It gets worse. I once picked up this book at an airport while looking for something braindead to read:
I never actually heard of Clive Cussler before, but apparently he had this series attached to his name that his son is now just continuing so they can keep a dead guy's name alive as a brand. The book was dreadfully boring, btw.
It gets worse. I once picked up this book at an airport while looking for something braindead to read:
I never actually heard of Clive Cussler before, but apparently he had this series attached to his name that his son is now just continuing so they can keep a dead guy's name alive as a brand. The book was dreadfully boring, btw.
Love Cussler! His Dirk Pitt series (that started in the 70s) Really ignited my love of reading.
He has a series called Issac Bell about a detective in 1900 that I enjoy that he started about 25 years ago
Tom Clancy is like that too. Seems there is at least a new book every year even though he has been dead since 2013. Of course, he allegedly used ghostwriters when he was alive and his name is just a brand by now, but come on. Same for James Patterson (still alive though).
The Wheel of Time series by Robert Jordan was finished by Brandon Sanderson after Jordan's death etc.
There's been J.R.R. Tolkien books published fairly recently! (Dead since 1973.) And while I don't know what I believe, Christopher Tolkien could have made these up all by himself. Who the hell is going to know how finished these supposedly "found manuscripts" actually were?
And going further back, Dumas used ghostwriters extensively, and while extremely talented, he was also like a popular brand author at the time. The Count of Monte Cristo is believed to be written by Dumas himself, but the plot outline is by Auguste Maquet.
It's not a new thing. And it's not going to disappear anytime soon.
I'm aware it happens, and honestly, I don't know if a deal was made with his estate or if he was fine with it before he died. As far as I know he never did it while he was alive like Tom Clancy, who did it since like the mid 90s, or Jim Davis who's been doing it (did it? not sure if still alive) for decades, but Garfield will live forever.
There's also the Bourne Identity guy, Robert Lundlum, he's been dead for a while, yet there are new Bourne books every year.
I know it happens, I know it's happened literally going back to the Bible, I'm not arguing against it. I'm just upset it's being done with an author who never did it while alive and I haven't read anything regarding him being fine with it or a deal being reached a la James Earl Jones retiring from acting, but signing a deal with Disney saying it was fine to replicate his voice with AI. So, from MY point of view, all I see is his wife and his publisher milking his money. And it's gross.
There's been J.R.R. Tolkien books published fairly recently! (Dead since 1973.) And while I don't know what I believe, Christopher Tolkien could have made these up all by himself. Who the hell is going to know how finished these supposedly "found manuscripts" actually were?
This is a bit different, since the Legendarium was the personal lifetime project of JRRT and he did a lot of unpublished writing, revisions and such, of which we have actual proof, sometimes barely readable handwritten manuscripts and so on. I have read most of the stuff that was released and it's definitely not "fake" - you could argue whether some of the latter releases are necessary, as you get basic storyline in Silmarillion (which was already an editorial patchwork by Christopher and Guy Gavriel Kay - and an excellent one, they managed to recreate the "Bible feel" - a pastiche of written-down oral history going back centuries, with all the repetitions, asides, geography, weird tangents, multiple names etc.) and most of the stuff was already published in the titanic 12-volume History of Middle-earth, but then again, we got the three books of "big stories": Children of Húrin, which is excellent and deserves the expanded edition, patchwork of notes and different versions as it may be; Beren and Lúthien, which doesn't say much new, but is worth it on the strength of the story alone (and the hilarious early version where the villains were cats
"Very remarkable is the story, as it was told in The Tale of Tinúviel, of the captivity of Beren, on his journey to Angband in quest of a Silmaril, by Tevildo Prince of Cats; so too is the total subsequent transformation of that story. But if we say that the castle of the cats ‘is’ the tower of Sauron on Tol-in-Gaurhoth ‘Isle of Werewolves’ it can only be, as I have remarked elsewhere, in the sense that it occupies the same ‘space’ in the narrative. Beyond this there is no point in seeking even shadowy resemblances between the two establishments. The monstrous gormandising cats, their kitchens and their sunning terraces, and their engagingly Elvish-feline names, Miaugion, Miaulë, Meoita, have all vanished without trace"
)
and Fall of Gondolin, which is mostly superfluous and not that interesting, but hey, it is the very first thing Tolkien started to work on, still in poetic form, while laying in a lazaret and like one of the three biggies, it deserves a special treatment. And the last thing released that I read, Fall of Númenor, is really good, as the Second Age sources are really scarce in Tolkien's writings and your typical reader won't be going through HoME or The Unfinished Tales just like that.
Also, the editorial work is really good, with us having different versions of various stories, sometimes with only minor alterations, sometimes with huge ones, with Christopher (or Hammond and Scull) openly admitting corrections (according to JRRT's latter preference or correcting a diverging typesetting, like the first reprint of Fellowship that has made alterations that were pervasive until 2004) and conjecture, especially when he himself wasn't sure what was meant by the particular JRRT's amendment.
It's not for everyone, but to me it's an extremely fascinating read. The LOTR annotations (by the aforementioned Hammond and Scull) are just amazing, with stuff like notes on the calendar and the painstakingly obstinate care JRRT has invested in making sure the phases of the Moon are correct for specific members of the Fellowship on specific days.
TL;DR these feel authentic to me, especially since it would be too much of very subtle work for a very limited potential success (i. e. popular as Tolkien may be, many readers will rather buy, let alone read another leather-bound version of LOTR and the Hobbit instead).
Technically, I’m still 80% done with E.B. Sledge’s book “With the Old Breed,” his autobiographical account of his time in the Pacific serving in the US Marine Corps in WW2.
The book is among the source material used in the mini-series “The Pacific.”
It’s excellent if you’re interested in reading firsthand accounts of soldiers fighting in WW2.
Okay, all the discussion on KISS in this forum made me want to go read more about them.
(Still not a fan, but Detroit Rock City is a catchy tune).
I’m almost finished with Ace Frehley's autobiography “No Regrets.”
It’s about what I expected and gives some insights into Ace’s perspective on the band’s 9 year journey while he was a member.
Ironically, despite its title, Ace seems to harbor more than a few regrets, but leaving KISS wasn’t one of them.
I’d recommend it to anyone who’s a fan of musician biographies regardless of whether or not you like KISS (again, I’m not a fan but still find Cold Gin to be a toe tapper of a song).
Keeping with the KISS autobiography theme, since each of the original four members wrote one, I’m reading Gene Simmons’s “Kiss and Make-up.”
It starts out very interesting, where he discusses his mother and his childhood growing up in Israel in the 1940s-50s.
It stays somewhat interesting as he discusses the band’s history but Gene feels the need to chronicle just about every girl he’s ever been with.
I’m not sure how much of that is posturing or how much can be attributed to Simmons possibly having had a sex compulsion problem but it slows down the book and is annoying.
So far, I liked Frehley’s book better. I’m still not a KISS fan even though I reluctantly concede God of Thunder has an atmospheric quality that makes it a highlight of their setlist.
Keeping with the KISS autobiography theme, since each of the original four members wrote one, I’m reading Gene Simmons’s “Kiss and Make-up...
It stays somewhat interesting as he discusses the band’s history but Gene feels the need to chronicle just about every girl he’s ever been with.
I’m not sure how much of that is posturing or how much can be attributed to Simmons possibly having had a sex compulsion problem but....
Could be both, could be inflated ego from being a celebrity who have ridiculous easy access to anything they can think of. I'm not a fan of Kiss, they have one or two enjoyable songs and that's it. However I was a big fan of the reality show Gene Simmons' Family Jewels. The reason for that being that it's mostly around his home life and how whenever he wants to puff his chest or brag for the camera he is quickly cut down by his teenage kids and/or his wife. Fucking hilarious television. I particularly enjoyed one episode when his son snuck out and took the car without permission and had a minor accident. Gene, sensing a disturbance in the force, wakes up in the middle of the night, does a round of the house, finds his kid and car missing, flips out, calls his son on the cellphone and goes picks him up. It was funny and endearing seeing this "rock god" just being a dad.
Having read Ace Frehley’s and Gene Simmons’s autobiographies, I’m now reading and 1/3 of the way finished with Peter Criss’s “From Make-up to Break up.”
Criss’s book is by far the most honest sounding one. Its syntax is a bit chaotic, with timelines jumping around, sometimes in the same paragraph.
In contrast to the image-controlled tone of Simmons’s book or more confrontational tone of Frehley’s, Criss has more positive things to say about everyone involved. He criticizes as well but his sound more like a person griping about their dysfunctional relatives rather than containing real animosity.
Despite being the oldest member of the band, and already married when KISS formed, Peter seems the least mature of the group. It’s almost as though he never really “grew up” past an adolescent emotional state.
From his recollections, it seems he considered his bandmates and crew his friends rather than just associates. His immaturity and lack of self-awareness at the time likely caused him to miss cues where his behavior or performance put his membership in jeopardy.
Out of the KISS bios I’ve read so far, only Criss’s displays a sense of enjoyment and wonder at the band’s success during its heyday.
I’m saving Stanley’s for last both because it’s the longest book and I suspect, like Gene’s, it will include a lot of PR and image control.
I'm so glad I discovered it. And him. And them, since it's a trilogy of a kind (third book published after author's death).
Hotly recommended.
18 years old British lad, looking more like a spectacular failure rather than the famous writer, fighter and many other things he'd become later, on his way on foot (mostly) from Holland to Constantinople in the 1930s.
Beautiful language (reading with phone in hand to check all the words I'm not familiar with), erudite observations (reading with phone in hand to check all the allusions I'm not familiar with), remarkable joie de vivre I'm familiar with so no phone needed for a change. Been to some of the places where he's been, seen some of the things that he's seen, fantastic to see them the way he did.
Amazing.
An Ex of mine back in college read Grapes of Wrath and HATED it LOL. Said it was boring as fuck. However I have seen the movie for East of Eden and LOOOOOVED it. James Dean, gone too soon. I'lll keep an eye out for both. I'm still, slowly, working through The Great Train Robbery.
An Ex of mine back in college read Grapes of Wrath and HATED it LOL. Said it was boring as fuck. However I have seen the movie for East of Eden and LOOOOOVED it. James Dean, gone too soon. I'lll keep an eye out for both. I'm still, slowly, working through The Great Train Robbery.
I’m now reading Paul Stanley’s Face the Music: a Life Exposed.
So far, it’s about his troubled childhood, dysfunctional family, and discovery of music. And, of course, like every other member of the band’s autobiography, his book talks about his sexual exploits.
I’d known Paul had a disability but that might be something that’s not common knowledge. It definitely affected his self esteem.
Since it involved his right ear, causing partial deafness, it is interesting that he overcame it to have a musical career.
Once I’ve finished it, I’ll summarize all of the four founding members of KISS’s autobiographies. On balance none of the books are boring. You’d have to be somewhat of a KISS fan (I’m an exception) or at least a fan of musical history to find these books interesting.
I mean, sure, their cover of 2000 Man is arguably better than the original Stones version.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
