Koontz is an incredibly prolific writer, and much of that prolificacy comes from the fact that he draws his stories from common wells. Not to say his stories are all the same; only a handful seem truly repetitious (and if he tends to a certain plot, there are only a handful of those anyway).
Most of what he pulls from these wells just make up the skin of the story: setting, description, and minor sub-plots. They go more into his style or voice more than anything. So study this if you ever intend to write Koontz fan-fic (Kind of like how you should master a lexicon of words like cyclopean and eldritch if you want to impersonate Lovecraft. And don't forget the archaic spellings.... Stay tuned for a Lovecraft Lexicon in the future.)
So without further ado, here's the list of common Koontzisms (in no particular order).
1. Bougainvillea -- Probably Koontz's favorite flower. The only book I can think of without it is Icebound. And I only think it doesn't have bougainvillea because it's set in Antarctica, but there's probably some flashback or Denouement Picnic (see below) with it languidly climbing a trellis.
2. Dogs -- Koontz loves him his dogs. There are a few books without them (usually really old ones), but everything modern has them (most notable was The Darkest Evening of the Year, which was his love note to his beloved Golden Retriever, Trixie, who was dying at the time he wrote it). 75% of the Dogs in Koontz will be Goldens, 20% will be Labs, and all other breeds have to fight over the remaining 5% (statistics made up on the spot).
3. .38 Chief's Special -- The weapon of choice for a Koontz hero. They'll occasionally use others and will sometimes hit the black market for illegally modified uzi's and shotguns when the Nazis are coming.
4. Chinos and Rockports -- the standard-issue uniform for a Koontz hero. So common, I've begun to wonder if he has some kind of endorsement deal.
5. Unusual Similes -- Koontz uses similes like salt. After reading his stuff, you'll never have to worry about your thyroid, but you might want a gallon of fresh water. (Extended enough?)
6. Koontz's Law of Character Backstories -- Every character in a Koontz novel must come from a horrific background. If a hero's parent is dead, that parent committed suicide. In front of the hero. After telling him it's all his fault. Think about the worst possible things you can think of happening to a kid without killing him. Somewhere, that is the backstory of a Koontz hero(ine).
7. Denouement Picnic -- Most characters in Koontz's novels survive. They will gather at the end (with their various dogs) a year or so after the climax, usually for some kind of picnic or barbecue.
8. Criticism of Modern Society -- The world is going to hell, and it's the fault of those damned hippies. Koontz's characters tend to have personal creeds against the permissive trends of society and will fight against it symbolically in the climax.
9. Short Climaxes -- Most villains consider themselves to be gods, and Koontz ratchets up the tension with their immense powers, but the go down like punks. One bullet will usually do it. Basically the opposite of Roger Ebert's law of multiple villain deaths. Interesting thing is that it never really feels anticlimactic.
10. Rich Characters -- Koontz's characters are almost always self-sufficient. If they're not, their rich uncle will kick off in act 1 and leave them a sizeable inheritance. They never have ransom money, but they usually have anywhere from ten to fifty grand sitting around that they can use to buy illegally modified automatics, chief's specials, and H&K shotguns in act 2. The exception is Odd Thomas, who never seems to need money.
Well, those are the ten most obvious, but there's a ton more. What did I miss? Tell me in the comments.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Let's Talk About Dean Koontz: Part 1
I just got my hands on Relentless, Dean Koontz's newest thriller. I haven't had the chance to read it yet, but I think it will be next in the queue (I currently have 2 books going: Stephen King, and Spider Robinson).
Having mentioned King, it puts me in mind of a lot of pop cultural garbage against Koontz. It has become popular to hate Koontz as a second-rate, poor-man's King. That has never really struck me as a valid argument.
I come away with completely different feelings from each of them. Technically, they are both horror writers, but that's not where Koontz lives, and his stories never get as dark and dingy as King's (who has the distinction of being the only writer to make me want to take a shower after reading his work).
My feeling toward Koontz are mixed. When he's on, he is one of the greatest. When he's off, he's pretty bad (but more readable than other books I've suffered through, not naming any names). Interestingly, that's the same opinion King has of him. Just look at the interview where he famously said, "...Stephenie Meyer can't write worth a darn."
When it comes to Koontz, I'm not much of a critic. The problem is that I love Dean Koontz. I have read every book of his that I can get a hold of (43 at this point by my count. Relentless will be 44). When he's bad, I just shake my head as if the puppy just made a mess on the rug.
Reading Koontz is something of a homey experience, made so by the common threads that run through his books. There's probably a drinking game.
I intended at this point to take you through those common threads, but this post is already too long, so the threads will follow in a separate post.
Having mentioned King, it puts me in mind of a lot of pop cultural garbage against Koontz. It has become popular to hate Koontz as a second-rate, poor-man's King. That has never really struck me as a valid argument.
I come away with completely different feelings from each of them. Technically, they are both horror writers, but that's not where Koontz lives, and his stories never get as dark and dingy as King's (who has the distinction of being the only writer to make me want to take a shower after reading his work).
My feeling toward Koontz are mixed. When he's on, he is one of the greatest. When he's off, he's pretty bad (but more readable than other books I've suffered through, not naming any names). Interestingly, that's the same opinion King has of him. Just look at the interview where he famously said, "...Stephenie Meyer can't write worth a darn."
When it comes to Koontz, I'm not much of a critic. The problem is that I love Dean Koontz. I have read every book of his that I can get a hold of (43 at this point by my count. Relentless will be 44). When he's bad, I just shake my head as if the puppy just made a mess on the rug.
Reading Koontz is something of a homey experience, made so by the common threads that run through his books. There's probably a drinking game.
I intended at this point to take you through those common threads, but this post is already too long, so the threads will follow in a separate post.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
4 years
It has been 4 years since my writing education began in earnest. Of course, I've been a writer for several times that. I used to think you can't learn how to write from someone else. I'm still pretty leery of writing classes in school (you need to have the right teacher or it might become more of an impediment than help).
The one nice thing about having gone my own way so long was that I had well over 400,000 of my million "practice words" written by that time. The drawback is that most of those words sucked since I didn't know what I was doing (my first novel was an impenetrable doorstop coming in at 275,000 words). For those keeping track at home, that's 3x as long as a first book should be.
Anyway, I just wanted to give a big thanks to those folks who have helped me most over these last 4 years: Robert J Defendi, Scott Rhoades, John English, Carolyn Larson, Dave Tippets, and Dave Wolverton.
The one nice thing about having gone my own way so long was that I had well over 400,000 of my million "practice words" written by that time. The drawback is that most of those words sucked since I didn't know what I was doing (my first novel was an impenetrable doorstop coming in at 275,000 words). For those keeping track at home, that's 3x as long as a first book should be.
Anyway, I just wanted to give a big thanks to those folks who have helped me most over these last 4 years: Robert J Defendi, Scott Rhoades, John English, Carolyn Larson, Dave Tippets, and Dave Wolverton.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Administrative Change
I've decided to stop writing Book Reviews of every book I read. Simply, as of today I'm 22 books behind and that is daunting and keeping me from even wanting to think about this blog. And of the 40+ reviews I've written this year, only 1 or 2 (if I'm generous) actually have any insight in them. I'll still review books that particularly strike me.
I'll probably even remove some of my reviews because they have such negative value that their mere existence pulls down everything else (and not just on this site). You'll thank me when I delete an old post and you find your car has appeciated a smidge.
That said, any books in my sidebar or past years' collection you want my opinion on, drop a comment on any thread. If you'd like to start a discussion, say so, and I'll start a thread for it.
I'll probably even remove some of my reviews because they have such negative value that their mere existence pulls down everything else (and not just on this site). You'll thank me when I delete an old post and you find your car has appeciated a smidge.
That said, any books in my sidebar or past years' collection you want my opinion on, drop a comment on any thread. If you'd like to start a discussion, say so, and I'll start a thread for it.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Book Review: Cetaganda by Lois McMaster Bujold
Synopsis: Miles Vorkosigan goes on a diplomatic mission to the Cetagandan Empire. Within minutes of arriving, he gets swept up in a silent coup d' etat that if it succeeds, blame will be placed on the Barrayaran government.
This was a fun story. The Cetagandans are a people who focus on improvement of the race by genetic engineering. They have a two-caste system: the Haut, who are artists--the cream of engineering--and the Ghem, the military. In addition, there are the Ba, a servitor race--think genetic eunuchs. It's an interesting societal construct mainly because one would think the Ghem would lead because they have all the guns, but the leaders of Cetaganda are the Haut.
The plot of the book deals with the Star Creche which is the gene bank for the entire civilization. I had a little problem with an eight-star empire relying on a single gene bank. Talk about all eggs, one basket.
Haut women are so beautiful they spend the majority of their time encased in opaque indestructible bubbles. When Miles first sees a Haut woman's face, he is effectively ensorcelled by it. That seemed a bit much to me, but that might be because Haut women are impossibly beautiful. what that really means is that you can't even imagine how beautiful unless you see one. So in my mind, Miles is mush-brained over the most perfect female I can imagine, and that doesn't really seem in character.
Overall, it's an enjoyable book. It brings the intrigue of politics into a locked-room murder into a spy thriller. Besides the points above, the only disappointment is that the Dendarii don't show up.
This was a fun story. The Cetagandans are a people who focus on improvement of the race by genetic engineering. They have a two-caste system: the Haut, who are artists--the cream of engineering--and the Ghem, the military. In addition, there are the Ba, a servitor race--think genetic eunuchs. It's an interesting societal construct mainly because one would think the Ghem would lead because they have all the guns, but the leaders of Cetaganda are the Haut.
The plot of the book deals with the Star Creche which is the gene bank for the entire civilization. I had a little problem with an eight-star empire relying on a single gene bank. Talk about all eggs, one basket.
Haut women are so beautiful they spend the majority of their time encased in opaque indestructible bubbles. When Miles first sees a Haut woman's face, he is effectively ensorcelled by it. That seemed a bit much to me, but that might be because Haut women are impossibly beautiful. what that really means is that you can't even imagine how beautiful unless you see one. So in my mind, Miles is mush-brained over the most perfect female I can imagine, and that doesn't really seem in character.
Overall, it's an enjoyable book. It brings the intrigue of politics into a locked-room murder into a spy thriller. Besides the points above, the only disappointment is that the Dendarii don't show up.
Sunday, August 3, 2008
Book Review: Artemis Fowl: The Lost Colony by Eoin Colfer
Synopsis: Artemis Fowl and Holly Short work together again to rescue the Demons of Hybras and keep them from trying to kill all the humans.
I wasn't so hot on this story. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't that great either. Each Artemis Fowl book adds more characters. The problem with that is that there's only so much time in a story. The more characters there are, the less time they get on screen. Colfer does it pretty well, but I felt a few of the characters were somewhat redundant.
It has an interesting ending that relies on time paradoxes, and Colfer does a good job handling them. Makes me wonder about the next book since it's apparently about a time paradox. I wonder if it's dealing with fallout from this one or a new paradox.
I wasn't so hot on this story. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't that great either. Each Artemis Fowl book adds more characters. The problem with that is that there's only so much time in a story. The more characters there are, the less time they get on screen. Colfer does it pretty well, but I felt a few of the characters were somewhat redundant.
It has an interesting ending that relies on time paradoxes, and Colfer does a good job handling them. Makes me wonder about the next book since it's apparently about a time paradox. I wonder if it's dealing with fallout from this one or a new paradox.
Book Review: The Vor Game by Lois McMaster Bujold
Synopsis: Three years after The Warrior's Apprentice, Miles Vorkosigan graduates from the academy and gets his first assignment. That goes bad, and Miles ends up struggling to save the Emperor and averting interstellar war.
Talking about Lois McMaster Bujold with a friend, his biggest criticism was the coincidences that go into making her plots work. This book is the one he was thinking about. There are quite a few coincidences running around this book. It's not too bad when you consider economy of characters and efficient plotting, but it can make the story feel contrived at times.
That said, the story is rather fun to read. Miles is a consummate protagonist. While things constantly happen to him to destroy his life, he struggles to keep afloat and alive. And inevitably everything he does just makes things worse. Just as it should be.
Talking about Lois McMaster Bujold with a friend, his biggest criticism was the coincidences that go into making her plots work. This book is the one he was thinking about. There are quite a few coincidences running around this book. It's not too bad when you consider economy of characters and efficient plotting, but it can make the story feel contrived at times.
That said, the story is rather fun to read. Miles is a consummate protagonist. While things constantly happen to him to destroy his life, he struggles to keep afloat and alive. And inevitably everything he does just makes things worse. Just as it should be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
