10.25.09

More Philosophy Now

Posted in Books and Film, Philosophy, Publishing News tagged , , , , , at 4:27 pm by ndichario

Phil1009_covThe new issue of Philosophy Now magazine (Sept./Oct. 09) is available. The issue is dedicated to existentialism, and in it you’ll find my review of Revolutionary Road, the film, mostly, but also Richard Yates’ incredible novel, which I couldn’t resist talking about as well.

I’ve copied in the full text of my review here, but I encourage you to buy the magazine. There are a number of terrific articles for all of us parlor existentialists to enjoy. It’s a great issue.

Revolutionary Road

Nick DiChario asks if it’s existential, or just depressing.

All April Wheeler wants is for her husband Frank to shut up. Chances are you’ve felt a similar frustration. You suffer a setback in life – not your run-of-the-mill disappointment, but a game-changer, one of those epic collapses that forces you to take a long, hard look at who you are and what it means to be alive in a world that has turned against you; a moment that makes you reassess a life-long dream and decide whether it’s time to give up on it for good – and you just need a little time and space to think it through.

This is exactly where April is in the opening scene of Revolutionary Road, the film based on Richard Yates’ classic 1961 existential novel. April always wanted to be an actress, and she went to acting school before she met Frank. When she joined the local production of The Petrified Forest, it was mostly to remind herself of her former life, to rediscover the flame that once burned brightly inside her. Connecticut isn’t exactly Broadway, but for a woman of thirty-something, mother of two, opening night at the high school was a big deal. If she had performed admirably – if she had gotten a standing ovation, or even a sincere round of applause – it might have been enough to justify her existence. But she was awful – so awful that she knew she would never act again, and most likely had no talent to begin with. Although this scene is passed over quickly in the film, Yates gives it a good measure of attention in his novel. It is an important moment, a moment in April’s life when desire runs hard up against truth and comes out the worst for it. Frank does his best to console her, make her feel better about her failure; but all she really wants him to do is shut the hell up so she can think, put it all in perspective and rearrange her psyche to cope with the death of her dream. Not too much to ask for – but Frank is incapable of giving it. During the ride home the couple argue violently, each saying things they know will deeply hurt the other. Welcome to the lives of Frank and April Wheeler.

 

Sam Mendes

Sam Mendes

Revolutionary Road is directed by Sam Mendes (Jarhead, Road to Perdition, American Beauty), who makes the most of Justin Haythe’s inspired screenplay. Viewers follow the Wheelers from setback to setback as the unhappy couple readjust and compromise their dreams of living interesting, artistic, avant garde lives, and conform to the standard roles of husband and wife, just like all the other husbands and wives in the falsely idyllic suburb in which they live. They always imagined themselves better than the rest; but this illusion fades before their eyes and ours as the film inches forward. Frank once laughed at his father for toiling his life away as a salesman for Knox Business Machines, but through a cruel twist of fate, Frank ends up working for the same company, toiling in much the way his father had toiled. Every time reality becomes too much for the Wheelers, they fight. The kids they never wanted; the job that’s stealing Frank’s best years; the dreadfully boring existence of a housewife… neither of them asked for this life (did they?) – and yet both of them are living it, hating each other for it in their own small ways, and denying one of the most important tenants of existentialism – taking responsibility. Their fights lead to affairs, their affairs to fights. Time and again April asks Frank to shut up because she doesn’t want to talk about it; and Frank, who loves April and is terrified that at any moment she might leave him, can’t stop talking. Their relationship is built on needs not met, and through the first half of the film there seems to be no way out. But is there a way out after all? April comes up with an idea, another potential game-changer.

Leo_kateApril is the real star of this story. Without her inner torment there would be no existential conflict. April decides to take control, to meet the enemy head on. Existentialism is concerned with the freedom of choice and what one does with it. It tells us that we are not only fundamentally free to choose, but obligated to make authentic choices. To choose authentically means we are individually responsible to undertake the challenge of continually creating ourselves. This existentialist responsibility is too often misunderstood as dark, moody, and just plain depressing, when in fact it is a call to action, what Sartre describes as “the sternness of our optimism.” After years of denial April finally sees her responsibility for her own life and understands that she and Frank have not been true to themselves. She comes up with a plan to go to Europe “for good.” Frank was stationed in Paris during his stint in the military, it’s the only place he ever talked about returning to, so April decides they must move there. She sees this as her chance to change their course, set things aright. She discovers that she can make good money as a secretary for NATO, or in any number of government agencies overseas. Frank can then, finally, take some time off and discover what he really wants to do with his life. “Don’t you see?” April begs, “You’ll be reading and studying and taking long walks and thinking… For the first time in your life you’ll have time to find out what it is you want to do, and when you find it you’ll have the time and the freedom to start doing it.” Paris is Shangri-La, and if she can convince Frank of this they’ll leave the wretched burbs behind forever. But be prepared, there is a problem, and the viewer can see it coming from a mile away. Only April doesn’t see what is obvious to us: the plan instantly frightens Frank. For all his brave talk, he seems to fit the role of coward just fine. He says he despises his job, but appears to find comfort in it. He claims to be disenchanted with the dull routine of his days, but discovers relief in the tedium, in the daily ride on the train, in the office banter, and in the meaningless affair with the secretary.

Make no mistake, this is the stuff of existentialism, and existentialism is perhaps best served on a literary plate. Many seminal works of existentialism can be found in the stories and plays of Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Franz Kafka, Albert Camus, Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir. But rarely do dramatic works of existentialism translate well into film, especially of the Hollywood blockbuster type. The internal monologues; the ruminating, self-evaluation and angst; the subtle things that make living in the world absurd, have all produced great literature, but not always riveting cinema. Mendes, however, pulls it off through an intuition for picking the dramatic scenes from Yates’ novel and squeezing the intensity out of each one – the bitter fights, the horrible things the characters say and do to each other, the affairs, April’s clumsy attempt at aborting her unexpected pregnancy… Mendes lets us become intimate voyeurs, and in this way breathes a certain kind of awful life into the film. Even the tortured and psychotic John Givings is used mercilessly to shine a light on the protagonists’ flaws. John at first admires the Wheelers for their plan to escape to Paris; but when he learns that they’ve abandoned the idea he becomes distraught and demands to know why. Frank tells him that April is pregnant – a shock to them both, they hadn’t planned on it, but “suppose we say that people anywhere aren’t very well advised to have babies unless they can afford them. As it happens, the only way we can afford this one is by staying here. It’s a question of money, you see.” He explains this to the psychologically-damaged John as if he’s explaining it to a five-year-old rather than to an adult who once had a brilliant career as a mathematician. But John is not so easily convinced. Money is an excuse, not a reason, and he lets Frank know this: “Don’t people have babies in Europe?… What’s the real reason? You get cold feet, or what? You decide you like it here after all? You figure it’s more comfy here in the old Hopeless Emptiness, or – Wow, that did it! Look at his face! What’s the matter, Wheeler? Am I getting warm?” It’s a brutally honest scene, and the most damning in the film: the patient out of the psychiatric ward on a half-day pass is the only one who has the courage to speak the truth.

It’s an existential wake-up call, but it comes too late to stop the downward spiral of events that lead to the tragic climax. Everything has already been set in motion. April has missed her window of opportunity for a safe abortion, and Frank is responsible for the cold, calculated dismantling of their dream. In the end, the Wheelers suffer not from what they perceive to be the trap society has set for them, but from refusing to act.

 

Rev_road_covRevolutionary Road is a brilliant novel, and I highly recommend the film. You won’t often get a chance to see good existentialism on the big screen. In fact, I have not seen a better attempt since Lo Straniero (1967), based on Albert Camus’ The Stranger. To his credit, Mendes is unfailingly faithful to the novel, picking up on the high-drama points of Yates’ story and paying attention to the nuances. Kate Winslet as April and Leonardo DiCaprio as Frank play their parts magnificently. The minor characters are wonderful as well, especially Kathy Bates as the well-intentioned and irritating Mrs Givings, the real estate agent who sells the Wheelers’ their house on Revolutionary Road.

There is no ‘tosh’ (the word Virginia Woolf was fond of using for frivolous or silly writing) in this tale of self-inflicted wounds. In his famous lecture Existentialism Is A Humanism, Sartre tells us that people must take responsibility for themselves, whatever the situation: “We are alone, without excuses. That is what I mean when I say that man is condemned to be free.” Yates seemed to have been intimately aware of this. He struggled as an author, and never achieved great success or notoriety in his lifetime, suffering acute alcoholism, and mental problems which sent him to a psychiatric ward. This novel is about the truth of human experience, and Yates’ life experiences were pretty ugly. Perhaps the anguish of his own life allowed him to read between the lines of his generation and identify what was ailing it. He used his personal adversity to feed his work and wrote through it all with a clear, sharp, realism that wasn’t appreciated nearly enough in his day. I first read this novel in college and thought it was okay, although a bit boring. It’s amazing what thirty years of perspective can do for a work of art… I have more of an appreciation and sympathy for Yates’ personal sufferings now, and the obvious influences they had on this classic story of disappointment and loss in America. He expertly pulls apart the social order and how we all compromise ourselves to death behind a veneer of cozy acquiescence. Although set in the post-WWII era, it could just as well have been written today.

I can understand why the story might have seemed dull when I was a kid in college; but today, after having inevitably lived some of the disillusionment Yates wrote about, it’s a whole new disturbing ball game. There must have been times when, much like his character April, Yates just wanted everyone to shut up so he could put it all in perspective. In the final scene of the book, and as the film fades to black, in one of the few humorous moments in an otherwise uncompromisingly relentless tale of existential angst, April finally gets her wish.

© Nick DiChario 2009

Nick DiChario was nominated for the Hugo and World Fantasy awards. His novels A Small and Remarkable Life (2006) and Valley of Day-Glo (2008) are published by Robert J. Sawyer Books.

Subscribe to Philosophy Now, one of the coolest magazines in the universe.

07.05.09

Dillinger: A Love Story

Posted in Books and Film, Publishing News tagged , , , , , , , , at 11:49 pm by ndichario

Robbing, Killing, Romancing: Those Were the Days!

DillingerWell, okay, what the heck, why not? Director Michael Mann does everything in his power to turn Public Enemies into a love story between John Dillinger (Johnny Depp) and Billie Frechette (Marion Cotillard), while at the same time trying to keep within the ball park of historical accuracy. He gets high marks for coming pretty close, and for a good tight story, and for coaxing decent performances out of everyone, including the stoic Christian Bale as Melvin Purvis, Billy Crudup as J. Edgar Hoover, and both Depp and Cotillard. Good solid work all the way around, but certainly nothing special, which I must say was a bit disappointing considering the talent.

In the end I thought that Mann was trying too hard to pretend that Dillinger wasn’t really a rotten, murdering bank robber. Does anyone really, seriously believe that Dillinger had a heart of gold and was a misunderstood product of a failed American judicial system? Mann also glosses over the fact that Dillinger was a fella who enjoyed his prostitutes (and in fact was in the company of one when he was finally gunned down on the street), which kind of throws a wet towel over the whole romance thing.

The bank robberies and the daring escapes didn’t seem very romantic either. Maybe I’m just tired of all the senseless killing these days, in real life and on the big screen. It was a long film at two hours and 23 minutes and it felt long. By the end of the movie I was yawning, and I didn’t quite buy into the tragic-hero climax that the director was hoping for and that we all knew was coming. A good rental maybe. Mildly recommended

Million_PiecesSci Fi Frey

Speaking of love stories, remember Oprah and James Frey? Frey, the controversial author of the memoir A Million Little Pieces (2003) fibbed his way into the literary limelight via Oprah’s Book Club. He has landed another book deal, as reported in the New York Times, this one with a movie attached to it. Frey’s continuing success proves the old adage that even bad press is good press. HarperCollins signed Frey and collaborator Michael Bay to write a YA series, and DreamWorks has already purchased the film rights. The story, a science fiction concept, is about a group of young alien teens hiding out on Earth after their own planet has been attacked. Any author these days who can make big bucks writing should be an inspiration to us all. Congratulations. But it does make you kind of wonder about the whole celebrity of writing and what it means to the rest of us, doesn’t it?

Of further interest…

James Frey “Bending the Truth

The Smoking Gun exposé

One of my favorite actors is Giovanni Ribisi, who played a bit part in Public Enemies. If you’ve never seen Heaven, check it out. It’s a great little film. You won’t be disappointed.

06.16.09

Wake

Posted in Books and Film, Publishing News tagged , , , , at 11:55 pm by ndichario

USWakeI’m sure the last thing Robert J. Sawyer needs is another review of Wake. The book was published in May and has received plenty of well-deserved attention and quite a bit of praise already. But heck, Rob is my friend and the editor of my first two novels, and I’m just as excited for him, personally, as I am about his first book in his WWW trilogy, so I guess he’s getting another review whether he needs it or not.

In general, one of the reasons I always read Rob’s novels is because he has a knack for asking the interesting high-concept questions.

Rollback: What would we do with our lives if we could be young again?

Mindscan: Would you scan your mind into an android body if you could leave all your troubles behind?

Flashforward: What would happen if, for just a fleeting moment, people saw a flash of their own personal futures? (ABC is set to ask this very question with a new TV series based on Rob’s novel this fall.)

Wake: Is it possible for the Internet to gain consciousness?

I’m oversimplifying, certainly, but Rob gets an incredible amount of value out of turning high concepts into novels, and Wake is another prime example. The Internet has recently developed as many connections as the human brain; does this mean it’s capable of making the intellectual advances that humans needed to make to become self-aware? And if it is capable of doing so, how might it be done?

The answer to the first question is obvious in Wake, or there would be no book. Rob mainly concerns himself with the second question: How will the Internet come awake? As Rob has mentioned in several interviews, he compares the Internet’s journey toward consciousness to the road Helen Keller travelled when she eventually learned how to interact with the world. (Helen Keller lost her hearing and vision when she was barely more than a year old.)

But as with Helen Keller, it doesn’t just happen. To help the Internet along, it takes the right person, at the right time, with all the right qualities, and in Wake, the person who first becomes aware of the Internet’s presence and figures out how to literally “wake it up” is Caitlin, Rob’s fifteen-year-old blind, female protagonist. I don’t want to give away too much of the story because, as with all good novels, the discovery is a big part of the fun, but I will say that Caitlin’s search for vision mirrors that of the Internet’s awakening; there is a direct, technological connection between Caitlin and the Internet as well as an instinctual, human connection, both of which are necessary to make this novel work. Rob manages, with cleverness, wit, and drama, to not only lead the reader through several extraordinary plot twists, but to keep us turning the pages, wondering where the story will go next.

As with Rob’s other books, the moral and philosophical issues surrounding the concept, the issues that make science fiction fascinating for many readers, are also thoroughly explored. Rob is one of the best at this sort of thing, and SF fans will not be disappointed: Highly recommended.

Rob_sawyerTo learn a bit more about this book, check out the totally cool video clip of an animated Rob chatting it up.

Curious about the book deal? You will find this article veeeeery interesting!

06.12.09

Valley of Day-Glo Nominated for John W. Campbell Memorial Award

Posted in Books and Film, Publishing News tagged , , , at 1:22 am by ndichario

I’m very pleased to announce that Valley of Day-Glo, published under the Robert J. Sawyer Books imprint, has been named a finalist for the John W. Campbell Memorial Award — the principal juried award in the science fiction field, voted on by a blue-ribbon panel of American and British academics and critics. The award is considered the third of the big-three science fiction awards, after the Hugo and the Nebula. 

Man, I’m honored, humbled, and just plain thrilled!

Thanks to Rob and all the folks at Fitzhenry & Whiteside who worked so hard on this book.

Of further interest….

Here are this year’s Campbell finalists.

Rob’s official announcement.

Chadwick Ginther talks about the Campbell on the McNally Robinson site.

SF Signal announces the awards (and you can check out all the covers).

A Small and Remarkable Life, also published by RJS Books, was previously nominated for this award.

Valley-of-day-glo-cover-large

06.06.09

A Little R&R

Posted in Books and Film, Publishing News, Writing Life tagged , , , at 12:07 pm by ndichario

Nick_Rob

Me (left) and Rob Sawyer relaxing in Winnipeg at the home of fellow author Bev Geddes during the “totally unofficial” KeyCon barbecue, Saturday night May 16. Rob had just wrapped up a reading and book launch at McNally Robinson, Winnipeg’s finest bookstore, for his novel Wake, which I’ll be reviewing here shortly. Hint: Great book!

06.02.09

Philosophy and Comics

Posted in Books and Film, Philosophy, Publishing News tagged , , , at 10:54 am by ndichario

MayJune09The new issue of Philosophy Now is available. The May-June 2009 issue is all about comic books and philosophy. Lots of fun and interesting as always. Included is my review of one of my favorite novels, Austin Grossman’s Soon I Will Be Invincible. The review follows, but PLEASE SUBSCRIBE! It’s a great magazine.

Nick DiChario finds out what it’s like to be the bad guy.

What is the nature of good and evil? This question has vexed philosophers throughout the ages. But philosophers aren’t the only ones to have grappled with it. Comic books have pitted good against evil since the 1930s, when they first appeared. In fact, the superhero form of this age-old battle seems more popular than ever, recently conquering the silver screen: The Dark Knight and all three Spider-Man movies are among the top 20 grossing films of all-time. Watchmen, one of the most anticipated films of 2009, based on Alan Moore’s comic book, pulled in 70 million dollars during its opening weekend. X-Men Origins: Wolverine just came out, with more planned. Some might argue that people are attracted to the special effects, or maybe just the spectacle; but being a writer myself I prefer to think that the story has something to do with it.

Enter Austin Grossman and his debut novel Soon I Will Be Invincible (2008). The plot is pretty standard comic book fare. Soon after the superteam the Champions breaks up, their big-time hero CoreFire unexpectedly disappears. The team decides to reform to find out what happened to him. Prime suspect in CoreFire’s disappearance? The team’s arch-nemesis, Dr Impossible, who has suddenly escaped from prison. The Champions will spend most of the novel searching for Dr Impossible while trying to learn what happened to CoreFire. Dr Impossible, who is actually innocent concerning CoreFire’s disappearance, will spend most of the novel evading capture while trying to find CoreFire so that he can kill him…

But Grossman, a video-game designer and a doctoral candidate in English literature at the University of California, Berkeley, is a clever writer. He approaches this work with a keen eye for human nature and a shrewd kind of playfulness. He takes the traditional comic book contest of good versus evil and turns it on its ear by telling most of the tale from the point of view of the uncompromisingly bad supervillain, Dr Impossible. There is a second voice in the novel, the superheroine, Fatale, a woman of steel with a digitized brain, and she is integral to the plot; but it’s Dr Impossible who drives the action, and he’s the character we long to hang out with, narratively speaking. Grossman succeeds in teasing the reader into first not hating the evil doctor, then sympathizing with him, and finally going so far as to actually cheer for the guy. The author seems to grasp that our fascination with the ancient battle of right and wrong is not so much with the good guys, with whom we naturally relate, as with the bad guys, whom we yearn to understand. What makes villains tick? Why are they so rotten? Must they be vanquished, or can they be saved? Grossman invites us to take our curiosity one step further. Be the evil character for a while, he seems to be saying. See what it feels like from the inside: isn’t it fun? And yes – as a matter of fact, it is.

Dr Impossible is not self-delusional. He knows that he’s a bad guy (as opposed to just misunderstood). In true existentialist fashion, he embraces who he is and takes responsibility for his actions. He reflects on his childhood, his university days and, with a refreshing clarity, the moments he chose evil over good. As the Roman poet Juvenal once said, “No one becomes depraved all at once.” Grossman writes these self-reflective passages with a healthy dose of dark humor, making Dr Impossible almost charming, even if he is rotten to the core. Although he sometimes feels sorry for himself, Dr Impossible mostly just wishes that he could have been better at being bad:

“How do you take over the world? I’ve tried everything. Doomsday devices of every kind, nuclear, thermonuclear, nanotechnological, gadgets that fit in a shoe box and that were visible from space. I’ve tried mass mind control; I’ve stolen the gold reserves in Fort Knox, only to lose them again. I’ve traveled backward in time to change history, forward in time to escape it; I’ve stopped time altogether to live in a world of statues. I’ve commanded robot armies, insect armies, and dinosaur armies… Each time, it ended the same way. I’ve been in jail twelve times.”

In the philosophical universe, the road to understanding good and evil is fraught with danger and complexity. Susan Neiman in her book Evil in Modern Thought (2002) writes, “One could easily spend a lifetime studying the problem of evil and be no better for it.” In fact, Neiman refuses to so much as attempt to define what evil is, instead laying out her case that it might just be the one philosophical concept from which all other philosophical concepts are born. The world of comic books is not quite so convoluted, and maybe this, ultimately, is what appeals to us. Sociologist Irving Sarnoff’s brilliantly simple definition is worth noting: “Evil,” he says, “is knowing better but doing worse.”

For better or worse, Soon I Will Be Invincible gives us a chance to live on the dark side for a while. We are the Joker, the Red Skull, Lex Luthor, Magneto, the Green Goblin. We are Dr Impossible. Whether you’re a fan of comics or literature, there is plenty here to enjoy. And there’s plenty for fans of philosophy, too. I highly recommend this book.

© Nick DiChario 2009

Nick DiChario was nominated for the Hugo and World Fantasy awards. His novels A Small and Remarkable Life (2006) and Valley of Day-Glo (2008) are published by Fitzhenry and Whiteside.

Soon I Will Be Invincible by Austin Grossman, Pantheon Books, 304 pgs, 2008, ISBN: 0718152913

US Cover

US Cover

UK Cover

UK Cover

03.03.09

U.S. Authors Nipped at the Border

Posted in Books and Film, Publishing News tagged , , , , , , , , at 1:47 pm by ndichario

Much to my disappointment, my brilliant editor and good friend Rob Sawyer will no longer be able to publish American authors through his science fiction imprint Robert J. Sawyer Books (RJS). According to Rob, the Canada Council for the Arts has objected to him publishing U.S. authors “while the Canada Council helps to subsidize the costs.”

Rob has published four books by American contributors since he launced the line through Red Deer Press in 2004: Letters From the Flesh, Marcos Donnelly’s brilliant second novel; The Savage Humanists, an excellent anthology edited by Fiona Kelleghan; and my first two novels, A Small and Remarkable Life and Valley of Day-Glo. (As I write this, I believe ten books in all have appeared under the RJS imprint.)

This is an unfortunate development for those of us in the states who have watched good markets for original science fiction and fantasy dwindle over the years. Fitzhenry & Whiteside appeared to be an emerging market willing to take chances on new writers and original voices in the genre regardless of country of origin, although predominately Canadian. I met Sharon Fitzhenry and liked her quite a bit, and I thoroughly enjoyed working with Rob. I’m not sure my first two novels would have found a publisher if Rob hadn’t been willing to take a chance on them. The fact that Fitz is a book publisher (we’ve seen plenty of short-story markets disappear over the years, eh?) makes it even more disappointing to American scribblers. Rob has published approximately two books per year through RJS and will continue to publish Canadian authors.

Of further interest…

The full post on Rob’s blog.

An interview with Marcos Donnelly re: Letters From the Flesh.

Robert J. Sawyer Books website.

The Canada Council for the Arts home page.

11.16.08

A Sign of the Times

Posted in Publishing News tagged , , at 7:52 pm by ndichario

Speed matters! Someone had to be first out with a biography of Michelle Obama. What seems odd to me about this article is that the author and the publisher both seem so darn pleased with themselves for having cranked out the book and rushed it to print (Nov. 26 release date) without having been given access to the subject or conducting any interviews with her. I suppose this would have only slowed them down. But jeez.