Siren “Daughters” Make Prospective Journal; So It Goes Proof Sheets Turned in Wednesday Evening
Who could forget PROSPECTIVE: A JOURNAL OF SPECULATION and its CTHULHU: A LOVE STORY theme issue (if you have, cf. January 10 2013 and September 21 2012)? So last evening brought word I’ve had two more poems accepted by PROSPECTIVE, this time for their upcoming WHEN SIRENS CALL issue. But what kind of Sirens? Editor Lauren Stone offered this answer: “You can use any part of the title. Sirens as the mythical creature or sirens like an ambulance or nuclear bomb warning. Or thematically it can be about control or love or lust, something indicative of the mythology. Or it could be about the ocean. Or it could just be a piece that you love and don’t think really fits the theme, because it may be perfect when viewed through a different lens.”
So, what the heck, I went with the women of Classical nature and so came the reply: “I am pleased to inform you that we have selected ‘Medusa’s Daughter’ and ‘Terpsichore’s Daughter’ for publication in ‘When Sirens Call.’” And there we have it. “Medusa’s Daughter” has, herself, been around a bit, having first been published in the US in STAR*LINE for May-June 1997 and in the UK in MEDUSA (Hilltop Press, 2005), as well as my own STRANGE MISTRESSES collection. “Terpsichore’s Daughter,” on the other hand, has remained up to now, um, untouched.
Then in other news, proof sheets have come for Perpetual Motion Machine Publishing’s SO IT GOES Kurt Vonnegut tribute anthology (see January 3, 25), as well as a call for the authors to provide personal essays on Vonnegut — personal encounters, feelings about his work, etc. — to go on a website that should be up by next week. My own canine in this karass is a story about family values, more or less, “Dead Girls, Dying Girls,” but possibly you know about that already (and if not, fear not, you’ll learn 🙂 ).
jamesdorrwriter 
February 21, 2013 at 12:09 pm
So “Medusa” has been around the block, but at last, “Terpsichore’s Daughter” will be inducted into full womanhood (blush) or something like that. Congratulations! Please remind us on the day that “Dead Girls, Dying Girls” is up.
February 21, 2013 at 3:00 pm
Watched the DVD of SLAUGHTERHOUSE 5 on the DVD player last night, to remind after the fact after I’d sent my essay, etc. in. I also have MOTHER NIGHTaround somewhere, I think (though I can’t imagine what a film of CAT’S CRADLE would be like.:-D
February 21, 2013 at 3:33 pm
Was the DVD true to the book? Also, I’d LOVE to see a film version of Cat’s Cradle –preferably made by a Brit film company or decent Indie company. Hollywood would ruin it.
February 21, 2013 at 11:09 pm
To be honest, it’s been too long since I read the book to really say. I have the notion a lot was left out, but the main points were there, but someone else who’s read it more recently might have a different opinion. (One reason I wouldn’t review the movie — I liked it over all, and felt an urge to cheer at the end, and thought some points very nicely done, though others maybe glossed over, though maybe those were done the best that they could. That is, I felt disappointment to some extent, feeling there should have been more, but I can’t point to any example. Anyone else reading this who has an opinion on it, by all means feel free to share.)
February 24, 2013 at 1:32 am
I just read a review of the movie version of MOTHER NIGHT that mentions in passing that “SLAUGHTERHOUSE FIVE required that you read the book to get a full appreciation of the story in the film.” I think I agree with that, that the film could in no way replace reading the book, but could be a sort of reminder for one who had read the book some time before.
February 24, 2013 at 4:08 pm
A bunch of movies are like that. It is very rare that I like the movie & the book equally –and that is usually because they tell two versions, both well done. But not often does that happen. Right?
February 25, 2013 at 10:53 pm
One example that came to me where I think the movie version is much better than the book is THE LOVED ONE spoofing the Los Angeles/Hollywood style of funeral preparation and cemeteries from a British point of view. I saw the movie back in the 60s, but only decades later read the Evelyn Waugh novel which seemed nowhere near as funny. Then getting the DVD even later than that, I see the movie may be less funny than I remembered (so tastes change too, maybe) but it still beats the book. Part of this probably comes from it having an all star cast, one of those things where it seems like several big name stars might have been in it just because it’s so much fun (e.g. Rod Steiger, John Gielgud — though maybe they needed to get every British actor they could find in Hollywood at the moment — James Coburn, Tab Hunter, but also Jonathan Winters and . . . wait for it . . . Liberace and Milton Berle.
On the other hand, MOTHER NIGHT has a small non-speaking part played by . . . Kurt Vonnegut. (I apparently didn’t notice the first time I saw that film, but this time I thought I recognized him and, when the credits came, sure enough it was! As something like “Sad faced man in crowd.”)
February 26, 2013 at 9:46 pm
Talk about too many cooks in the kitchen! That was overkill!
I love the “sad faced man in crowd” subtlety (MOTHER NIGHT)
Hollywood movies (American movies in general, trying to accomplish something akin to literature) leave me cold, for the most part.
We tried to watch a movie (Indie/American) called “DESCENDENT” about a descendent of E.A. Poe discovering secrets about the relatives of Poe starting with a fragment where a man plucks the heart of a maiden out and tosses it, still beating, on the floor which “Poe” is witness to…
just awful, really awful.
February 26, 2013 at 10:48 pm
Ick! : P
February 26, 2013 at 10:53 pm
Yup. Beware! The goodies you find, Jim, may be very odd –but they at least are unique in their way. That is, the ones you’ve recommended!