Cole Parker

Thanks, EJ. C

Isn't it the writer's job to keep the readers coming back for more? That's the service I try to provide: to keep my readers coming. C Oops. Back for more. BACK FOR MORE.

You're telling me you scared the thing off?I didn't think you were that terrifying.C

If you hear a story of an Aussie man who took an axe to his car and chopped it up into environmentally friendly pieces, that would be me. Oh and the tail light fell off too. Uh, hate to ask this, guy, but what the hell do you expect? Start hacking away at your ride wth a big ole axe, it's not too surprising the tail light might fall off.Duh!C

Trab, you're great! C

Des needs a mop. C

I heard he was doing a reaserch trip--to look for Diagon Alley. C

I think this is what is meant by the term 'digression.' I think when one is speaking of an author's work, something he's slaved over, poured his heart and soul into, stayed up nights like a father holding a crying child in the wee small hours of the morning so it will quet down and he and his overwrought brain can get some needed rest (and all you authors will udnerstand that, I'm sure), toiled and teared over it as life churned about him, to take a discussion of the output of such dedication to his craft to then a disucssion of the working of the lower intestinal track, is the perfect definition of the word 'digression.' But I did learn something about enzymes. It wasn't all for naught. Heh heh heh.<g> C

One of my most astute observations of life is: When people start talking about themselves in the third person, they gone way, way round the bend. C

Scenic grafts. I've got to stop reading this shit. My stomach muscles need time to recover. C

Saturday. A higher power says Saturday. I try not to argue with higher powers. C

About every other post, Des, you make me laugh out loud. Please get to work on the other half. C

Yes, yours. Except while doing duty in your lend/lease program. C

I probably didn't make myself very clear. I really wasn't trying to dismiss Forbidden Planet. I was making the statement that it didn't have the same implact on me when seeing it as an adult rather than a teen. I don't think that's too surprising. Kids are a lot more suggestible to film images than adults. And that was a very different film than others we saw at that time. When I said it was dated when I saw in 40 years later, I was not only meaning the film had aged, but I had aged as well, or matured, whatever you want to call it. That it didn't have the same impact on me surely had as much to do with me as with the film. As a general rule, I think the writing in flilms from the 30's and 40's was much sharper than now. We've often replaced great, pithy, insightful writing with special effects. We also seem to make the majority of our films these days for the teen audience. As a result, I don't go to the movies nearly as often as I used to. C

Thanks, guys. C

Let's see if I have this right. You want a response to your message from someone who hasn't read it. Uh, good luck, guy. *Scratches his head, then thinks scartching his balls might be more profitable, and wanders off into the sunset.* C

Isn't anticipation supposed to be fun?. Anyway, I'm enjoying the frsutration, and I hate that when I'm undergoing it. Peace. C

Thanks, EJ. I've been waiting and waiting, and not all that patiently. But, don't you mean chpater 10? I read both 8 and 9 some time ago. C

Yes, I was mostly speaking of the wooden acting and some of the dialogue. The visuals remained stunning. The 'monster' that showed up in the electrical field they generated was amazing. Robbie was amazing. It was quite scary for a kid to see, and very believeable. It was certainly stunning for its time when it was first shown. But acting and effects were much improved when I again saw it 40 years later. Granted, that was on a TV screen. That indeed could have made a tremendous difference. C

Ah, Trab, I read many stories where the point is made that to fight the good fight knowing you cannot win is something by which to define yourself and your principles.Madrigal, being a philosopher, will probably enjoy disecting that thought of yours.It's good to have another blogger among us.C

Des: I saw Forbidden Planet when I was a kid. Wonderful movie that I remember still today. I happened to see it again a few years ago and it was much dated and didn't have nearly the impact. Shows how credible young kids are, and how the visual images of movies can affect them to a much greater degree than adults. Still, that was a great movie for its time, and I do remember the vivid discussion of the powers of the id. C

Des, look at Camy's note again. Not only does he speak of a horse, for some odd reason, but he talks of a house riding off into the sunset. Methinks he may have been over-snacking on some of those grapes that have been sitting around fermenting since last summer. Or he's found some of that strage smelling stuff to smoke. C

So if I'm reading this right, sex has nothing to do with this. Hmmmm. I'll pass. C

You forgot to qualify whether he needs to be sexually active or not. C

Don't feel disadvantaged by this. I have found, through extensive personal experience, that story lines that seem superb in dreams, rarely are in the harsh light of day. In dreams, unreality makes no difference. But when you're writing stories, as you know, things have to make sense, have to be logical, and you can't overlook the craziness that is of no concern in dreams. Lying half asleep, you think you have a marvelous story to flesh out. Sit down at the computer, and it looks just as silly and undoable as it really is. So don't sweat it. You're dreams are probably all filled with lustful indulgences, anyway, and not the stuff of a good, Colinesque story. C