Joe Hill Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

RAMSEY CAMPBELL » Discussion » Joe Hill « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Colin Leslie (Blackabyss)
Username: Blackabyss

Registered: 02-2010
Posted From: 86.164.67.73
Posted on Friday, February 12, 2010 - 07:48 pm:   

The new Joe Hill novel, Horns gets 5 stars in SFX reviews. So is Joe Hill the future of "commercial" horror or is he just Stephen Kings son?

For my money I thought 20th Century Ghosts was great, Heart Shaped Box okay and Gunpowder excellent.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chris_morris (Chris_morris)
Username: Chris_morris

Registered: 04-2008
Posted From: 12.165.240.116
Posted on Friday, February 12, 2010 - 08:13 pm:   

People say nepotism has nothing to do with his success, but in my view there's only one reason why he's the only new horror novelist to break the NY Times Bestseller list in over a decade: he's King's son. Hill isn't untalented, but he's not his father. I suspect the novelty will wear off with the public over the course of his next two or three novels.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steveduffy (Steveduffy)
Username: Steveduffy

Registered: 05-2009
Posted From: 86.172.5.176
Posted on Friday, February 12, 2010 - 09:55 pm:   

It's possible for both these conditions to be true: he could be "the only new horror novelist to break the NY Times Bestseller list in over a decade [because] he's King's son" (in fact, I probably agree with Chris, there), AND he could be well worth reading in his own right.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.110.180.31
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 01:11 am:   

I don't recall either Justin Leiber or Richard Christian Matheson having disproportionate success with their work. Readers may come to Joe Hill because he's King's son, but they stay because he's bloody good. And being named after a great American trade unionist hasn't harmed his credibility at all. His writing was making waves for years before anyone suspected his parentage.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chris_morris (Chris_morris)
Username: Chris_morris

Registered: 04-2008
Posted From: 98.220.97.79
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 02:53 am:   

Fritz Leiber and Richard Matheson never broke the NY Times Bestseller List either, did they? So you can't exactly say the acorns fell far from the trees.

If King is different it's because he's not just a horror writer, he's an American icon. Joe Hill, like "Richard Bachman," sold meager numbers of books before his true identity became known -- and then huge numbers afterwards. I'm not saying that Joe Hill is bad -- he's not to my taste, but that's another matter -- I'm only saying he isn't really New York Times Bestseller material. He isn't Judith Krantz. He isn't John Grisham. People have purchased his books because they love Stephen King and they are curious about his son. A good percentage of those people will probably stick around for books two and three, possibly four, but eventually they'll recognize that Joe Hill is only a modestly good writer, that he isn't the voice of his generation, like his father arguably was, and suddenly remember that horror fiction is out of fashion. Eventually they'll go back to their Michael Connelly novels, their Danielle Steels, and forget about Mr Hill. That's my guess, anyway.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Craig (Craig)
Username: Craig

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 75.4.248.185
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 05:33 am:   

I'm wracking my brains trying to think of any offsprings that equal their fathers/mothers in stature in the world of literature. Maybe Mary Shelley to her mother, Mary Wollstonecraft?... You've got the Lowells - James Russell, Amy, and Robert - but none are parent-child, if I remember correctly.... Do Justin and Richard Christian equal Fritz and Richard? I just kinda doubt it.

To me, it's foolish to think Joe Hill didn't get where he is because of his father, but it's also foolish to think he didn't get there because of complete lack of talent - of which his father might have played a part in as well (i.e., editing, notes, etc.). It's not fair that some get breaks others don't... but then is life ever fair? And doesn't Joe Hill have to live forever in the shadow of his father?...

Yes, in the end, life is absolutely fair: it's unfair to everyone.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.0.114.254
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 09:34 am:   

Kingsley and Martin Amis, of course.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.110.225.149
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 10:42 am:   

Craig, do we have any evidence that Joe Hill has benefited from his father's ghostwriting support? That's quite an allegation.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.0.114.254
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 11:05 am:   

It's not really an allegation, more a surmise. I would say that it would be unusual if Stephen hadn't offered his son at least some 'editorial' input. Also - and this is another surmise - I would imagine that having such a rich father allows for a considerable degree of financial freedom in which to develop one's craft. As his father once said, "Talent is common as table salt. What separates success and failure is a good deal of hard work." The simple fact is that hard work requires free time.

I'm wary of the potential incorrect reading of statements such as this - that Hill is only publishable because of his affiliation to his dad and not his literary ability. I am not saying this. (As Martin Amis says bitterly to those who claim he is where he is because of his father: "Oh yeah, it's like taking over the fucking family shop." It isn't of course.)

But come on, having Stephen King as your dad is going to benefit your career more than the alternative, surely.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.0.114.254
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 11:06 am:   

Also, I don't see where Craig mentioned anything about ghostwriting. He referred to editing and input. Not the same things.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.0.114.254
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 11:19 am:   

Anyway, let's judge Hill at least five years from now. I'd say Heart-Shaped Box was as good as Carrie. Maybe Horns is as good as Salem's Lot. Let's see if he can produce a third as good as The Shining.

I personally think that in 20th Century Ghosts he's already written as good a first collection as Night Shift - maybe even better.

The guy's talented, all right.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 03:00 pm:   

I'd say Joe succeeded because he's a bloody good writer, and there's nothing unfair about that.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Craig (Craig)
Username: Craig

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 75.4.247.112
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 03:01 pm:   

Gary's right, I was just saying that he benefitted I'm sure by some editorial input; and I agree with Gary that surely Joe Hill had a leg-up in his writing career, it would be folly to just wholly discount this.

It's also impossible to believe he could ever break out of his father's shadow, I don't care if he lives and writes for a 100 years, and does write those great books (not wholly his fault, this: the publishing world has changed). Not that he cares, I'm sure he's writing what he loves, and it must show....
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Rosswarren (Rosswarren)
Username: Rosswarren

Registered: 11-2009
Posted From: 86.166.251.196
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 07:19 pm:   

I'm quite proud of the fact that I found Joe's work before it came out he was King's son. Someone on another forum was raving about '20th Century Ghosts' and I hunted a copy down on ebay; I was blown away.

'Pop Art' is for me one of the best short stories of the last decade.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Colin Leslie (Blackabyss)
Username: Blackabyss

Registered: 02-2010
Posted From: 86.164.67.73
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 07:32 pm:   

The strange thing is my father was an electrician but I recently managed to electrocute myself on a light socket so clearly it's the ability rather than the skill you get genetically...guess Joe Hill made better use of his genetics than I did
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Colin Leslie (Blackabyss)
Username: Blackabyss

Registered: 02-2010
Posted From: 86.164.67.73
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 07:39 pm:   

This probably explains a lot :-

As literary apprenticeships go, Hill's was tough to beat. "I'd come home from school and find my mom [novelist Tabitha King] in her office clattering away at the keyboard, and my dad would be in his office sitting in front of his word processor," he says. "By the time I was 11 or 12, it seemed perfectly natural to go to your room and make stuff up."

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1963736,00.html#ixzz0fRVJGpyb
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Bacon (Stevebacon)
Username: Stevebacon

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 90.213.27.210
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 08:07 pm:   

"By the time I was 11 or 12, it seemed perfectly natural to go to your room and make stuff up."

My dad was a welder, but the same goes for me.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Huw (Huw)
Username: Huw

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 220.138.167.224
Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 - 10:03 pm:   

Same here! Both my parents are teachers.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.110.146.35
Posted on Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 01:17 am:   

For me it was about the only viable option, and that may be true for many of us.

My first encounter with Joe Hill was a story in Leviathan in the late 90s that Andy Cox had recommended. It was about suicide, and is not in his collection. Then I read 'Twentieth-Century Ghost' and was blown away. Then 'The Black Phone', even more so. Then I learnt he was King's son and thought "Fuck, now the knives will come out."
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 188.147.73.125
Posted on Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 01:49 am:   

I had no idea that Joe Hill was King's son, until now. Hard as that is to believe. Well, I will always buy his books, continue to buy his books, because I think he's great. I know that doesn't really boil down to why, but he's a brilliant writer. I couldn't give a flying fuck that he's King's son. It's quite simple, either he can write or he can't. And whether or not he can, I think the lad's (not to sound too condescending) can do that quite clearly.

Any belly aching about his heritage, sounds too much like jealousy.

The SP is full of delusional half-wits who think they are the next big thing, and I have very litttle time for those who cannot construct a fucking active sentence without denigrating anyone who has the slightest bit of succcess.

I repeat, I had no idea, truly, that Joe Hill was King's son.

Thank Christ he doesn't have to deal with the SP.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Clive (Clive)
Username: Clive

Registered: 10-2009
Posted From: 81.104.165.168
Posted on Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 02:02 am:   

What is the SP?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Matthew_fell (Matthew_fell)
Username: Matthew_fell

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 216.232.190.19
Posted on Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 02:18 am:   

++++Any belly aching about his heritage, sounds too much like jealousy++++

Seems to me that there's a lot of that around here.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Bacon (Stevebacon)
Username: Stevebacon

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 90.213.27.210
Posted on Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 02:39 am:   

Clive - small presses.

Or Snow Patrol.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Clive (Clive)
Username: Clive

Registered: 10-2009
Posted From: 81.104.165.168
Posted on Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 03:07 am:   

Ah, yes. Of course. Cheers Steve. :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Craig (Craig)
Username: Craig

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 75.5.0.248
Posted on Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 03:39 am:   

Commercial success in the arts requires two things, imho: talent + opportunity. Some have much more talent than opportunity, some the reverse. Talent can be learned; opportunities can be gained, lost, gained again, and so on. Some have life easier, some have life more difficult. It's clear Paris Hilton has life "easier," and it's clear that a poor benighted fellow in earthquake-stricken Haiti has it "more difficult" - from those extremes, somewhere between them, boundaries blur. Just because some have it easier in some areas, so what? Why deny it?

I love how some screenwriters complain about Hollywood never "letting them in," but then when they get in, it was all because of their talent. When they're out, they're being kept out (because of the system, the market, etc.); when they're in, it was all about pure artistic ability. When a movie stinks, it's everyone else's fault; when a movie's great, it was all about the script. There's degrees in everything. I believe Joe Hill had a leg up - so what if that's what I believe? Surely one has to believe this?! Stephen-effing-King is his FATHER! If I wanted to write horror and Ramsey were my father, well... aside from getting backhanded a few times....

The point is: you still have to be great to sustain, and going by what everyone's said here, Joe Hill has. (Has Tabitha sustained herself?... how do they compare?...) But why deny the obvious, that he's King's son?... (The counter argument: Why bring it up at all then? is valid; but then there's the counter-counter argument: Why not?)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Colin Leslie (Blackabyss)
Username: Blackabyss

Registered: 02-2010
Posted From: 86.164.67.73
Posted on Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 10:23 am:   

*Has Tabitha sustained herself?*
Good point about Tabitha Craig, I remember reading one of her books years ago and thinking it was pretty poor and guess what...She has not made the impact Joe Hill has made despite the obvious opportunities avaliable.

Frank - my original point was trying to dissect why Joe Hill seemed to have the backing of the major publishers, not if he had any talent. I agree he is talented but more so than Ramsey Campbell?

Personally I hope that Joe has great success, I think it's good for the whole genre, hopefully publishers will have more confidence in horror/dark fiction. That is why I asked if he was the future of "commercial" horror i.e. someone to finally get horror back on the shelves of the major bookshops.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tom_alaerts (Tom_alaerts)
Username: Tom_alaerts

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 217.136.82.203
Posted on Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 10:35 am:   

I thought that 20th century ghosts was reasonably good but I couldn't see what all the fuzz was about.
I did try Heart Shaped Box but gave up after 100 pages or so: slick, commercial horror. Perfectly professionally done, of course, but I feel that I should aim higher in my reading.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Skunsworth (Skunsworth)
Username: Skunsworth

Registered: 05-2009
Posted From: 78.149.54.191
Posted on Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 10:51 am:   

My understanding is that when 20th Century Ghosts was offered to PS, it was on the strict understanding that it was done without Pete knowing who Joe was, or his lineage - I remember Pete speaking about it at FCon 2008.

For me, 20th Century Ghosts is an excellent collection, and one of my favourite books of the past years. I thought Heart Shaped Box was good, but not brilliant, and I'm looking forward to Horns. Personally, I'm tired of all the 'oh, it's only cos he's SK's son' crap.

S
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Skunsworth (Skunsworth)
Username: Skunsworth

Registered: 05-2009
Posted From: 78.149.54.191
Posted on Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 11:19 am:   

My understanding is that when 20th Century Ghosts was offered to PS, it was on the strict understanding that it was done without Pete knowing who Joe was, or his lineage - I remember Pete speaking about it at FCon 2008.

For me, 20th Century Ghosts is an excellent collection, and one of my favourite books of the past years. I thought Heart Shaped Box was good, but not brilliant, and I'm looking forward to Horns. Personally, I'm tired of all the 'oh, it's only cos he's SK's son' crap.

S
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 11:33 am:   

Pete did indeed not know who Joe was until well after he'd agreed to publish the book (which he loved). Pete is an old-fashioned publisher of the best kind: he'll publish a book if he likes it even if he isn't certain it will sell, but won't publish one if he doesn't like it even if it would make him money.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Bacon (Stevebacon)
Username: Stevebacon

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 90.213.27.210
Posted on Sunday, February 14, 2010 - 08:31 pm:   

I wish there were more like him.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kate (Kathleen)
Username: Kathleen

Registered: 09-2009
Posted From: 86.169.163.57
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 07:44 am:   

I was in Las Vegas, looking for a book to take with me on the flight home (I'd already read everything I had with me) and stumbled across 20th Century Ghosts in a mainstream bookshop. I had no idea who he was but I devoured the book and my immediate thought was that I had to get my hands on everything else he'd written. I got back and googled him, read his Wikipedia entry and found out who he was. My best friend (not a horror fan) said, "Oh yeah, I'd been meaning to tell you about him!"

So for me he certainly made it on his own merits. I wonder how differently I'd have approached the book if I'd known beforehand?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Craig (Craig)
Username: Craig

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 75.4.255.252
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 08:01 am:   

All well and good. And all assuming, of course, the singular hand of Joe Hill....

Hey! I'm just sayin's, all!

(Because in the end, whatever the construct that is known as "Joe Hill" is, it's apparently doing good work. Would it matter, otherwise, if some other truth were to be discovered?... A serious question. My answer? No.)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kate (Kathleen)
Username: Kathleen

Registered: 09-2009
Posted From: 86.169.163.57
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 08:06 am:   

If so, Craig, why isn't the construct known as "Tabitha King" raved about just as much?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.47.10.77
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 11:25 am:   

I knew who Joe Hill was before I read 20th Century Ghosts but I managed to put it to the back of my mind. The stories were more imortant to me and all that.... I loved the collection and hope he will write another one soon. As usual, with any kind of success, there will always be some criticism as to how it was achieved.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.27.30.20
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 12:53 pm:   

Why is it a "criticism" to answer a question with what one believes to the case? This thread started with a question: a range of answers have been offered.

Quite why one should be called a "delusional half-wit" who is "jealous of success" on account of the (ostensibly heretical) suggestion that having the Kings as parents might just be a tad helpful in terms of developing one's literary ability beggars belief.

Btw, Mozart benefited from his father's musical monomania. That guy had music in the air he first breathed. Was still hugely talented, though.

As far as I can tell, that's exactly what some folk are saying here about Joe Hill. I can only assume that those people who can't understand that simply don't want to.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 12:56 pm:   

You must be joeking!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.27.30.20
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 01:16 pm:   

Actually, it's Colin's fault for asking a leading question. :-)

By asking an either/or question, however, answers were codified artificially into just two categories when, as ever, the reality of the situation is probably more mixed.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 217.37.199.45
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 01:18 pm:   

Gary, I don't think anyone is disputing that having parents who are keen readers and writers has been instrumental in developing Joe Hill's own writing talent. What's come under attack here is the view, widespread in fandom but not necessarily held by any RCMB member, that Joe Hill owes his commercial and critical success only to his father's fame. I'm hearing that as genre 'realpolitik' from people who should know better, who are offering a 'come off it' sneer and saying "Let's not kid ourselves..." I and others are saying this dismissive attitude is not credible.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Clive (Clive)
Username: Clive

Registered: 10-2009
Posted From: 81.104.165.168
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 01:20 pm:   

>>You must be joeking!<<

I've been waiting for someone to say that! :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 188.147.215.215
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 01:22 pm:   

Colin - My thread wasn't connected to what you said.

Gary - Quite clearly you have me at a disadvantage again, since you exhibit such mental prowess.

I am making reference to a particular part of the thread which is quite banal and insulting, and therefore requires an equally banal and insulting reply.

Have you become the new champion of the people, or is it you're intention to intervene like the hand of some interminably annoying God whenever I say something you don't like.

Far worse things have been said before. You are rather fickle in your choice of interjecting. I never know if it is in the capacity of moderator, or because you have personal objections.

'I can only assume....' Yes, 'we' must clearly not want to understand. You've got me...again...

Are we going to start arguing again and have this thread deleted? Up to you?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kate (Kathleen)
Username: Kathleen

Registered: 09-2009
Posted From: 86.169.163.57
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 01:23 pm:   

I've been hoping no one would.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kate (Kathleen)
Username: Kathleen

Registered: 09-2009
Posted From: 86.169.163.57
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 01:24 pm:   

Curses! Didn't post in time! LOL
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 217.37.199.45
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 01:24 pm:   

There's a viable discussion going on here, Frank, and it's solely your personal decision to be rude and threaten to bring it crashing down.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 217.37.199.45
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 01:33 pm:   

I would say again: if having a very famous writer parent ensures massive success for a new writer, why weren't the books of Justin Leiber and Richard Christian Matheson massively successful? The latter, at least, is a good writer – I assume the former is too.

To take another, still more striking, example: Bob Dylan is one of the most enduring icons of modern popular music, and one of the most influential popular figures of the 1960s. Why has his son, Jakob Dylan, had only middling success with his band The Wallflowers? The phrase "the new Dylan" has been used successfully to promote many new singer-songwriters over the past forty years. Finally, we have a singer-songwriter who actually, biologically IS the new Dylan. Why is he not a huge commercial and critical success? Answer: his work is not that remarkable in itself, so he only stands out from the crowd for a few seconds. The same would be true of Joe Hill if he were not, in fact, a remarkably good writer. There's no 'come off it' involved. He would have been a nine-day wonder if he were not that good.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 217.37.199.45
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 01:35 pm:   

P.S. Apologies to any Jakob Dylan fans reading this – I'm just using him an an example. Feel free to prove me wrong.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.27.30.20
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 01:47 pm:   

>>>Are we going to start arguing again and have this thread deleted? Up to you?

AKA: if you look at me the wrong way, I'll hit you, and it'll be your fault because you looked.

OK, Frank, you win. I won't look.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 188.146.231.254
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 01:47 pm:   

Joel - with respect, Gary makes a direct link to my part of the thread (delusional halfwits), I think, not with other board members in mind at all. Therefore I responded as is my right to do so. Are you telling me that you yourself have you never been rude, Joel, to anybody here on this board, intentionally or not?

It's a bit rich considering some of the language and insults traded round here.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 217.37.199.45
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 02:08 pm:   

Frank – no, I just think your suggestion that the thread be deleted was unnecessary and aggressive. I didn't need to point out that Gary was also being unnecessarily defensive since I had already done so.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 217.37.199.45
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 02:10 pm:   

P.S. I'm not trying to put anyone down here, just maintain a valid discussion! Anyway, I've said what I have to say and will let you all get on with it. Stay cool.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 02:11 pm:   

Happy to oblige Clive
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.27.30.20
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 02:21 pm:   

>>>if having a very famous writer parent ensures massive success for a new writer

Maybe it would help if the group of people who are saying this were identified. I must be out of the loop. I know of nobody who holds that view. Are there such people . . . or is this just a 'straw man'?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 188.146.103.64
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 02:24 pm:   

Joel - point taken, apologies to you.
Gary - let's just leave it shall we, or it'll just denegenerate into another verbal fist-fight.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.27.30.20
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 02:24 pm:   

Frank, having reread your comment at 1:49, it would seem that I perhaps mistakenly assumed you were referring to comments made by folk on this board. My apologies if that's the case.

(However, I have to say that the comment at 2:18 possessed no such ambiguity.)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.27.30.20
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 02:25 pm:   

>>>Gary - let's just leave it shall we, or it'll just denegenerate into another verbal fist-fight.

Sure.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Craig (Craig)
Username: Craig

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 75.4.252.180
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 04:20 pm:   

Kate: Touché (sp?). That's the serious answer. I have a sexist answer: She refused to take his advice, and/or, you don't EVER correct or rewrite your wife. Those are both non-serious jokes.

In sum, I must admit, it is a bit of a straw-man argument for me. I admit to a tinge of jealousy as well - who wouldn't want a mentor of the very highest levels? And to want a mentor of the very highest levels, implies, one wants to be excellent at one's artistic craft. To say Joe Hill is a great writer, is to say he's achieved both - it's enviable.

Surely Joe Hill was mentored, at least?... Or did every time Joe Hill bring up a story, Stephen turned his head and said, "No! Not gonna look at it! Not! Not!" [as Joe starts reading, King puts fingers in his ears - loudly:] "Bah! Bah! Bah! Bah! Bah! Bah! Bah!"

... okay, I'll stop now.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Skunsworth (Skunsworth)
Username: Skunsworth

Registered: 05-2009
Posted From: 78.149.54.191
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 04:38 pm:   

Has anyone considered that perhaps the exact opposite was true? That JH didn't show SK a thing, so that he could be sure that whatever success he acheived, he did so on his own merits? Because that's how I know I'd have approached it, and from JH's method of approaching PS, I'm kind of assuming that he may well have done that as well.

S
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Craig (Craig)
Username: Craig

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 75.4.252.180
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 04:57 pm:   

...and from JH's method of approaching PS, I'm kind of assuming that he may well have done that as well.

Oh, f*ck, now I'm forced to have to comment again, Skunsworth, on this particular line of reasoning....

Does anyone REALLY think someone like Joe Hill would approach anyone and say, "Here - I'm Stephen King's son by the way - read this"? Does anyone think even if he did, he'd ADMIT it? Does anyone think if King handed a story to someone or manyones and said, "Read this," he'd want it to get out? (i.e., the pushing of King/King's name =ed success)

An argument that runs, "Mr. X is virtuous because of doing action Y, but not performing action Z," is an untenable argument. So is the reverse construct: "Your honor, my client couldn't have stolen that bagel from the bakery, because he'd then have been mortified to have that be discovered. Because he would have been mortified, it stands to reason, he simply didn't do it."

Let's not argue virtues, where there can be no lack thereof. Joe Hill, simply is now - and he is, apparently, pretty damned good.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kate (Kathleen)
Username: Kathleen

Registered: 09-2009
Posted From: 86.169.163.57
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 05:25 pm:   

Putting myself in a young and unknown Joe Hill's shoes, I'd have been terrified to show my famous father my stories. Terrified that he'd think they were awful or that he'd SAY they were good because he had to and I'd never get any objective feedback. And if I tried to publish anything as his son, I'd be terrified that the world would expect instant brilliance of me. Or what if everyone expected me to be "the next SK" and be just a carbon copy of him? Or what if I genuinely thought I had what it takes but didn't want to be accused of all the obvious things, so I'd really know if I was good or not, without any help from my lineage?

Sure, that's a lot of projection, because they're all the things *I'd* think, but they're certainly just as valid as possibilities.

I don't doubt he gets excellent advice and probably heard some good suggestions along the way, but an editor doesn't make the writer. If JH were only mediocre, a few words of advice from SK wouldn't make any difference. The work speaks for itself.

As to not editing/correcting one's partner... well, I suppose it depends on the partner.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.27.30.20
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 05:27 pm:   

Absolutely. Even if Joe got loads of advice from King, it doesn't call into question his obvious ability. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Skunsworth (Skunsworth)
Username: Skunsworth

Registered: 05-2009
Posted From: 78.149.54.191
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 05:34 pm:   

So Craig, what you're saying is, you're right and we're wrong, whichever argument we choose to back or whatever statement we make? Good. Glad that's cleared up then.

S
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Craig (Craig)
Username: Craig

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 75.5.7.222
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 05:36 pm:   

Gary, Kate - I do agree. You can't get far unless you got the goods. To even discuss this is somehow unseemly.

Two things though: 1) It is impossible for me to believe he didn't receive SOME kind of "mentorship," however minimal, along the way - to deny that is propagandistic; and 2) It is simply not a virtue to say "He didn't tell anyone" when (even judging by your last post, Kate) the reverse reality is untenable for anyone, anywhere - to champion that version of reality as championable is, imho, also propagandistic.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Craig (Craig)
Username: Craig

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 75.5.7.222
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 05:37 pm:   

Did that last post clear it up for you, Skunsworth?...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Skunsworth (Skunsworth)
Username: Skunsworth

Registered: 05-2009
Posted From: 78.149.54.191
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 06:28 pm:   

I think I will continue to form my opinion based on the (admittedly limited) evidence I have at my disposal, to whit: hearing Pete Crowther talk at some length on how he came to read and then sign JH. We may have to agree to disagree in relation to our differing interpretations of JH's success and how he acheived it.

S
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.27.30.20
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 06:31 pm:   

That's the trouble: limited evidence.

At least we surely agree on one thing: however he made the grade, we'd much rather see a writer of the calibre of Joe Hill up there than the Danielle Steeles of this world.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.27.30.20
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 06:32 pm:   

And a HORROR writer, too: double whammy!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Skunsworth (Skunsworth)
Username: Skunsworth

Registered: 05-2009
Posted From: 78.149.54.191
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 06:33 pm:   

Danielle Steel's great!

S
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.27.30.20
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 06:52 pm:   

Not as good as Barbara Taylor Bradford. Now she's some good fiction, lad.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Colin Leslie (Blackabyss)
Username: Blackabyss

Registered: 02-2010
Posted From: 86.164.67.73
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 06:55 pm:   

++Actually, it's Colin's fault for asking a leading question++

A big boy made me do it...honest

Without wishing to cause any more trouble, I still wonder if this is good for the genre. Yes its good to see horror in the bestseller lis or no its not good because it means publishers are only investing in a sure thing (by publishers I mean large press not the likes of PS). There's little evidence of a genre revival on the back of this.... What do you think?

Sorry Gary did it again!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.27.30.20
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 07:01 pm:   

I should get my red pen on you, Mr Leslie!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.27.30.20
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 07:02 pm:   

Seriously, I do see a genre revival happening slowly yet surely. A few of the bigger publishing houses are looking again at horror. Who knows, another few years might see us right.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Colin Leslie (Blackabyss)
Username: Blackabyss

Registered: 02-2010
Posted From: 86.164.67.73
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 07:21 pm:   

Sorry Sir, won't happen again sir.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Colin Leslie (Blackabyss)
Username: Blackabyss

Registered: 02-2010
Posted From: 86.164.67.73
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 07:24 pm:   

Here's hoping you are right, certainly in terms of quality of writing, it's already there.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jonathan (Jonathan)
Username: Jonathan

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.109.188.43
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 11:13 pm:   

I'm certainly looking at horror. In fact, I've just sent Conrad Williams a contract for a novel.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Bacon (Stevebacon)
Username: Stevebacon

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 90.204.111.236
Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 11:29 pm:   

Good stuff, Jonathan. Can't wait.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Craig (Craig)
Username: Craig

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 75.4.246.172
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 12:16 am:   

Allow me the indulgence of making one last point? Perhaps to clarify where I'm coming from?

Michael Douglas is the son of Kirk Douglas. But there's never a mention of him being the son of Kirk, in relation to his career. That's because he's not hiding nor trumpeting that fact - he simply IS Michael Douglas.

But I feel like we have the name "Joe Hill" (i.e., not King) and then constantly the bio-bit that he was not trumpeting his pedigree, he was discovered first, etc. To me, it bespeaks the ego. Why say ANYTHING? Why hide anything? Why not just be Joe King, son of Stephen, here's my stories, how I got published/read/discovered/etc. doesn't matter? So some think or don't you were influenced by your dad - you think anyone would have cared?

Going back to Tabitha, NO ONE, certainly not me - it never crossed my mind to even think "nepotism" or favoritism or mentorism or any other ism, in relation to her - not once, never, nowhere, never. I now know why, in retrospect: there was nothing trying to be hidden. She's Tabitha King, wife of Stephen. Here's her stories. You like them? You don't? Fine. End of story.

I just have this little tiny bug in me that doesn't like being bullshittted, that's all. So you're King's son. BFD. When one is hiding something (um, calling yourself "Joe Hill" IS hiding something, and why why why why why hide something?), I then think - someone has something to hide.

There. Rant over. Apologies if I've offended anyone here, but - unless you all have something to hide as well....
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Bacon (Stevebacon)
Username: Stevebacon

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 90.204.111.236
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 12:25 am:   

Craig, I understand your point, but to bring in a similar film analogy, would you consider Emilio Estevez as having something to hide, in relation to Charlie Sheen?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Bacon (Stevebacon)
Username: Stevebacon

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 90.204.111.236
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 12:27 am:   

And I'm pretty sure that in the first few years of Michael Douglas's career, the fact that he was the son of Kirk Douglas would have been a big deal, too.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jonathan (Jonathan)
Username: Jonathan

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.109.188.43
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 12:34 am:   

Surely the evidence is in the writing and, having read all bar one of Joe's books, he's certainly one of the most exciting new writers around. I thought that even before the familial link was revealed. He'll stand and fall by his writing, not who his Dad is.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Clive (Clive)
Username: Clive

Registered: 10-2009
Posted From: 81.104.165.168
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 12:39 am:   

There is of course another son in all this, Owen King, who is a few years younger than Joe and kept his surname when being published. Hasn't quite made as big a splash though.

http://www.owen-king.com

I have to admit that the only King, Hill or King i've read are a couple of short stories in anthologies (Night Surf and The Mist) on On Writing which was interesting.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.110.245.204
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 12:41 am:   

Speaking of Michael Douglas reminds me that he has a younger brother who is a failed stand-up comic. The story is told that once, facing an unruly audience, he snapped: "Do you know who I am? I'm Kirk Douglas' son!" Whereupon first one audience member, then another, then another and then all of them stood up and declared: "No, I'm Kirk Douglas' son!"
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Clive (Clive)
Username: Clive

Registered: 10-2009
Posted From: 81.104.165.168
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 12:42 am:   

He does seem to be a big comics fan though which is cool.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Craig (Craig)
Username: Craig

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 75.5.8.26
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 02:08 am:   

I don't think there was ever a time we didn't know Emilio Estevez was Martin Sheen's son ("Sheen" a chosen stage name anyway, Estevez the family name) - there was no question or secret.

Eric Douglas - not sure that's who you mean, Joel - he was also struggling to be an actor, before he I believe committed suicide some years back. His artistic flaw was that he looked very much like Michael, and his voice was identical to Michael's - you could simply not distinguish between their voices. And the world, alas, only needed one Michael Douglas (the superior actor, mind).

Btw, tangent: THE KING OF CALIFORNIA, a little indie-pic from last year or the year before I think, with Michael Douglas? Pretty good flick, well-worth the rental.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kate (Kathleen)
Username: Kathleen

Registered: 09-2009
Posted From: 86.169.163.57
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 05:23 am:   

Identity is a very personal and complex thing. A name is a face you present to the world, the outermost onionskin. My own list of identities reads like a rap sheet: alias, alias, alias... And none of those names reflect my family. They're not famous or infamous; I just needed to choose my own identity, the name that felt like ME.

So I don't see anything suspect in Joe Hill's decision. People choose their own names for all sorts of reasons: Barbara Hershey was Barbara Seagull for a few years to commemorate the death of a seagull on the set of one of her films - a tad flaky, one might say, but a personal decision for her own personal reasons. I respect that.

PS) I'm not having a go at you, Craig - honest!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Craig (Craig)
Username: Craig

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 75.4.233.13
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 06:17 am:   

I'm not having a go at you either, Kate. I find this discussion fascinating.

I do think it undeniable to admit that: a pseudonym on some level, means someone is hiding something. Hiding something is not bad because it is hiding something - it is only hiding something: however that is to be interpreted, is how to interpret it. Ramsey hid his real name as author of NIGHT OF THE CLAW purely for legal reasons, if I remember the story correctly (?).

Joe Hill is hiding the name of "King" for a reason - the question is about identity? I think then it becomes about ego, because it's not like we could see a Barbara Seagull's face and know that it's Barbara Hershey. No one, so the story goes, knew it was Joe Hill - and here comes that old cynic again, UNTIL later, when he had some laurels. Would we ever have known otherwise?... the cynic in me says, no. Joe Hill would have vanished without a trace. Whatever. No one's a saint, no one's above the desperate gnawing of the easily-bruised, thirsting-for-praise ego. The more I wax on this, the more cynical I get. I'd best stop, it's only reflecting unwell on my own ego....
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chris_morris (Chris_morris)
Username: Chris_morris

Registered: 04-2008
Posted From: 98.220.97.79
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 08:19 am:   

I think Joe Hill hid his identity for perfectly valid reasons; I think he's a stand-up guy. He wanted to know if he had the chops to make it on his own.

But that doesn't change the fact that before people knew who he was, he was basically a small press horror writer on the level of, say, Glen Hirshberg, and after, he was a Stephen King-level bestseller. The only thing that changed was his identity. If Glen Hirshberg had been revealed to be Stephen King's son, I'm sure he would have been a bestseller, too.

I cast no aspersions on his talent -- as I said, he's not to my taste, but that's another thing entirely. My point (decades ago, it seems) was that his "success" (if you want to call NY Times bestsellerdom "success") has been more or less a factor of his lineage. It remains to be seen if he can keep the audience he has accumulated. My own view is that he won't be able to do it.

Tabitha King -- another fine example -- had a minor "success" with SMALL WORLD back in, I don't know, 1979. At that time Stephen King wasn't yet truly Stephen King The American Phenomenon, but he was famous enough to have a good following. Tabitha's success with that first novel -- a supernatural novel, a rarity for Tabitha -- was surely due to Stephen's fans' curiosity about his wife. The book, which isn't bad, sold well, but subsequent books sold fewer and fewer copies. I expect the same to happen to Hill -- through no fault of his own. Neither he nor Tabitha are bad writers. They just aren't Stephen King.

To be fair, I think Hill's books provide more of what the average horror reader is looking for, and to that end he may retain more of his audience than Tabitha did -- but these days, the average bestseller reader is not a horror reader. If Hill's sales plummet, as I said earlier, it will surely be only because the public has come to its senses and, its curiosity sated, will remember that it no longer has an interest in horror fiction.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chris_morris (Chris_morris)
Username: Chris_morris

Registered: 04-2008
Posted From: 98.220.97.79
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 08:22 am:   

It just occurred to me that my last post was more or less the same as the one that preceded it a few days ago. I'm arguing in circles. Clearly I'm a complete idiot. I'll go back to shutting up, which I'm better at anyway.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jonathan (Jonathan)
Username: Jonathan

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.109.188.43
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 08:53 am:   

Joe Hill actually, from what I've read, is a very different writer from his father. His sensibilities and prose style aren't similar at all and his themes are somewhat different. I think he's much more than an 'average' horror writer. I think that he's a good writer full stop and that's all that matters to me. Actually, for that matter, I'm not sure what the 'average' horror reader is looking for. If anyone finds out, e-mail me and I can start thinking about early retirement.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 10:59 am:   

And if my name was Joeking I'd want to hide it just to avoid the obvious jokes. Nothing to do with trying to stay anonynynynomus
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Colin Leslie (Blackabyss)
Username: Blackabyss

Registered: 02-2010
Posted From: 86.164.67.73
Posted on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 07:20 pm:   

You know I never even noticed that before. Now I can't take him seriously.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Mark_lynch (Mark_lynch)
Username: Mark_lynch

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 62.254.173.35
Posted on Saturday, February 20, 2010 - 10:50 am:   

He's gigging in the UK March:

http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/displayDetailEvent.do?searchType=1&aut hor=Joe|Hill
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carolinec (Carolinec)
Username: Carolinec

Registered: 06-2009
Posted From: 82.38.75.85
Posted on Saturday, February 20, 2010 - 03:33 pm:   

Ooo, he's coming up north too - unlike his dad, whose UK tour was solely in the south east (still, I believe he does have issues with travelling, and I can empathise with that as I have the same problem).

That's a bit annoying as I've just ordered a signed copy of Horns from Forbidden Planet - and he's actually coming to Leeds! Think I might end up with TWO copies just so that I can meet him!!

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Bold text Italics Underline Create a hyperlink Insert a clipart image

Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action:

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration