Showing posts sorted by relevance for query STEPHEN KING. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query STEPHEN KING. Sort by date Show all posts

Sunday, August 27, 2023

Stephen King won't forbid AI from training on his writing, and he's not afraid of AI ... yet

Jordan Hart
Sat, August 26, 2023 


Stephen King weighs in on AI in an essay published by The Atlantic.

King said that he's not opposed to programmers using his works to teach AI about creativity.

Thousands of other authors have objected to their work being used in AI without permission.


Artificial intelligence may be getting more capable, but Stephen King believes it still has some learning to do before it can successfully mimic human creativity.

In an essay for The Atlantic, the author said he wouldn't object to his work being used to teach AI programs, and he's "not yet" nervous about technology's potential.

"Would I forbid the teaching (if that is the word) of my stories to computers? Not even if I could," King stated.

Even human writers need to be readers if they hope to write well, according to King. Uploading the works of others to computers, or "state-of-the-art digital blenders" as he put it, can teach AI how to produce better art.

As of now, the 75-year-old wrote, AI's creativity isn't on par with the mental capabilities of a person. He compared AI-generated poems to "movie money: good at first glance, not so good upon close inspection."

Fellow authors Margaret Atwood and James Patterson joined over 8,000 other writers in signing an open letter demanding compensation for their work being used by AI companies without consent. The letter was sent to tech CEOs Sam Altman of OpenAI, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Sundar Pichai of Alphabet, and more in July.

"Millions of copyrighted books, articles, essays, and poetry provide the "food" for AI systems, endless meals for which there has been no bill," the authors wrote in a letter published by the Authors Guild.

Elsewhere in the literary community, audiobook narrators have also raised concerns of their voices being cloned by AI. Audiobook sellers — including Apple Books — have already rolled out their own AI narrators.

King said that forbidding programmers from using his to teach AI is essentially pointless.

"I might as well be King Canute, forbidding the tide to come in. Or a Luddite trying to stop industrial progress by hammering a steam loom to pieces," King wrote.

Monday, May 20, 2024

Stephen King's Justice Samuel Alito Remark Takes Internet By Storm



By Billie Schwab Dunn
Pop Culture and Entertainment Reporter
May 18, 2024 

Writer Stephen King has "no words" after learning an upside-down U.S. flag was flying outside the home of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, following the violent aftermath of the 2020 election.

The distress signal—used at the time by some supporters of former President Donald Trump to contest the election results—was spotted on Alito's lawn in Alexandria, Virginia, on January 17, 2021, The New York Times reported Thursday. In an email to the newspaper, Alito denied any involvement in flying the flag upside-down, claiming his wife, Martha-Ann, was solely responsible, the Times stated.

"A Supreme Court justice—Samuel Alito—flying an upside-down flag outside his house, indicating Stop the Steal. I have no words," horror author King posted to X, formerly Twitter. At the time of writing, his post had been viewed 702,700 times.

Despite a lack of evidence, Trump and his allies have repeatedly claimed that his 2020 loss to President Joe Biden was due to widespread election fraud. The photograph of the inverted flag at Alito's home was captured just 11 days after a mass of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6 while Congress was certifying Biden's win.

The Times report comes a few weeks after the Supreme Court heard arguments on whether Trump is protected by presidential immunity in his federal election subversion case. The High Court is expected to issue a ruling in the coming weeks.



Newsweek has emailed a spokesperson for King and the Supreme Court, for comment by Judge Alito and his wife Martha-Ann, on Friday.

King, who joined the Democratic Party in 1970 and is a vocal critic of Trump, often takes to social media to share his thoughts on various political issues—and Thursday was no different. People have taken to the comments to share their anger and frustration over the news.

"And the fact that Alito thinks it's all ok as long as he blames it on his wife is insane. Between Thomas and Alito, this is very, very bad," one person wrote.

"The [sic] is precisely why the Trump immunity case will get dragged out to the very last day of the Supreme Court's session," said another.

A third added: "And he doesn't recuse from any of the 1-6 cases. [angry emoji]"
Stephen King and United States Supreme Court Associate Justice Samuel Alito. King has weighed in to comment on an upside-down flag being displayed outside Alito's home. JOHN LAMPARSKI/ALEX WONG/WIREIMAGE/GETTY IMAGES

However, others disagree, justifying the upside-down flag hanging outside Alito's home.

"How dare others have opinions which differ from mine," a different X user commented.

"That's not what the upside-down flag means. It means 'distress.' You'd think your team could do some research," said another.

While an upside-down flag has traditionally been used as a call for help, in 2020 it took off as a symbol of Trump's "Stop the Steal" campaign.

"Everyone in America who cherishes our way of life oughta do the same," another person wrote.

The conservative justice said in a statement emailed to the Times that he "had no involvement whatsoever in the flying of the flag" and that it was "briefly placed by Mrs. Alito in response to a neighbor's use of objectionable and personally insulting language on yard signs."

Alito is not the first justice to face questions over his potential partiality to the former president. Justice Clarence Thomas has also faced calls to recuse himself from Trump's immunity case after his wife, Ginni, said that she attended the former president's rally before the January 6 attack.

Thomas has also been questioned over his relationship with conservative figures like billionaire GOP donor Harlan Crow, who, according to reports by ProPublica, has paid for several luxurious trips for Thomas and his wife. He defended their relationship in a statement: "Early in my tenure at the Court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable."

The Supreme Court adopted its first code of ethics in November 2023 following the scandals involving Thomas. The policies were met with swift criticism, however, for lacking a clear enforcement measure for how justices would be held accountable.

The ethics code, similar to the long-standing one to which lower courts are held, states that judges need to remain impartial and avoid political statements on issues that could be brought before them.

According to the Times report, which cited a list of guidelines that was handed to the Supreme Court staff, the court has warned its employees to avoid public political displays. The court's internal rule book also bans employees from displaying signs or bumper stickers.

 

Farah Griffin: If Sotomayor flew upside-down flag GOP would call for her resignation


Former White House communications director Alyssa Farah Griffin said Sunday that Republicans would be demanding resignations from liberal justices if they were reported to have displayed upside-down flags on their lawns after former President Trump was elected in 2016.

New reporting from the New York Times revealed an upside-down flag had been on display outside Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s house briefly on Jan. 17, 2021, days before President Biden’s inauguration and less than two weeks after the deadly Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

The upside-down flag had largely been associated at the time with the “Stop the Steal” movement and efforts to stop the transfer of power based on false claims of election fraud. Alito has said his wife was responsible for the flag.

In a panel discussion on CNN’s “State of the Union,” the former Trump aide-turned-CNN pundit criticized the Republican response to the reporting, which she called “deeply disturbing.”

“If after Donald Trump won in 2016, Justice [Sonia Sotomayor] hung a flag upside down on her front lawn, we, Republicans, would be calling for her resignation,” Farah Griffin said Sunday.

“I find it deeply disturbing, and I don‘t think we can gloss over it,” she added.

The reporting has been met with widespread criticism from Democrats, many of whom have also called on Alito to recuse himself from all Jan. 6-related cases before the Supreme Court.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) on Friday called on Alito to apologize for “disrespecting the American flag and sympathizing with right-wing violent insurrectionists.”

“He must recuse himself from cases involving the 2020 election and [former President Trump],” Jeffries continued, referring to Alito. He added that Congress should consider new ethics reform legislation for the high court.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) also called on Alito to recuse himself from cases related to Jan. 6, 2021, and the 2020 election, saying, “Flying an upside-down American flag — a symbol of the so-called ‘Stop the Steal’ movement — clearly creates the appearance of bias.”

In a statement to the Times, Alito said, “I had no involvement whatsoever in the flying of the flag,” adding, “It was briefly placed by Mrs. Alito in response to a neighbor’s use of objectionable and personally insulting language on yard signs.”



Samuel Alito's snide denial of his Jan. 6 flag is just as ugly as flying it in the first place


The Supreme Court justice views his fellow Americans with contempt, and not as citizens he's serving

By AMANDA MARCOTTE
Senior Writer
SALON
PUBLISHED MAY 18, 2024 

Samuel Alito | An upside down American flag (Photo illustration by Salon/Getty Images)

Add one more incident to the "shocking but not surprising" pile that grows
 mountainously high in an era of rising fascism: Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito flew a flag at his house signaling support for the Capitol insurrection in the days after January 6, 2021.

The inverted American flag was a popular signal of support for Trump's lies about the 2020 election and the MAGA riot on the Capitol. As reported Thursday by Jodi Kantor of the New York Times, photographs and testimony from Alito's northern Virginia neighbors show an "upside-down flag was aloft on Jan. 17, 2021" at his home. At the same time, the Times notes, Alito unsuccessfully attempted to get the court to take a case undermining the 2020 election.

Republicans are rubbing people's noses in the fact that there's nothing the rest of us can do to stop them from advertising their fascist sympathies.
Advertisement:

Gross and undeniable in its meaning, of course. But Alito, who has never been interested in honesty with the public, offered a glib rebuttal, telling the New York Times, "I had no involvement whatsoever in the flying of the flag." Instead, he blamed his wife, saying she flew the inverted flag as a "response to a neighbor’s use of objectionable and personally insulting language on yard signs."

As Joe Scarborough on MSNBC retorted Friday morning, "nobody believes him." There's no universe, Scarborough noted, in which the upside-down flag is used as a way to throw the finger to neighbors you're in a spat with. This is Alito lying by omission. As Kantor swiftly discovered, the argument the Alitos were having with their neighbors wasn't over loud parties or defecating dogs, it was over Jan. 6, which the neighbors in question vociferously objected to. Martha-Ann Alito took offense to a neighbor who "displayed an anti-Trump sign with an expletive" around the election. Things escalated, and, as neighbors and documentary evidence show, the inverted flag was up in the days after the riot.

A more honest description of the conflict would be that the Alitos rejected their neighbor's right to express their political opinions freely. In order to convey their disapproval of this use of First Amendment rights, the Alito household sent a message of support to people who used violence in an attempt to destroy American democracy. As more than one commentator pointed out, Alito continues to run around pretending he's a champion of "free speech," but when his neighbors expressed an opinion held by most Americans, he (or his wife, if you believe him) responded with an endorsement of violence to end constitutional democracy as we know it.

When asked about this by Shannon Bream of Fox News on Friday, Alito doubled down on the faux outrage over curse words and claimed his wife only expressed support for the Jan. 6 rioters after neighbors said mean things to the couple about how violent insurrections are, in fact, bad.

As a reminder, four rioters and five police officers died as a consequence of the riot. Alito is unsubtly suggesting that those deaths somehow are less offensive than some kids seeing a curse word. Even then, his "logic" falls apart at first blush. After all, children visit the Capitol every day, yet Alito is apparently fine with it being subject to people breaking windows, smearing feces, shedding blood, and threatening murder — all with quite salty language, as the voluminous video evidence from that day shows.

Related
Samuel Alito scandal shows why conservative justices on the Supreme Court are so whiny

Additionally, Alito's snide dishonesty is insulting, and it is meant to be.

For someone who feigns outrage at curse words, he is basically throwing a big middle finger to all American citizens. He's not just rejecting his duty as a public official to uphold democracy, but sneering at the idea that he even owes an explanation to the people he was supposedly hired to serve, who pay his salary. He feels no need to put the effort into a better lie. After all, what are any of us little people going to do about it?
Advertisement:

Alito's quasi-denials operate as confessions, and not just of his and his wife's sympathies for fascist seditionists. His open contempt for the idea that he has to answer to anyone radiates through these fake excuses. It ends up underscoring why he and the Mrs. were so enthused about Trump's attempted coup: They agree with the foundational sentiment that the American people should not be in control of their government. As Adam Serwer recently wrote in the Atlantic, Alito "expects the public to silently acquiesce" to his authority, "without scrutiny, criticism, or protest." Alito sees us as subjects whose duty is to bend the knee to him and his preferred leaders, like Trump. With this flag gesture, he's signaled support for violence as the enforcement mechanism.

Again, shocking but not surprising. Alito has long taken a "tough on crime" attitude that leads to almost no sympathy for the rights of criminal defendants — unless those defendants are aligned with him politically. When it comes to Trump and the Jan. 6 defendants, Alito has expressed a view that the criminal charges are illegitimate. As Scott Lemieux of Lawyers, Guns & Money noted, Alito's belief that he and his are above scrutiny of the law was evident even during Alito's confirmation hearing in 2006. When Alito was questioned about his participation in an organization dedicated to keeping Princeton's student body white and male, his wife threw a massive public tantrum, weeping giant crocodile tears and stomping out of the hearing. Their self-perception is not "public servant," so much as "medieval royalty."

As Don Moynihan wrote in a recent newsletter, far too many Republicans and their apologists seem to excuse this far-right radicalism because the people who are expressing it have expensive clothes, elite educations, and fat investment portfolios. He notes that Speaker of House Mike Johnson, R-La., is laying "the groundwork for another coup attempt in plain sight," while the media's outrage is far more focused on "scruffy students" expressing their perfectly democratic right to disagree with their country's foreign policy. Meanwhile, Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., signaled support for an organization, the Proud Boys, whose leaders are currently in prison for violent sedition.

I have one quarrel with Rep. Jason Crow, D-Colo.'s claim that Gaetz is trying to be "subtle" with his message. As with Alito, the dog-whistling is no longer about trying to smuggle fascist messages to supporters without the press or liberals noticing. Republicans are rubbing people's noses in the fact that there's nothing the rest of us can do to stop them from advertising their fascist sympathies. Their impunity is part of the argument against democracy. By flaunting their untouchability, they're treating the end of democracy as a done deal. If people as unapologetically hateful can't be removed from office, their behavior suggests, then democracy is dead already.

And yes, it's hard not to look at these self-satisfied moral monsters without feeling despair. But no one should fall for their tricks. Because of Trump, anti-democratic forces have had some major victories, but the fight is far from over. President Joe Biden's presence in the White House shows that democracy prevailed in 2021. Trump's ability to mount another coup will be hamstrung by the fact that he's out of office and has fewer levers of power. That's why people like Gaetz and Alito are so focused on demoralizing their opposition. They know Trump's ability to end democracy depends heavily on whether or not people fight back. They haven't won until they've successfully scared people into thinking it's already over.

Amanda Marcotte is a senior politics writer at Salon and the author of "Troll Nation: How The Right Became Trump-Worshipping Monsters Set On Rat-F*cking Liberals, America, and Truth Itself." Follow her on Twitter @AmandaMarcotte and sign up for her biweekly politics newsletter, Standing Room Only.

Tuesday, August 02, 2022

Why Stephen King testified for the government in a major publishing merger trial
Hannah Murdock - Yesterday 

Stephen King testified Tuesday against his own publisher, Simon & Schuster, in a major antitrust trial.

© Patrick Semansky, Associated Press
Author Stephen King arrives at federal court before testifying for the Department of Justice as it bids to block the proposed merger of two of the world’s biggest publishers, Penguin Random House and Simon & Schuster, Tuesday, Aug. 2, 2022, in Washington. King gave testimony opposing the merger.

The horror author was the star witness for the government in a lawsuit against the proposed merger of Penguin Random House and rival publisher Simon & Schuster, The Associated Press reported.

The Department of Justice is suing to block the proposed $2.2 billion merger, which would bring the “Big Five” book publishers down to four, according to The Associated Press.

The government argues that the merger would create less competition in the publishing market, leading to fewer options for consumers and potentially leading to authors being paid less.

“The evidence will show that the proposed merger would likely result in authors of anticipated top-selling books receiving smaller advances, meaning authors who labor for years over their manuscripts will be paid less for their efforts,” the government argued in a brief, per Reuters.

King has been outspoken about his disapproval of the merger, tweeting last year, “The more the publishers consolidate, the harder it is for indie publishers to survive.”

While on the stand, King stated that “consolidation is bad for the competition.” He also talked about the difficulties to earn a living that authors experience in the publishing industry today.

“It’s a tough world out there now. That’s why I came,” he said, according to Deadline.

The trial is expected to last two to three weeks, according to Reuters.

Thursday, September 02, 2021

Jen Psaki schools male reporters after abortion questions: 'You've never faced those choices'

Sarah K. Burris
September 02, 2021

Jen Psaki (AFP)

White House press secretary Jen Psaki had little patience for male reporters demanding she addressed abortion at the Thursday press briefing.

President Joe Biden announced Wednesday and again Thursday that he was committed to protecting women's health and reproductive freedom after the Supreme Court nullified Roe v. Wade by allowing a Texas law to take effect. The key part of the court ruling gave the constitutional right to privacy and an explicit liberty provision. Individuals in Texas can now demand private health details from those they suspect have had an abortion.

"The effort and the focus of the federal government is to look for every resource, every level at our disposal to ensure that women in Texas have the ability to seek healthcare," said Psaki as questions about the ruling began.

"Why does the president support abortion when his own Catholic faith teaches abortion is morally wrong?" asked one reporter.


"He believes that it is a woman's right, a woman's body, her choice," said Psaki. "He believes it is up to a woman to make those decisions and make those decisions with her doctor. I know you have never faced those choices nor have you been pregnant. But for women out there who have faced those choices, this is an incredibly difficult thing in the president believes that their rights should be respected. Go ahead. I think we need to move on. You have had plenty of time today."

See the video below:

Jen Psaki schools male reporters after abortion questions: 'You've never faced those choices'youtu.be

Joe Biden slams US Supreme Court refusal to block Texas' new 'extreme' abortion ban

The US president said the Supreme Court's ruling was "an unprecedented assault on a woman's constitutional rights".


A protest against the six-week abortion ban at the Capitol in Austin, Texas 
Source: Austin American-Statesman

US President Joe Biden lashed out on Thursday at the Supreme Court's refusal to block a Texas law banning abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, warning that it threatens to unleash "unconstitutional chaos."

"The Supreme Court's ruling overnight is an unprecedented assault on a woman's constitutional rights under Roe v. Wade, which has been the law of the land for almost fifty years," Mr Biden said in a statement.

Roe v. Wade is the landmark 1973 Supreme Court case that enshrined a woman's right to an abortion in the United States.

"This (Texas) law is so extreme it does not even allow for exceptions in the case of rape or incest," Mr Biden said.


Texas valedictorian takes aim at state's 'dehumanising' new abortion law in viral graduation speech

The Democratic president took particular aim at a provision of the bill passed by Republican politicians in Texas that allows members of the public to sue doctors who perform abortions or anyone facilitating the procedure.

"By allowing a law to go into effect that empowers private citizens in Texas to sue health care providers, family members supporting a woman exercising her right to choose after six weeks, or even a friend who drives her to a hospital or clinic, it unleashes unconstitutional chaos and empowers self-anointed enforcers to have devastating impacts," Mr Biden said.

"Complete strangers will now be empowered to inject themselves in the most private and personal health decisions faced by women," he said.

Mr Biden said he was launching a "whole-of-government effort" to "see what steps the Federal Government can take to ensure that women in Texas have access to safe and legal abortions."


Stephen King buries Susan Collins: 
‘Women in Texas must pay the price for her gullibility’
Bob Brigham
September 02, 2021

Composite image of author Stephen King (screengrab) and Maine Republican Senator Susan Collins, photo by Gage Skidmore.

Famous Bangor resident and bestselling author Stephen King on Thursday slammed his home-state's senior senator after the United States Supreme Court refused to block the controversial anti-abortion law passed by Texas Republicans.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the high court and the vote has haunted her since the court's overnight decision, as she repeatedly insisted that Kavanaugh did not pose a threat to abortion rights.

King slammed Collins for being gullible.

"Remember when Susan Collins said she was convinced that Brett Kavanaugh believed a woman's right to choose was 'settled law?' She was wrong," King wrote.



"Women in Texas must pay the price for her gullibility," he added.

King had previously slammed the Texas law as religious extremism.

"The Taliban would love the Texas abortion law," he wrote.



Minnesota braces for influx of out-of-state abortion patients

The U.S. Supreme Court decision on Texas' 6-week ban means more patients will travel to Minnesota for care.

By Emma Nelson Star Tribune
SEPTEMBER 2, 2021 — 6:58PM

LM OTERO - ASSOCIATED PRESS
A security guard opened the door to the Whole Women’s Health Clinic in Fort Worth, Texas, Wednesday, Sept. 1, 2021.

Minnesota physicians and organizations that help women access abortions are bracing for a spike in demand, days after Texas enacted a law considered the most restrictive abortion ban since Roe v. Wade.

The law prohibits abortions as early as six weeks — before some women know they're pregnant — and is already pushing people in Texas and surrounding states to seek abortions elsewhere. Destinations include Minnesota, where abortion access is constitutionally protected and less restrictive than many states. Meanwhile, in neighboring North Dakota, lawmakers on Thursday signaled that they plan to introduce their own version of the Texas law.

Though reproductive health advocates in Minnesota were anticipating a major challenge to Roe v. Wade, many expected it would come next year, when the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on Mississippi's 15-week abortion ban, said Megumi Rierson, communications manager for Our Justice, a Twin Cities-based organization that helps pay for abortions. The court's decision early Thursday not to block the Texas law changed that calculus.

"Providers and advocates were all preparing for an increase in requests, but we thought that we had a lot longer to develop some infrastructure," she said. "And we don't, because now it's here."

The pressure on Minnesota is only expected to rise if more states follow Texas' lead — something advocates say they predict after the court's decision. Minnesota is home to a handful of abortion clinics in the Twin Cities, Duluth and Rochester, as well as the telemedicine clinic Just the Pill, which provides medication abortions to women in Minnesota and surrounding states.

Dr. Julie Amaon, Just the Pill's medical director, said Thursday she's already hearing from patients in Texas and other states looking to travel to Minnesota for medication abortions. Just the Pill is not currently providing services to those patients and does not provide direct referrals for patients in Texas, according to a statement.

The availability of medication abortions via telemedicine helped lower some barriers to abortion that the pandemic created, and it is seen as a potential solution as state restrictions increase. But "it is not the answer to everything," said Dr. Sarah Traxler, chief medical officer with Planned Parenthood North Central States, which serves Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota.

Patients may need or prefer surgical abortions, Traxler said. And though the pandemic prompted the Food and Drug Administration to temporarily allow doctors to mail the drugs to patients, most states surrounding Minnesota restrict telemedicine abortion, she said. Telemedicine laws apply to the state where the patient is, not the provider, so patients in other states would still need to travel to Minnesota to access it.

That means more pressure on brick-and-mortar clinics, which already face hurdles of their own. Though abortion access is constitutionally protected in Minnesota, there are restrictions including a 24-hour waiting period, mandated counseling and a requirement that minors notify both parents.

"If Minnesota ends up having to take care of a large number of women who come from outside of the state, that may create a further access-to-care problem," said Rep. Kelly Morrison, DFL-Deephaven, an obstetrician-gynecologist who has introduced legislation to strengthen reproductive rights. "This is an American problem, but because it's being fought in state legislatures across the country right now, some of the burden is falling disproportionately on certain areas."

In 2019, the legal and policy advocacy organization Gender Justice sued the state on behalf of a group of plaintiffs to challenge Minnesota's abortion restrictions, arguing that they are unconstitutional. The case is expected to go to trial in Ramsey County District Court in June, said Gender Justice Executive Director Megan Peterson.

Meanwhile, Peterson and other advocates said, abortion access in Minnesota remains unchanged.

"A lot of people, including people who maybe need abortion care, will see the news and be really worried about, what does it mean?" Peterson said. "This is very much worth freaking out over, but we don't want to have people think abortion is illegal in Minnesota — it's not."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Sunday, February 02, 2020

Stephen King quits Facebook, 'not comfortable' with false information in political ads

I HAD NO CHOICE THEY KICKED ME OUT SUMMARILY WITH NO NOTICE NOR CHANCE OF APPEAL SO THANKS FOR THE SOLIDARITY 

by WGME Staff Saturday, February 1st 2020

FILE - This May 22, 2018 file photo shows Stephen King
 at the 2018 PEN Literary Gala in New York.
 (Photo by Evan Agostini/Invision/AP, File)

BANGOR, Maine (WGME) -- If you're looking to keep up with Maine author Stephen King on Facebook, don't bother. He isn't there anymore.

Friday night, King tweeted he is quitting Facebook. A search for his page on Facebook Saturday morning came up empty.

According to his tweet, King said he is "not comfortable with the flood of false information that's allowed in its political advertising."

He also expressed doubts over Facebook's ability to protect users' privacy.

Concerns have been raised as to how accurate political advertisements are on Facebook and the company's apparent unwillingness to address those concerns.

Sunday, July 31, 2022

MONOPOLY CAPITALI$M
EXPLAINER: Bid to block book merger sets competition fight



Book Publishers Antitrust Explainer
FILE - Stephen King poses for a photo May 22, 2018, at the 2018 PEN Literary Gala in New York. The government and publishing titan Penguin Random House are set to exchange opening salvos in a federal antitrust trial Monday, Aug. 1, 2022, as the U.S. seeks to block the biggest U.S. book publisher from absorbing rival Simon & Schuster. The government’s “star” witness will be Stephen King, the renowned and genre-transcending author whose works are published by Simon & Schuster. 
Photo by Evan Agostini/Invision

MARCY GORDON
Sat, July 30, 2022

WASHINGTON (AP) — At a time of mega-mergers and flashy high-tech corporate hookups, the biggest U.S. book publisher’s plan to buy the fourth-largest for a mere $2.2 billion may seem somewhat quaint. But the deal represents such a key test for the Biden administration's antitrust policy that the Justice Department is calling an out-of-the-ordinary witness to The Stand: author extraordinaire Stephen King.

In Penguin Random House’s proposed acquisition of rival Simon & Schuster, which would reduce the “Big Five" U.S. publishers to four, the administration is burnishing its antitrust mettle and its fight against corporate concentration.

The Justice Department has sued to block the merger. The trial opens Monday in federal court in Washington.

The government contends the merger would hurt authors and, ultimately, readers, if German media titan Bertelsmann is allowed to buy Simon & Schuster from U.S. media and entertainment company Paramount Global. It says the deal would thwart competition and give Penguin Random House gigantic influence over which books are published in the U.S., likely reducing how much authors are paid and giving consumers fewer books to choose from.

An appearance at some point by King, whose works are published by Simon & Schuster, will be a highly unusual for an antitrust trial and will draw wide attention.

The publishers are fighting the lawsuit. They counter that the merger would strengthen competition among publishers to find and sell the hottest books. It would benefit readers, booksellers and authors, they say.

A look at the case:

PUBLISHING HEAVYWEIGHTS:

The two New York-based publishers each have impressive stables of blockbuster authors who’ve sold multiple millions of copies and have scored multimillion-dollar deals. Within Penguin Random House’s constellation are Barack and Michelle Obama, whose package deal for their memoirs totaled an estimated $65 million, Bill Clinton (he received $15 million for his memoir), Toni Morrison, John Grisham and Dan Brown.

Simon & Schuster counts Hillary Clinton (she received $8 million for hers), Bob Woodward and Walter Isaacson.

And King. His post-apocalyptic novel “The Stand," published in 1978, swirled around a deadly pandemic of weaponized influenza.

Bruce Springsteen split the difference: His “Renegades: Born in the USA," with Barack Obama, was published by Penguin Random House; his memoir, by Simon & Schuster.

___

THROWING THE BOOKS AT THEM

The Justice Department contends in its suit that as things now stand, No. 1 Penguin Random House and No. 4 Simon & Schuster (by total sales) compete fiercely to acquire the rights to publish the anticipated hottest-selling books. If they are allowed to merge, the combined company would control nearly 50% of the market for those books, it says, hurting competition by reducing advances paid to authors and diminishing output, creativity and diversity.

The Big Five — the other three are Hachette, HarperCollins and Macmillan — dominate U.S. publishing. They make up 90% of the market for anticipated top-selling books, the government’s court filing says. “The proposed merger would further increase consolidation in this concentrated industry, make the biggest player even bigger, and likely increase coordination in an industry with a history of coordination among the major publishers,” it says.

The Justice Department case reaches beyond the traditional antitrust concern of concentration raising prices for consumers, pointing to the impact on consumers’ choices and viewing authors as workers as well as sellers of products in the global marketplace of ideas. The notion is that fewer buyers (publishers) competing over the same talent pool reduces sellers’ (authors) bargaining power.

The case “potentially creates a precedent that could be used in the labor area," says Rebecca Allensworth, an antitrust expert who is a law professor at Vanderbilt University.

___

BIDEN’S COMPETITION CRUSADE

The Biden administration is staking out new ground on business concentration and competition, and the government's case against the publishers’ mergers can be viewed as an important step.

President Joe Biden has made competition a pillar of his economic policy, denouncing what he calls the outsized market power of an array of industries and stressing the importance of robust competition to the economy, workers, consumers and small businesses. He has called on federal regulators, notably the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission, to give greater scrutiny to big business combinations.

Biden issued an executive order a year ago targeting what he labeled anticompetitive practices in tech, health care, agriculture and numerous other parts of the economy, laying down 72 actions and recommendations for federal agencies. Targets range from hearing aid prices to airline baggage fees.

Another trial on competition starting Monday in federal court: The Justice Department is suing to block UnitedHealth Group, which runs the biggest U.S. health insurer, from acquiring health-tech company Change Healthcare. The government contends the $13 billion deal would hurt competition and put too much health care claim information in the hands of one company.

___

PUBLISHERS MAKE THEIR CASE

Hold on, Penguin Random House and Simon & Schuster say as they prepare to enter trial: The merger would actually strengthen competition among publishers to find and sell the hottest books, by enabling the combined company to offer greater compensation to authors.

It would benefit readers, booksellers and authors, the publishers say, by creating a more efficient company that would bring lower prices for books. The government has failed to show harm to consumers as readers because the merger wouldn’t push up prices, the companies contend.

“The U.S. publishing industry is robust and highly competitive,” they say in their filing. “More readers are reading books than ever before, and the number grows every year. Publishers compete vigorously to reach those readers, and the only way they can compete effectively is to find, acquire and publish the books readers most want to read. ... The merger at issue in this case will encourage even more competition and growth in the U.S. publishing industry.”

The companies reject the government’s central focus on the market for anticipated best-selling books — defined as those acquired for advances to authors of at least $250,000. They represent only a tiny sliver, about 2%, of all books published by commercial companies, according to the companies’ filing.

___

Follow Marcy Gordon at https://www.twitter.com/mgordonap

Sunday, January 07, 2024

BEST DAVID SOUL OBIT
David Soul, Stephen King and the terrifying power of Salem’s Lot

Alexander Larman
Fri, 5 January 2024

David Soul in Salem's Lot - Alamy

The actor and singer David Soul, who has died at the age of 80, will best be remembered for his iconic performance as the detective Kenneth ‘Hutch’ Hutchinson in the ever-popular TV series Starsky and Hutch. Soul tended to be associated with roles that played on his apparently straight-arrow persona honed in the show, which, as time went by, he tended to play up to for comic effect. The highest-profile parts that he took in later years, unsurprisingly, were self-parodying cameos in everything from the Irvine Welsh adaptation Filth to the likes of Little Britain and Holby City on British television.

Soul’s twinkly, likeable presence made him a natural fit for roles in comedy and light drama, but these unchallenging roles did his acting abilities a disservice. Not only had he managed to subvert his clean-cut looks as early as 1973, in which he played a treacherous police officer in the Dirty Harry picture Magnum Force, but his finest hour as an actor came when he starred in the lead role of the Stephen King adaptation Salem’s Lot in 1979, which was broadcast on CBS as a two-part drama just after Starsky and Hutch came to its conclusion. Had an impressionable teenager watched the miniseries because they were a fan of Soul’s, they would undoubtedly have been scared witless.

Although King was already a bestselling author with a considerable fanbase by November 1979, with several iconic novels including The Shining, Carrie and – naturally – 1975’s Salem’s Lot terrifying millions of readers worldwide, he was not yet a known quantity in TV and film adaptations.

Although Stanley Kubrick was hard at work filming The Shining, which would ultimately, and publicly, disappoint King upon its release in May 1980, the only film of his work that had been released prior to 1979 was Brian de Palma’s Carrie. It had been a considerable box office hit in 1976, as well as winning critical plaudits for the lead performances by Sissy Spacek as the telekinetic teen and Piper Laurie as her religious fanatic mother.


Stephen King in 1970 - Getty

Any adaptation of Salem’s Lot had to live up to this precedent, and Warner Bros Television, who produced the film on a $4 million budget, were careful not to derail the King bandwagon before it had begun. After all, if it was done properly, it could be the beginning of a long and lucrative association.

Yet King was unenthusiastic at first, later saying that “TV is death to horror. When [Salem’s Lot] went to TV, a lot of people moaned and I was one of the moaners.” Initially, attempts to adapt it were dismal; King complained that “Every director in Hollywood who’s ever been involved with horror wanted to do it, but nobody could come up with a script.”

For it to succeed, it would have to take risks, and for them to pay off admirably, and terrifyingly. Its story of a successful writer, Ben Mears – something of a King trope throughout his novels – who returns to his hometown of Salem’s Lot, only to realise that vampirism is rampant in the town, whipped up by the charismatic and villainous Richard Straker, was rich in potential but would need to find the right filmmakers and stars. Otherwise the results could be disappointing, or even ludicrous.


James Mason, Tobe Hooper and David Soul on the set of Salem's Lot - Alamy

The hot horror director of the moment, Tobe Hooper, was hired, fresh from the vast commercial success of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and veteran screen villain James Mason would prove to be a seductive and terrifying Straker, He managed to make even the words “Good evening” sound frighteningly ominous. But in the lead role of Mears, Hooper and the screenwriter Paul Monash – a King veteran, having already produced Carrie – needed to find someone who was a familiar face but not over-associated with the horror genre, who could stand toe-to-toe with Mason and also provide a steadying figure that the audience might empathise with amidst the scares. The producer Richard Kobritz met with Soul, in what the actor later described as an appropriately “black, bleak” office, and offered him the role.

Soul was delighted to be acting opposite Mason, which he called “a real kick”, and the production was set in the town of Ferndale in Northern California. The crucial location was the Marsten House of the novel, a hilltop property with a reputation for being haunted which Mears is planning on writing a book about. An elaborate set was constructed outside Ferndale, in the style of a New England house, although as Soul said “they built the exterior, [but] it wasn’t a whole house…it was a façade, and the interior was at the Warner Brothers lot back in California.

“One day, when we were preparing to shoot up at the house, we heard this horrible crash, and there was this car that had run into a telephone pole. When we reached the car, the driver had this look on his face like he’d seen something impossible, and sure enough, this man had lived in Ferndale for 30 years, and had never seen this before.” Soul would not be the only person aghast at what the production would conjure up there.




Several of Soul’s Starsky co-stars, including Juliette Lewis’s veteran character actor father Geoffrey and George Dzunda – later to meet a grisly end in Basic Instinct – were reunited with him in Salem’s Lot, and Soul enjoyed working with them. But he reserved his highest praise for Mason, who he called “absolutely a marvel…a legend, a real legend, someone who came out of the old school, and boy, you could tell the difference. He really knew his craft.” Belying his terrifying persona on-set, Soul praised Mason as “a joy to be with, and a joy to be around.”

The two may have been deadly adversaries on set, but when not filming, they would head to Mason’s trailer and play cards together, which Mason was a keen aficionado of. And the veteran actor was not above punning humour, either; he referred to Soul and his young co-star Lance Kerwin, who played Mark Petrie, a boy whose knowledge of horror film lore helps solve the mystery of Salem’s Lot, as “Lancesky and Hutch.”

One of the film’s most terrifying characters was that of Kurt Barlow, the Nosferatu-esque vampire who Straker has come to Salem’s Lot in order to resurrect. As played by the Austrian character actor Reggie Nalder, Barlow’s character was changed from the conventional-looking villain of the novel to a demonic apparition, on the grounds that, as Kobritz said, “I wanted nothing suave or sexual, because I just didn’t think it’d work; we’ve seen too much of it.” (The fact that he had the velvet-voiced Mason as his lead villain meant that suavity was also assured, too.)


Chilling: a scene from Salem's Lot - Alamy

Soul remarked that “Nadler was born to play this role. He didn’t like it very much, because he had to wear these contact lenses, and his make-up kept falling off, so we had to stop and reset his face, eyes, teeth and eight-inch fingernails.” He quipped that Nalder may have been dissatisfied with the requirements of the role – the actor commented “The makeup and contact lenses were painful but I got used to them. I liked the money best of all” – whereas, in Soul’s knowing words, “I did it for the art.”

The series was packed full of immediately iconic scares. The moment in which the child vampire Ralphie Glick tries to enter his brother Danny’s room from outside, while scratching terrifyingly at the window, remains the most memorable, and has been alluded to in everything from The Simpsons to Eminem’s song Lose Yourself. Guardians of the Galaxy director and DC supremo James Gunn wrote, after Hooper’s death in 2017, that the filmmaker “created the moment that scared me the most as a child – that floating, dead kid tapping on the window.”




Bearing in mind the demands of television, rather than film, it largely eschewed explicit bloodshed in favour of what Hooper called “the overtone of the grave.” He said “A television movie does not have blood or violence. It has atmosphere which creates something you cannot escape – the reminder that our time is limited and all the accoutrements that go with it, such as the visuals.”

Soul enjoyed working with “the very fine director”, who he praised for being “very well prepared”. There were lighter moments, too. The actor celebrated his birthday on set; he later quipped, “they told me I had a good time, but I don’t remember a hell of a lot...I’m told I was enjoying it too.”


Reggie Nalder as the villain of Salem's Lot - Alamy

Salem’s Lot was enthusiastically received on its first screening, and was later followed by a sequel, Return to Salem’s Lot, and another 2004 miniseries adaptation, this time starring Rob Lowe. It has subsequently proved to be one of the most influential of all modern-day vampire stories, inspiring everything from such Eighties classics as The Lost Boys and Fright Night to Buffy the Vampire Slayer and King regular interpreter Mike Flanagan’s 2021 Netflix miniseries Midnight Mass.

And another film remake is planned, this time directed by It screenwriter Gary Dauberman. Yet it will struggle to surpass the original, which remains one of the most successful King adaptations, with the emphasis on suggestion and subtlety over bloodshed making it all the more terrifying.

As Soul put it: “Salem’s Lot is responsible for a whole new genre, particularly in terms of television. I think the film we did is the legendary film, the real thing, and everything else tried to copy elements of what we accomplished.” The obituaries will salute this versatile actor for being forever Hutch, but Salem’s Lot is surely his truest – and longer-lasting – legacy.



STANDARD OBIT

Starsky & Hutch actor David Soul’s 50 years on screen and stage


Jordan Reynolds, PA
Fri, 5 January 2024

Actor David Soul was best known for his role as Detective Kenneth “Hutch” Hutchinson in the classic crime-solving television series Starsky & Hutch.

US-born Soul, who starred opposite Paul Michael Glaser, who played Detective Dave Starsky, in the 1970s US TV series, was also known for his roles in Here Come The Brides, Magnum Force and The Yellow Rose.

With a career spanning 50 years, Soul also made a name for himself as a director, producer, singer/songwriter and social activist.

David Soul (Yui Mok/PA)


David Solberg (Soul) was born in Chicago, Illinois, on August 28 1943, then spent the next 12 years between South Dakota and post-Second World War Berlin.

His father Dr Richard Solberg, a professor of history and political science and an ordained minister, moved his family to Berlin where he served as a religious affairs adviser to the US High Commission.

Soul was affected by his experiences in Berlin and initially considered following in his father’s footsteps, later becoming involved with the South Dakota Young Democrats.

He was also an avid sportsman and was offered a professional baseball contract with the Chicago White Sox after high school in 1961.


David Soul arriving for the Theatregoers’ Choice Awards, held at Planet Hollywood in central London, in November 2005 (Yui Mok/PA)

But instead, during his second year of college, he left to go to Mexico City with his father who went to be a professor at a graduate school for young diplomats.

Here he was introduced to the indigenous songs of Mexico and when he returned to the US, he secured a job singing folk music at a coffee house at the University of Minnesota.

It was in Minneapolis where Soul got his first taste of theatre.

He was 21, married and with a child when he took over his friend’s role as the “Pugnacious Collier” in the Firehouse Theatre’s production of John Arden’s Sergeant Musgrave’s Dance.

Then, separated from his wife, Soul sent an audition tape and a photo, calling himself “The Covered Man” – while wearing a mask and shortening his name to Soul – to the William Morris Agency in New York, which signed him.

Actor David Soul in 2004 (Ian West/PA)

Soul travelled to New York in 1965 and appeared on The Merv Griffin Show for multiple singing appearances, as well as with MGM Records.

His first release was The Covered Man. Soul wore a mask for four months and would not show his face, saying he wanted to be “known for his music”.

Studying in New York with Uta Haugen and Irene Daily, Soul was given his first television role in 1960s dolphin series Flipper.

He was spotted on The Merv Griffin Show by a talent executive at Columbia/Screen Gems, then signed a contract with Screen Gems which saw him move to Los Angeles.

Soul acted in Star Trek, Here Come The Brides, Perry Mason and Johnny Got His Gun, throughout the 1960s and 1970s.

He got his break as officer John Davis in Clint Eastwood’s police yarn Magnum Force, about Inspector Harold Callahan, which led to a part in Starsky & Hutch from 1974 to 1979.

David Soul arrives for the annual National Television Awards at the Royal Albert Hall in central London in 2004 (Ian West/PA)

In the years following, Soul directed different television series, produced and directed theatre shows and produced and directed three documentaries.

He also funded, produced and co-directed a documentary on the shutdown of Pittsburgh’s steel industry between 1982 and 1985.

At the height of his fame he released the UK chart-toppers Don’t Give Up On Us and Silver Lady, and the hits Going In With My Eyes Open and Let’s Have A Quiet Night In.

Soul toured across large parts of the world with his band and performed as part of the late Queen’s silver jubilee in 1977.

But in the 1980s Soul hit the headlines when he was arrested for attacking his then-wife, and he went on to be part of a BBC programme in the early 2000s which aimed to tackle domestic violence.

He also went on to appear in TV series Salem’s Lot, an adaptation of Stephen King’s novel of the same name, as Ben Mears, who returns to his home town, which has been taken over by vampires.

Soul was also in Miami Vice, Harry’s Hong Kong, Homeward Bound and a TV series remake of Casablanca.


David Soul on stage at London’s Phoenix Theatre (Rebecca Naden/PA)

In the last 30 years of his life, Soul moved from Los Angeles to New Zealand, then to Australia, where he performed in Willy Russell’s Blood Brothers, Paris and finally London where he worked in theatre, television and film.

In the 1990s, he made his debut on the West End stage in the award-winning play Blood Brothers while he was living in the UK.

Some of his many television and film credits in the UK include appearances on Little Britain, Top Gear, Holby City, Agatha Christie’s Poirot: Death On The Nile, as well as films Tabloid and Puritan.

He and Glaser reprised their roles in the 2004 remake Starsky & Hutch, starring Ben Stiller as Starsky and Owen Wilson as Hutch.

Soul, who was a dual US and UK citizen, was married five times, including to actresses Mirriam Solberg, Karen Carlson, Patti Carnel Sherman and Julia Nickson, and had six children and seven grandchildren.

Soul died on Thursday at the age of 80 surrounded by his family, his wife Helen Snell said in a statement.

Tuesday, February 11, 2020

What We Talk About When We Talk About Monsters



North American Lake Monsters
By Nathan Ballingrud
Published 2013-13-07
Small Beer Press
300 Pages



What We Talk About When We Talk About Monsters

By John Langan SEPTEMBER 19, 2013

THERE’S SOMETHING ALMOST non-descript about the title of Nathan Ballingrud’s excellent new collection of stories, North American Lake Monsters. It’s as if we’re being presented with a field guide — albeit, an eccentric one — rather than a selection of powerful and moving horror stories. And yet, unassuming as the title is, its naturalist overtones point to one of the book’s principal influences, the broad American tradition of fiction that flows from Hemingway and Faulkner down to Raymond Carver, Larry Brown, and Daniel Woodrell. At the heart of this tradition is a meticulous portrayal of men and women attempting to meet the challenges of living in an opaque, even hostile world, their struggles frequently engendered as much by their own shortcomings as by the recalcitrance of their environment. Such a characters’ fight to resist the world, even when it is doomed to failure, has provided the engine for a wide array of American novels ranging from The Sun Also Rises (1926) to Winter’s Bone (2007). 

Thematically, this genealogy also lies within hailing distance of the horror narratives of writers such as H.P. Lovecraft, whose characters also contest overwhelming forces, exterior and interior. While this convergence has received little critical attention, it has been recognized and exploited by writers in the horror field ranging from Ray Bradbury to Stephen King. Their narratives lavish as much attention on character and setting as they do on the threat to them, creating, as it were, an imaginary werewolf in a real subdivision. The result of this is twofold. At the level of narrative action, the horrific elements gain in credibility and effect. At the level of narrative resonance, the real-world trials the characters face intersect the symbolic implications of the horrific elements, creating a whole greater than the sum of its parts. Thus, in a novel such as Something Wicked This Way Comes (1962) the adolescent anxieties besetting Bradbury’s teenaged protagonists manifest in outsize fashion in the monstrous carnival that descends on Green Town, Illinois. Similarly, the protean monster that stalks the pages of It (1986) mirrors the plethora of fears that afflict King’s characters, first as children and then as adults.

What Nathan Ballingrud does in North American Lake Monsters is to reinvigorate the horror tradition in which he participates by returning to that Hemingway-Faulkner source. Though it would be glib to describe the stories in this collection as Stephen King by way of Raymond Carver, Ballingrud’s portrayal of women and men clinging to the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder rings as true as any of Carver’s efforts, and gives his work an impressive heft.

The protagonist of the book’s opening story, the blistering “You Go Where It Takes You,” is a case in point. The single mother of a three-year-old daughter, waiting tables during the morning shift at the local diner, Toni is living a life that is gradually coming apart at the seams. Abandoned by her child’s father, pursued by a social worker questioning the child’s psychological well-being, her daily existence has become a puzzle she cannot solve. When a large but friendly customer offers to take her out, she accepts not out of any expectation of a Cinderella-style rescue from her circumstances, but because it will be something different to do, a break in the routine that is grinding her down. Yet when this man reveals a fantastic and gruesome secret to her, Toni reacts, not with fear, but with jealousy and desire, seizing the revelation as a chance for her to escape from her life. Her response, and the action it subsequently engenders, closes the story on a devastating note. This showcases one of Ballingrud’s strengths as a writer, his ability to inhabit the emotional lives of his characters in a way that feels utterly authentic.

That ability is on display throughout the rest of the stories in this book. In “Wild Acre,” a remarkable werewolf story, the beast is glimpsed only briefly during the story’s opening pages, but the psychological damage it inflicts on Jeremy, the sole survivor of its attack, poisons his life. Within the narrative, it is possible to recognize the outline of one of the more familiar werewolf stories, that of the man unwittingly infected by the monster’s curse. But Ballingrud uses that structure to frame a story about the ways in which violence warps the lives of all who encounter it. He offers no satisfying confrontation with the monster, no climactic dispatch of the beast and exorcism of its evil. The werewolf devotes no more attention to its victims than does any of the other forces arrayed against them, from an economy in recession to a social milieu in which they are not welcome. For the monster, its victims are food, worth no more attention than a lunchtime hamburger. Confronted by such circumstances, Jeremy is subject to the very real and alluring temptation to become like the beast, to embrace the violence that has granted it so much sway over his life. It is a compelling anatomy of the effects and the attractions of brutality

“Wild Acre” brings its monster onstage momentarily, and at a distance. Not all the stories in this collection, however, play as coy. The brilliant “Sunbleached” portrays a situation by now familiar to readers of vampire fiction: the disaffected youth who longs for a vampire to confer on him the gift of its condition. From Anne Rice to Stephanie Meyer, this plot has been treated in quasi-romantic terms. Ballingrud shifts the scenario to the Freudian family romance, giving us Joshua, a fifteen-year-old boy living with his mother and younger brother. Wounded by his father’s abandonment, jealous of his young mother’s boyfriend, Joshua looks to the vampire who becomes trapped under his house as a means to take control first of his own life, then of his family.. Yet the state of the vampire with whom Joshua is attempting to negotiate gives a clue that the situation is far, far worse than he realizes. Charred by a brief exposure to the rising sun, this is no handsome prince of the undead. Rather, it is sharp teeth and an appetite. We can hardly be blamed for guessing that the story will not turn out happily; when that guess is confirmed, however, it is in a scene shot through with a pathos even more devastating than the horror it accompanies.

Joshua is like many of the protagonists in Ballingrud’s stories: emotionally scarred; uncomfortable in his own skin; desperate for some kind of change, no matter good or bad. The vampire embodies one of the collection’s recurrent motifs, that of consumption. Sometimes it is the monsters who do the eating, sometimes the human characters, but the world of this book is one of hunger real and figurative, in which everyone is riven by a fundamental lack. Indeed, it may well be the manner in which a character responds to this radical insufficiency that defines him or her as monstrous or human. The monsters embrace and indulge their hungers unabashedly. The humans wrestle with their deficits, and although that struggle may lead them to terrible decisions, there is still the sense of their choices as stays against the abyss. Of course, this results in an irony that pervades the collection. But it is not a cheap irony, the knee-jerk response of the amateur cynic. Rather, it is the earned response of a writer who has watched men and women try to escape the traps of their lives by constructing bigger and more elaborate traps for themselves.

Among aficionados of horror fiction, it has become something of a commonplace to say that we are living in a new golden age of the field. Given the work of writers such as Laird Barron, Glen Hirshberg, Victor Lavalle, and Livia Llewellyn, this is not an unreasonable view to take. Certainly, the innovative and exciting fiction currently being produced in the horror field calls to mind the mid-1980s, when Clive Barker, T.E.D. Klein, Stephen King, and Peter Straub were demonstrating the potential of the horror story to serve as a vehicle for serious and sustained literary expression. Like the work of those earlier writers, that of Barron, Hirshberg, Lavalle, Llewellyn — and of Nathan Ballingrud — is built to last. Today, we might reach for a book such as Barker’s The Damnation Game (1985) or Klein’s Dark Gods (1985) as an example of work that has weathered the last few decades and promises to survive into those ahead. North American Lake Monsters is such a book. 

RECOMMENDED