel an elemental longing combined with a stubborn conviction in the idea of salvation by love.

Lou’s work was uneven, perhaps not by his stated standards, but with each album (and each decade) you just didn’t know what you were going to get. And yet, even that was cool. He was the coolest person on this earth. Go ahead, Lou, release the Bob Ezrin-produced Berlin, and album of fantastically depressing yet inspired songwriting. Put out Metal Machine Music, the sonic equivalent of a root canal. If you were looking for iterations on his most well-known album, Transformer, he was already onto something else, and often something polarizingly different. Perhaps solipsistic, perhaps self-intoxicated, perhaps self-annihilating. Perhaps lost in the mid-80s, writing MTV pop songs with production standards that don’t age well.

The height of my appreciation for Lou Reed came as he released New York in ’89, when the quality of his output (and production standards) levelled up while I was turning nineteen. It combined his assured poetic chops with acidic social critique and a fuck-tonne of guitar. This was followed by Songs for Drella, to this day one of my standalone favourite albums. Brimming with empathy but with a Velvet-y stripped-down sonic aesthetic (that I wished the acoustic-driven “Unplugged” trend at the time embraced), it was a collaboration with his former collaborator, John Cale; an ode to their mentor (and one-time producer) Andy Warhol, who had recently passed.

I should probably talk about Will Hermes biography of Reed. And, in a way, I am. It’s a weird feeling, reading the intimate (and finely rendered) details about someone who was a spiritual role model in so many years of my life, especially under so many situations that seemed beyond my control.

I knew he could be, to put it lightly, difficult. He didn’t suffer fools. And yet as someone now in their 50s, with a lot of life experience and self-reflection, I’m inherently prone to interrogate phrases like this. Basically: isn’t that another way of saying “asshole?” They weren’t always “fools,” but people he knew, people he had a history with. Hermes’ accounts of Reed severing ties indirectly, through third parties, with figures no less important to his life (save career) than Warhol and Cale–even his wife, Sylvia Morales–are difficult to read. Difficult because, and perhaps I’m doing him too much a service in saying this, but in many ways he represents the sort of insecure artist that many have inside of us. The part of us that is more comfortable sending a witty indirect riposte than having the balls to actually sit down and speak with someone face-to-face, consequences be what they may.

He was artistically uncompromising and yet simultaneously his best enemy, hindered in no small way by spending the better part of a decade-and-a-half deeply entwined with chronic substance use (heroin, yes, but mostly alcohol with amphetamines). His songs came from deep injury and his MO was deeply insecure, lashing out, burning bridges, yet consistently championing the works of those around him he admired with the fire of a thousand teenagers (The Ramones, Talking Heads and most recently, Anohni).

This isn’t a book for a casual fan (if that’s possible to be). And yet, for those of us who are–in whatever way–beholden to Lou Reed’s music, no matter how inconsistent (note, my favourite solo album is Street Hassle, which is a deeply fucked fin de 70s meltdown, capped by the brilliant title track), no matter how maddening yet believable a depiction, what Hermes is able to show of Reed’s character is consistently inconsistent. A collection of contradictions almost built to self-destruct. A middle-class Jewish kid from Long Island who became known for the seedy NYC underground, a queer role model uncomfortable with his self-promoted ownership of that attribute. Someone who wanted it both ways: to be a provocateur, but without an instinct to reflect on the consequences.

Despite his self-destructive instincts, despite his sometimes terrible treatment of the people closest to him–including allegations of occasional physical assault of partners–I wept while reading Hermes’ deeply tender account of Reed’s passing by liver failure, accompanied by his longtime partner and soulmate Laurie Anderson, alongside local Toronto musician Kevin Hearn. It served as a sort of closure for me, a decade after the fact, helped by the unparalleled intimacy of the source material and the author’s judiciously light touch with prose when others would have opted for the sort of ham-fisted poetry Reed himself would’ve sneered at.

I’d like to mention that Lou Reed: The King of New York is not only a thorough document of a vital force in 20th century popular and alternative music, but an intimate glimpse of the 60s and 70s New York zeitgeist, as well as a compelling portrayal of the inherently dangerous world that those who belonged to the LGBTQ+ community faced (such as shock therapy for those young men institutionalized for being gay).

A brief note to Hermes, should he come across this: in the future please refrain from making the all-too-common mistake–particularly among American writers–of name-checking cities like Prague and New York City, only to refer to a concert in the same paragraph as happening “in Canada.” Um, we have cities, too.

[Update: I’ve been meaning to write this review for a while, and of course it turns out the day I pressed “publish” just happened to be Lou Reed’s birthday. Go figure.]

Share
Posted on

Self-promotion

Hate it. Hate. I hate it. *spits poison from wound*

Promoting myself sometimes/always feels like putting on a clown suit and yodelling “Hey everybody, something I wrote that I think is good was published,” while squeezing a bulb horn and yuk-yuking my way until falling through a manhole.

I think it — this notion that self-promotion is a kind of fool’s errand — can come down to two things: a socially internalized idea of “selfishness,” and social anxiety.

A big part of it is the visibility. I have social anxiety, though some people who know me may not clue into this, and while it’s way better than when I was younger (thank you, therapy and age) it’s not non-existent, especially on days when I’m feeling conflicted about whatever personal or work-related conflict is afoot. But this is just part of it, a facet of a more complex whole.

Promoting oneself shares some Venn with “networking,” a word which can cause some people to feel the urge to vomit, largely owing to prolonged exposure to those who are just a little too slick and creepy — and sometimes strangely successful — in social situations. How can one be oneself-with-others in a way that is flexible — reasonably invested and and curious — which also makes room for our strangeness; our quirks and idiosyncrasies? I’m not convinced it needs to be the exclusive domain of the neurodivergent or the anxiety-having, who are more attuned to this idea owing to their need to otherwise “blend” in social environments. I think, for many people in the general population, being ourselves-with-others can sometimes feel like a series of situational disguises. Just how coherent are our identities? Is “identity” just an ever-shifting amalgam of self-adjustments to our social environment?

Anyhoo, self-promotion is a similar sort of pain. I don’t want to be that guy (insert image of shameless author plugging their wares to an annoying, kinda desperate degree and taking little interest in, you know, community). And yet it’s kinda naive to think that people will just find your work through a random series of adventures (though that can happen in real life, albeit often on an infinitesimal level).

Look, I will admit I’m luckier than 99% of writers out there: I’ve had the opportunity to visit several cities across the country promoting my books*. I was interviewed by Gil Deacon on CBC Radio*. However, not unlike crowd-surfing (IYKYK), in no time the glow fades out, your ass is on the floor and before you know it you’re abruptly just another chicken scratching at the same yard. (* thanks in large part to my publisher’s travel and publicity grants)

So, I suppose, a thesis: I promote my work because I think it’s good and I would like to encourage people to seek it out if it appeals to them. That sounds pretty straight-forward, right? This isn’t a particularly revolutionary or provocative statement.

This is where “selfishness” comes in, at least for those prone to this idea. I’m not talking about healthily putting one’s interests to the front burner, but rather the idea of self-promotion as an egotistical pursuit, an unchecked desire to put ourselves first in a gross, narcissistic, oxygen-depleting way. There are many reasons for having this play in our thoughts, particularly if you’ve been raised in environments that use guilt and shame as a means of “correcting” behaviour that strides to stand out (let alone celebrate personal accomplishment).

So, yes, doing something perfectly acceptable such as promoting the short story or essay or novel we wrote, the beast that took untold (unpaid) hours of our time to craft, can come across as craven and attention-seeking if we’re feeling less than confident, or struggling with self-worth issues…which, while acceptable within the purview of human complexity, is also kind of silly.

Writers, put your work out there. Shout about it from the rooftops. I might also suggest that, working in the same principle, you put forward the works of your peers along the way. We all deserve to have our works appreciated, and there’s no way of doing this without sticking our necks out in public — it is, I think, part of being an artist, whether or not we are comfortable with it.

Share
Posted on

Hands On

Hand update: I’ve got a pretty gnarly scar, but there’s progress. Two weeks ago they removed the stitches from my palm, and I would not wish that pain and discomfort on anyone (note: they can’t anaesthetize your hand for this).

Psychologically I’ve been up and down. I’ve had to work through a feeling of being violated, of having to re-familiarize myself with what my hand can do (via physio) while fighting the fear that I’m going to pull or tear something in the process of rehabbing it back to where it should be.

While this has all been going on the political world south of the border has erupted into a swirl of chaos and condemnation. It’s a type of deja vu, considering we went through four years of this already. In the end, one of the people running for the presidency represented change and the other chose stability; the problem of course is that stability is hard to defend (let alone promote) when the candidate in question is trying to be a celebrity-endorsed centrist while there are so many voices in the mainstream media complaining about a left-wing cabal sacrificing the sanctity of American values. Frankly, it’s only a matter of time before the same debate amps up on this side of the border (it’s basically already here), what with a thoroughly mediocre Prime Minister playing out his third term similar to a sitting duck Biden, with little regard for the public malaise around his party. Cooler heads prevail when there are reasons to stay the course and our current PM struggles to even sell his wins let alone address his weaknesses.

When I wrote my third novel, The Stars Align for Disco Santa, it was during the worst year of Trump (2020), and was certainly influenced by many of the things that have now come to fruition: authoritarian politicians abetted by corporatist tech companies running roughshod over and unveiling the frailty of democracy, exposing how much of the West is protected by evidently feeble gentlemen’s agreements and empty platitudes of decency. In other words, if Harris had won, my book–soon to be doing the rounds of publishers via my agent–would’ve still been relevant, but reflective of a dark time in society now past. Now? It seems more pertinent than ever, which is terribly sad (an understatement), but here I am.

You write the book you have to write. By the time it hits the market you have no say on how trends will have changed in the interim, how the landscape and zeitgeist will have shifted. When my first book was picked up by Wolsak & Wynn, I had to wait nearly three years before it was published; in that time the media landscape seemed inundated with time travel narratives, so that when The Society of Experience finally came out the conceit felt certainly less unique than during the years I’d spent writing and polishing the manuscript. In short, you really have no choice but to deal with it, and I can only hope that, by the time Disco Santa does the rounds, publishers will see it as rising to the occasion.

Share
Posted on

A note about the note

I recently added a note to the welcome message at the top of this here blog:

A small request: I don’t have a Patreon, and I’m not interested in placing ads here, so ultimately whatever time I spend posting here I do on my own time and dime. I would be so thankful if you could visit my Goodreads page and, if you like my work, please consider rating it. You don’t have to write a review if that’s not your thing (although that’s mighty appreciated).

Allow me to show a slice of publishing’s sausage factory. I don’t like corporate behemoths for many reasons, but for the purpose of this argument it comes down to anti-competitiveness. And yet, unquestionably, Goodreads equals traffic and visibility for authors. That’s the reality. When people provide positive ratings and/or leave comments, that boosts the odds of more people discovering my work. Goodreads is a nice way to say hey thanks (or whatever your version of that is) if anything here interests you. I’m not going to stop you from trying it out, however I’m also not going to slam you over the head with this sort of request.

There are other ways to get the word out, of course. I mean, while I’m here, there’s nothing more awesome than bumping into someone who’s read one of my books, so feel free to spread the word the ol’ fashioned way: word-of-mouth. 

I also accept that, despite being a bit of an introvert, I could do more to get the word out, like advertising this blog a little more on social media. The irony is that I feel self-conscious driving people toward my blog, this place on the internet where I post things for the general public to see. Anyhoo, that’s me.

Share
Posted on

Pankaj Mishra

Last week I had the pleasure of seeing journalist and essayist Pankaj Mishra deliver a rousing speech at the Royal Ontario Museum, as part of his being awarded the 2024 Weston International Award. Mishra most recently wrote an excoriating piece for the London Review of Books on The Shoa After Gaza. In his writing and arguments I really appreciate his combination of intellectual principle, and clarity, two things that don’t often combine as elegantly as in Mishra’s prose.

His speech was wide-ranging, and I would do it injustice to attempt summarizing it. That said, broadly, it was about the problems with Western media and it’s inability to capture situations such as what’s happening in Gaza without appearing to sanitize the language used to talk about inhumanity, or to display a complete lack of curiosity about the welfare of brown and Black bodies. How difficult it seemed for mainstream American journalists to talk plainly about the militarized crackdowns on protests in their own country.

One of my takeaways is that there are a lot of mainstream journalists and institutions who are beholden to a liberalism that attempts to peddle a singular neutral truth and is completely unable to work with complexity (such as multiple perspectives).

Personally, there are two current journalistic trends that drive me crazy:

  1. Talking about smartphones and their effect on youth, where “smartphone” for all intents and purposes is clumsily subbed in for what is largely “social media”. By using it as a catch-all I feel we’re shielding social media companies from social responsibility. There’s no compelling research that shows an adverse affect on youths with smartphones — they can distract, but they can also help people connect.
  2. Columnists who trip over themselves to make sure that the left and right are equally to blame for what ails society, despite widespread right wing terrorism on the climb, a literal fascist running for re-election, and all the while the people who own our social media accounts — some of whom, like Facebook, prevent people in my country from distributing news articles to each other — are libertarian billionaires.

Share
Posted on

Book Three Reveal

So, as I mentioned last month two months ago, I had delivered Book Three to my agent. He has since added it to his fall catalogue, in time for his yearly trip to the Frankfurt Book Fair. So, in light of the fact that this is now real and legit, I thought I’d (finally) reveal what Book Three is.

The real title is The Stars Align for Disco Santa.

The synopsis I wrote for the catalogue is as follows:

“Marcus is living the dream. Quite literally, it turns out. One fateful day at his tech startup, he finds a sticky note on his desk containing a cryptic message about his ex-girlfriend that draws him into a labyrinthine quest through chaotic film sets, sailing the violent waves of Lake Ontario on a virus-infected author cruise, destined to land on Monster Island . . . only to discover he’s been working in a stupor as a bookstore employee all this time, under the effects of a powerful medical prototype that has created a life-like inner world for him to experience, a world drawn from his and others’ memories, including his ex-girlfriend, Marta, and his mysterious half-sister, Jocelyn, who happens to be the architect of the experiment.

Evoking the hit Apple TV+ series Severance and reminiscent of Murakami’s The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle, The Stars Align for Disco Santa is a heartfelt satire of misplaced desire and the limits of our control, a fast-paced novel that is as much about family and grief as it is an offbeat joyride through the not-so-funhouse of the psyche, asking the question: What matters?”

The cat is out of the bag now, and I no longer have to use “Book Three” to describe this! I am released!

Share
Posted on

Priorities

Being in-between projects, I’ve had some time to reflect on a number of what’s next ruminations. Such ruminations aren’t always healthy. There are a lot of people out there who don’t know how to kick back, and feel the compulsion to thrust themselves into the next thing, whether or not that’s what’s best for them.

I’m a fairly compulsive writer. When I don’t have a novel in the works (in whatever stage) I have a short story kicking around. That said, it’s also mid-August (so much for weekly blog entries — sorry, folks) which is historically, in my professional world as a psychotherapist, the time of year when people take stock. Summer is fading, vacations have been taken, the world of work is growing louder after a prolonged period of sunshine and chilling. For those with children, school is beginning. For those in corporate settings, the fourth quarter looms to the degree that there might as well be a target on December…even though it’s August. And because I’m human why shouldn’t I experience some of this?

Sure enough I’ve begun to give some thought to where my priorities should be. As a shrink, I’d like to advertise my Business Therapy side project more, as it’s steadily gaining traction and promises to keep me engaged (after twelve years I needed something to mix things up in my practice). As a writer, I’m weighing applying another grant due in September (and no, my previous attempts this year haven’t borne much fruit), but also looking for markets that offer a venue for satire (so far: not many explicitly are looking for humour, which kinda sucks). Personally, I want to find the right balance between staying active (because I’m half-cattle dog, basically) without over-committing to activities that I won’t be able to fulfill to my satisfaction. I like growth, but don’t want to find myself exhausted in its pursuit.

Balance, man. <- this is a line from the beginning of my recently-delivered novel (aka Book Three), which stands in contrast to what the protagonist, Marcus, ends up experiencing. I have to say that this book feels like the most honest thing I’ve ever written (outside of my short story from 2015, Second World). It’s ultimately about figuring out “what matters,” even if the answer is something that doesn’t get 150 likes on social media. As I wrote in my notes, it’s about being okay with what might end up only being “ok.”

On this note, I hope you’re holding up okay, and taking moments for yourself to take stock, even though that can be intimidating.

Share
Proudly powered by WordPress