What do you like to write? I used to write a lot of blogs and reviews on this site but have moved on to novel writing.

@RazzaTazz: Novel writing, eh? Of what variety?

My writing is predominately (in fact, almost exclusively) of the non-fiction variety. I thrive on essays, authors like Bill Bryson & David Sedaris. I've recently discovered and come to love Erik Larson, who writes historical nonfiction as if it were a novel (all the dialogue is actual quotations from primary sources, all the speculation based on exhaustive research). If I were to ever publish a single longform work, I'd hope for it to evoke one or all of those writers' styles.

Creative nonfiction, sadly, doesn't have quite the same marketability as fiction. If you find yourself intrigued, this is one of my favorite pieces.

EDIT: Also, good grief, "a lot of reviews" doesn't even begin to cover it, apparently. What made you let up, other than burnout?

@akbogert: Well I only started taking it seriously last April. The first and the major one that I am working on is a sci-fi/fantasy (which will be a series), I also have the first draft done of an erotic thriller and have started a pure sci-fi PA type of novel as well.

@RazzaTazz: Sci-fi/Fantasy means quite a few things, from what I've seen. Which elements in particular define your nascent series?

@akbogert: Its kind of like a Vernian take on John Carter I guess. The Martian Chronicles are part fantasy, part sci-fi.

@RazzaTazz: I'd overlooked John Carter because the movie looked fairly lackluster (and I pretty much never read sci-fi, so I knew nothing about the books from which it was derived). I suppose my affinity for steampunk sentiments should have gotten me more on-board with Verne earlier. That said, I can see how the two styles could mesh.

Frankly, my lack of any kind of knowledge regarding science fiction has always been my weak suit when it comes to nerd cred. It's awkward because I'm always surrounded by folks who love and breathe it, and I've never been anything other than ambivalent. Maybe someday I'll read or watch something and that will all change on a dime? After all, a month ago I'd never even heard of Comic Vine, let alone been amassing a pull list.

...dare I ask what constitutes an erotic thriller?

@akbogert: Well sci-fi is a broad category. It includes such sub genres as post apocalyptic and dystopian and fantasy includes a lot as well like literary nonsense. I am not big on a lot of sci-fi, which is mostly the soft stuff (except for Star Wars) but I do like a fair amount of hard sci fi, which is what I am aiming for. Hard Verne

@RazzaTazz: Oh, I know it's broad. That's just a testament to how bad I am at the whole nerd thing. Never been into Star Wars or Trek, never read Ender's Game. I guess that's more what you'd call the soft stuff. On the other side of things I've also never read anything by Philip K. Dick or Isaac Asimov, which I'd presume falls more under "hard" (though having not read them, I could be way off there). That said, of the two extremes I'm far more likely to get into the latter than the former, so perhaps I'd like what you're writing.

I guess the world has been on a bit of an apocalypse bent as of late. As a fan of Borderlands I suppose I get the whole Mad Max angle, and apparently zombies are always a good time (I must be the only person on earth not following The Walking Dead), but somehow I remain largely uninterested.

All that aside, I'm something of a Nikola Tesla fanboy, and as a fan of Stephen King I find myself in need of a crash course in Cthulu (because apparently no one can get enough Lovecraft), so I imagine it's inevitable that I'll find my way into the cyberpunk and/or supernatural sci-fi worlds someday.

@akbogert: Hard tries to be as scientifically accurate as possible. If you are interested in Lovecraft, look up my fellow moderator @Icarusflies

@Icarusflies: Your expertise is required (well one of your expertises)

@Icarusflies: Haha. I merely noted that my interest in decent horror and psychology will inevitably lead to me becoming familiar with that body of work. What little I know of it comes from the rather peculiar source of a book I read about tabletop and role-playing games while doing an independent study on video games. As one who tries to avoid the overtly sexual or gratuitous, I know I'll have to tread carefully through Lovecraftian waters, but I get the sense that there's some pretty worthwhile stuff to be read.

On a side note, (but really, quite unrelated), I get two messages every time a moderator "mentions" me -- one for the comment, one for the reply. As far as I can recall I haven't gotten double-messages for anyone else mentioning me. I don't know if that's a bug or inevitable or what, but as I seem to have your attention this seemed the best way to bring it up ^_^

@akbogert: It happens anytime someone comments on a blog of yours and replies to you at the same time. Thus far only mods have commented on this blog.

@RazzaTazz: Ah. It appears so few people mentioned me directly when replying to my previous blog that I hadn't noticed the trend until now (as not only have only mods replied, but almost every reply has been addressed to me). I understand from a programming standpoint why that happens, though it seems like the type of thing that could eventually be fixed with some kind if if, then logic. I'm more bothered by the way almost every comment that begins by addressing me shows up in my inbox as if I had sent that message. Haha.

'Tis a shame there aren't more people -- and, more importantly, more questions -- going on here, happy as I am for the conversation.

@Icarusflies: Ah, that's quite alright. If you feel compelled to offer some suggestions/general thoughts on Lovecraft, a PM is probably the better way to go about it anyway. I can't say for certain how long it will take me to actually get around to reading the things, but I will definitely value the guidance and refer back to whatever conversation we may have whenever I do happen to do the reading. And yeah, when I said Lovecraftian I guess I more meant the culture that followed the actual body of work.

@akbogert: OK

Why do you like steampunk? I personally don't like it that much, though I like the fantastical approach of Verne and Wells. I am big Verne and Wells fans though not so much of SP.

@RazzaTazz: Hm. I've never really thought to justify it. And I'm glad you said "like steampunk" as opposed to "why are you a fan of steampunk" because my appreciation only goes so far. I guess part of it is an attraction to the Victorian era. From a literary perspective, that time gave rise to some of my favorite writers, not least of which being Dostoevsky. Aesthetically, I'm not sure I know why I like the Victorian look, any more than I can explain my appreciation for Art Deco or Caravaggio. I just do. If I had to fixate on one particular aesthetic, I'd note that I've always been drawn to clockwork, because I think it's incredible that people found a way to make devices that keep record of anything so consistently and meticulously as old watches and clocks. That creative and clever spirit manifests itself in the unnecessarily complex (yet still functional) inventions and devices that litter the steampunk landscape. The thing about Steampunk is that despite its reliance on the past it really is more of a future, just an alternate future, because despite reliance on outdated modes of technology it's often shown depicting outlandishly advanced applications. The authors you mention envisioned a world which had accomplished similar things to ours -- circumnavigation, deep-sea exploration, space travel, etc. -- but accomplished them in different ways. Steampunk is merely a continuation of that dream which ignores the advances in technology those authors could never have imagined. But of course, it also ignores the great benefits those technologies brought in its hasty desire to embrace the alternate world.

So really, it's a mix of faux nostalgia and a misguided belief that were the world different, it would also be better, that make steampunk appealing. And it's my awareness of that naivete that ultimately holds me back from truly embracing it, though I appreciate the movement's influence in small doses.

@akbogert: If you like Art Deco have you been to Miami? I have been to Miami

@RazzaTazz: I have not. The only two times I've set foot in Florida have been trips to Walt Disney World with the family, and to be honest the humidity didn't precisely make me want to hurry back.

I have, as a New Yorker, been to Rockefeller Center quite a few times, though, and that place is a monument to Art Deco. Is Miami known for such? Or was the art deco part simply an unrelated prelude to the Miami visitation inquiry?

@akbogert: There is lots of art deco architecture in Miami. Especially near Miami Beach

Have you skated at Rockefeller Centre? Yes I have

@RazzaTazz: I've not, though not for lack of others' trying. I've had pretty bad experiences in the past with trying to skate, usually painful ones. Every few years I try again, and regret it enough to swear it off for a few more years. Kind of like Taco Bell, except that's weeks rather than years.

@akbogert: I have never had much TB, though I have tried it.

@RazzaTazz: Happily, the nearest one to my house is 40 minutes away, so I only ever go there in conjunction with far more defensible goals, like meeting a good college friend who lives about twice that distance away. There was one much, much closer to my college, and unfortunately it was one of very few places open after midnight, which made it a necessary evil during study crunch times.

@akbogert: I am not even sure how close I am to one.

What do you think of Rene Magritte? He is one of my favourite artists.

@RazzaTazz: That's the dude with the apple painting, right?

Heh, I kid. I imagine that's how most people know him, though. Kind of like how when I mention Dali all anyone knows is melting clocks. And, well, that answers your question a bit, I suppose: I love surrealists. And although maybe it's a bit cliche, "The Treachery of Images" is one of my favorite works of art, period. That said, I probably owe his work another look, just because it's been a few years since last time.

@akbogert: My favourite is Time Transfixed. I went to Chicago just to see that (though American Gothic and Nighthawks were also notable there)

@RazzaTazz: Your favorite, eh? Any specific reason/personal connection?

It's a bit jarring, to be honest. It took me a little bit to realize that the shadows and reflections didn't actually make sense.

Sounds like that was quite the exhibit, then. Those are some of the most homaged/parodied paintings in history, I'd think (nevermind their popularity as is). I'd love to visit Chicago someday, if for no other reason than to compare it to New York (as evidently, we've always been rivals, Boston sports notwithstanding).

@akbogert: I like it better for its message, whatever that is ... of course art can be interpreted in different ways (though I am not of the opinion that art should be interpreted in any way, there are incorrect interpretations of art). For me it speaks about progress and how it affects society. Kind of like Colville's Horse and Train (I don't have a thing for train paintings though, just both of those speak to me along the same lines).

It was not an exhibit though, those three are in their permanent collection.

@lykopis: I'm glad to hear the idea is appreciated; I thought it was good, but then it was my idea. It's proving to be a good thing though! Folks don't seem interested in answering any of the questions I asked in the OP though (which is fine, but answering them would be cool too).

Well, right now I'm "actively" reading Batman, Batgirl, Red Hood & The Outlaws, and I plan to be reading the new Uncanny X-Force and (X)X-Men. So I guess that'd be a no. I'm very wary of jumping into anything from a name or company I'm unfamiliar with, so if there's some good steampunk stuff going on out there I probably don't know about it. Lady Mechanika is the exception to that, because I ran across Joe Benitez at some point while look for cool art (it may have popped up on tumblr?) and I immediately picked up the three issues (0-2) that Comixology had to offer. I don't really understand why it's been such a short and slow run, because everything about it makes it seem like it would be popular. The short version is: good suggestion, I've read all I've come across, and I have indeed loved it.

I'm a photographer, and I think to a certain extent I have a tendency (albeit an unfair one) to wish that paintings were more like photography. I'm drawn to the visceral, the lifelike. And Caravaggio's work is so that. Also, I love dichotomies (if one can love a concept), particularly light/dark and black/white (probably why I'm drawn to Cloak & Dagger, as they're perfect for that kind of artwork). Caravaggio is almost synonymous in my head with chiaroscuro, and his use of light and shadows is simply a wonder to behold.

@RazzaTazz: I completely agree about interpretation. I've always been a little cynical about criticism of any art, a la that joke that goes around the Internet from time to time about the author meaning "the curtains were f****ing blue." It's doubly hard with surrealists, because half the time their message was usurpation of meaning; they defied you to find something that made sense. Happily, that wasn't always the case, and I think given the responses to locomotives at the time your interpretation is probably in-line with what Magritte had in mind. There's a mystery, even a mysticism, to new technology, to the point where it can intrude on everything else and make us just observe it in awe. I read that the real title of the painting isn't so much "transfixed" as "stabbed." It's that intrusion of technology which produces the jarring feeling I mentioned, that coupled with the unnatural lighting.

I'd not heard of Colville, though having now looked at that image I can see what links the two in your mind. Magritte focused on the mystery of "progress;" Colville portrays a certain blunt inevitability. Amusingly, my immediate thought was "You can't stop today as it comes racing down the track." You know...from Hairspray.

@akbogert: Colville is Canadian, I am not sure if many outside of Canada would be very familiar with him.

Nice reference to Hairspray. Are you a fan of musicals? I am

@RazzaTazz: Well Magritte is Belgian, and that didn't stop me hearing of him. Besides, we Americans have a sad tendency to know Canadian work but just assume the person's American.

I had absolutely no theater experience before going to college, but by graduation I had a theater minor and had participated in (acting, directing, technical directing, and a bunch of tech work) a couple dozen productions. I loved my time working on the stuff and have made a conscious effort to familiarize myself with it, though I've still a ways to go before I've filled all the embarrassing holes in my knowledge (i.e. never seen West Side Story or Fiddler on the Roof). To a certain extent, growing up on Disney movies made me a fan of musicals surreptitiously. Short answer: yes.

@akbogert What is it about Avengers Arena that you do not like? I've actually liked Avengers Arena, despite it being a direct rip of of Battle Royale. I think I've heard someone say that their issue with it is that they are killing off beloved characters for no real reason or something like that. Having not read anything like Avengers Academy (save the substitute teacher spider man issue) I'm finding the story kind of intriguing. So perhaps maybe having no prior experience with the characters helps with enjoyment of the series?

@Delphic: I've sort of exhausted myself explaining why I loathe Arena, almost to the point where it's about time for me to release a TPB version of all my rants. Haha. No, but if you want my views on it, I'd particularly suggest reading this, followed by this, and if you are still wondering what's on my mind read this and the lengthy comments which follow. Or reverse that, and read my CV blog first?

But to directly address your last point, that's probably true. I hate it because I love at least one character in it, and because I empathize with the many others who love other characters in it as much as I love X-23. The fact that we are losing (or threatened with losing) our characters is bad enough, but when coupled with how they're being lost -- the Battle Royale rip off, as you call it -- it's honestly just insufferable.

@akbogert: Maybe it's happened before, and I don't know because I'm relatively a Marvel newbie, but Do you really think Marvel could get away with a mass killing of characters, like they are attempting to do in Avengers Arena?

I ultimately believe that all things go back to status quo with comics and that character that we like will eventually always come back in some form or fashion. It's almost like it is comic book law. For example, I'm a huge Spider-man fan (probably the only marvel book I read before Marvel NOW), and with Superior Spider-man, I'm not entirely liking this new direction with Spider-Ock, but I do want to see where it is going. I know that eventually Peter Parker will end up being spiderman again, though I suspect we are going to get another "One more Day" and all the character development that Peter has made will be lost and we, Spider-fans, will be submitted to the same things again that were left in the wake of "One More Day". So in saying that I do not believe that marvel can get away with it.

@akbogert: Oh right, I haven't seen either of those two in a while either.

@Delphic: I actually basically addressed this question in one of the posts I linked to. Suffice to say yes, I do think they "could get away with it," I think there are people (predominately fans of Arena) who want them to "get away with it," and in the wake of events like House of M and AvX, I think it's entirely typical of Marvel to do it. Like I said, I specifically walked through how Peter Parker's a bad example and why I think this is really bad in that post, so I encourage you to read it ^_^

@wildvine: Well hey, answers to my questions! A name I have to earn, eh? Fine, Wv, I can play along. Those links...aren't particularly helpful though :p. What say you to a few questions of your own?

@RazzaTazz: Ah, but I haven't seen them at all -_-

@akbogert: Do you count movie versions, because that is all that I am counting?

@RazzaTazz: I count whatever version, I guess. Aside from the shows I've been in/worked on, I've seen only a few live performances (Phantom of the Opera, Wicked, Singing in the Rain, The Pillowman, Death of a Salesman, Next to Normal). So movies definitely count. I love the music of Chess and Les Miserables, but I haven't seen either live.

@akbogert: Les Miserables is a weird one for me. A musical about poor people that only rich people can usually afford to buy tickets to.

@RazzaTazz: Haha. True. I actually was introduced to it via the anniversary edition they did a year or two ago. As that was a "concert" edition, I've still never seen a true theatrical performance (unless, I suppose, you count the movie that just came out), though maybe someday. *shrug*

@wildvine: Haha, that's fine. I just wasn't sure if you'd intended to link to a profile or not, since I'm fairly confident in my ability to locate YouTube's homepage without a direct link :p

@akbogert: The movie was kind of weird for me, though I still enjoyed it.

@RazzaTazz: It was rather uncanny. To some extent the absurdity of breaking out into song at important moments is mitigated in musicals by the overt break in dramatic continuity signaled by a song beginning and ending. This film did away with that, and forces you to picture people actually singing in crucial moments. It would just never happen.

I felt bad for Crowe though. Guy has heart, but his voice was just not cutting it for me.