Jax Book Nook

I have completed my first draft of Beer Run II. As it currently stands, it is 32,000 words. I will wait a few weeks before revising it for draft two.

Let me provide you with a brief outline of the plot: Bill and Cassandra come back from Earth, tailed by the world’s most incompetent government spy, to find someone has set Bill’s lawn furniture on fire. It turns out to be Jethro Duff, a prominent member of the Lunatic movement. A brief internet search reveals Jethro was inspired by an online conspiracy theory known as the Great Reckoning, a conspiracy whereby Bill’s father invented the self-aware android in order to drive millions of people out of work, leading them to alcoholism, making them vulnerable to being dragged down into Bill’s brewery where they are eaten.

After an angry mob appears at the brewery, pelting the building with garbage, Bill hires an attorney named Blinda Botzel to start a lawsuit against the Great Reckoning LLC, owned by a man named Cody Duncan. To investigate Duncan’s operation, Botzel employs Jimmy, Bill’s intern at the bar, as a private investigator. Jimmy finds that the Great Reckoning, along with the entire Lunatic movement, is really an elaborate scam to sell merchandise by Duncan, who is a classic con man.

Duncan quickly spots Jimmy as a spy, but rather than telling him to buzz off, he instead offers to mentor him in the art of the con. Duncan creates the character of James P. Greenburg, scion of the family that owned a robotics factory in town that was bought out by Stiltson Industries, who now walks the streets, homeless thanks to the deindustrialization of the moon. While the character exists to sell T-shirts, Jimmy loses himself in the role, even participating in a riot that ends up breaking into city hall.

Meanwhile, Bill finds that Cassandra has a broken part that can only be replaced with the same model part made by Greenburg Robotics, which went out of business decades ago and the remaining parts are in the possession of Jethro, currently in jail for torching Bill’s picnic tables. Bill offers to drop the charges in exchange for the pump, but the prosecutor wants Jethro to squeal on the Great Reckoning. Furthermore, much to Bill’s surprise, the DA’s office has started taking an interest in Jimmy, apparently believing that he, not Duncan, is the ringleader.

Okay, so how does that sound for a pitch? Would any of you change anything? Looking forward to any criticisms before I start my revisions. Will eventually look for beta readers, too. Let me know if I have any early volunteers for that.

Okay, thought I would come out swinging on a timeless pop culture debate. Yes, Star Trek is better than Star Wars. This seems rather obvious to me, but I’ll put up with opposing arguments if for no other reason than to humor my adversaries.

How do I prove this? Well, to the extent one of these debates can be proven, I would point to consistency. Star Trek as a franchise has consistently produced quality entertainment since the original series in the 1960s. No one denies it’s had low points (Star Trek V, the kookier time travel episodes, Nemesis), but the fact is that most episodes of Star Trek are watchable, even enjoyable.

Star Wars is a franchise based on three great movies from 1977 to 1983, followed by a fifteen-year hiatus, culminating in twenty-five years of soul crushing mediocrity. Yes, there have been some bright spots (the Clone Wars cartoon, Rogue One, the first two seasons of the Mandalorian), but for the most part it’s a mess of stilted dialogue, thinly veiled racial stereotypes, and rehashing old tropes and characters from the original series.

Why is this? Star Trek is logical (“Logical,” says Spock. “Fascinating.”) Star Wars is romantic. (“Feel, don’t think,” says Obi-Wan. “Trust your instincts.”) The Original Trilogy of Star Wars was like a whirlwind romance and every addition to the franchise since then is an attempt to get back that same feeling you got the first time you saw Luke blow up the Death Star. A typical episode of Star Trek by contrast is about a group of competent and likeable people, whom you’ve seen enough to grow fond of, encounter a new phenomenon, and work together to solve it.

This becomes evident when each franchise tries to do what the other does well. Star Trek is capable of being emotional and pulling it off. Think Spock’s death in Wrath of Khan or Jean-Luc Picard coming face to face with the Borg in First Contact after being assimilated and trashing his own ready room. A logical person can show emotion in a situation where it’s warranted, like a funeral or at the birth of a child. An emotional person can rarely be logical. When Star Wars tried to be logical in the prequels, we got psuedo-scientific mumbo jumbo about midichlorians and overwrought soliloquies about how democracy dies.

You also have to look at how each series treats religion and science. Star Wars famously borrows from eastern mysticism to create the religious worldview of the Jedi. Star Wars does that well, but in Deep Space Nine, Star Trek proved it could speak about the religious dimension of life in its exploration of Bajoran and Klingon spirituality. Looking at it from the other end, Star Trek famously tried to get the science right to the best of their ability, having scientific and technical advisers on staff to help out the writing. By contrast, Star Wars can’t even be consistent with its in universe rules. In the Last Jedi, it’s a major plot point that the First Order just now learned how to tract a ship that goes into hyperdrive. This is odd because in the first movie, and I mean the very first movie, Princess Leia points out that the Millenium Falcon is likely being tracked after they escape the Death Star. She turns out to be right, which means that unless Yavin was really close to Aldoran, the Empire had no problem tracking people in hyper-drive.

I should quickly point out that Star Trek is better in that its heroes are generally more iconic than the villain. It’s actually a pretty solid claim to say that Darth Vader is the center of Star Wars. Taking the prequels and the OT as one series, the main character is Anakin Skywalker, who appears in all six films. Star Trek has a few iconic villains like Khan Noonien Singh or Gul Ducat, but rarely do they outshine the regular cast.

On a political level, Star Trek asks much more profound questions than Star Wars from the perspective of a liberal democracy. Star Wars’ original trilogy has us root for the underdog rebels, which is an easy thing to do. The prequels pondered why democracies die and came across as heavy handed and dumb. The sequel trilogy didn’t even bother, but just had StarKiller Base blow away the New Republic and let the Resistance replace the Rebellion and the First Order replace the Empire, and ta-da, instant nostalgia.

Star Trek, however, takes place in a world where the good guys are the Empire. The United Federation of Planets is a superpower in the galaxy and the main characters have to regularly look in the mirror and ask if they are still the heroes. In Deep Space Nine, a Maquis double-agent points out to Captain Sisco that the Federation actually is a little like the Borg, that they too assimilate other worlds in their own way.

Star Wars is about overthrowing the Empire, and once they’ve done that, they have nowhere to go and so they just go back to the well and create some new Empire. Star Trek asks a more jarring question of how can we be a good empire, which is a more relevant and profound question from the prospective of the United States and western democracies in general. How do you keep power from corrupting you? Star Wars had that question in front of them in the sequel series and they punted.

Finally, Star Trek faces the central problem of science fiction and takes it head on. Science fiction addresses how humanity and technology interact. The problem is that human beings create technology to make our lives better, and we largely succeed in doing that. As a result, in terms of human living standards, the future is likely to be much better than the present, much like how the present is much better than the past. It’s not just technology. The number of wars in the world is actually at an all-time low. Why is this a problem? For humanity, it isn’t, but for a science fiction writer, it is a problem because any good story depends on the existence of conflict. If the world of the future is likely to be better, where does the conflict come from?

The typical response is to turn technology into a bad thing. Think of the Fallout world showing us the aftermath of a nuclear war, where apparently people are not able to get bodies out of the street even three hundred years after the bombs fell. Others show us a world ruled by evil corporations, like the Weyland-Yutani Corporation in Alien. Star Wars has the dystopian Empire, which uses technology to blow up planets. But this doesn’t tract with the real impact technology has on our lives, which is mostly positive. Sure, some people use technology for evil, like the Nazis using Zyklon B to perpetrate the Holocaust or Kim Jong Un threatening the world with nuclear weapons, but for the most part, technology has extended our life spans and made us infinitely wealthier. The typical use of technology is represented by anti-biotics, not Sarin gas.

Star Trek gets this right. The world of the United Federation of Planets is a better world than the world we live in, yet somehow they still face adversity. The difference is that Starfleet engages in chosen suffering. They come into conflict with the Klingons and the Romulans because they are exploring the galaxy by their own free will. That’s more like what the future will probably look like.

So, that is why Star Trek is better than Star Wars. Star Trek is so good, I might have borrowed a few of its concepts to write my own book, which is here: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BLSVRZN5  

I was not going to write about Harry Potter again. I had an entire post about Star Wars v. Star Trek all set up in my head. This will be the fourth post in a row, and I know that. It’s just that it’s kind of hard to ignore what HBO just announced. Apparently, HP will be rebooted as a seven-season television show, with one season for each year at the school. That’s right, not stories in the Harry Potter universe, but a reboot of the original book series as a television show. I can’t think of a worse idea that will make people billions of dollars.

This is not about J.K. Rowling. I know she’s a controversial figure these days, and she is involved in this, but it’s really more that this is a bad idea. Just a really, really bad idea. This shows that HBO and Hollywood in general has failed to learn any lessons from how they’ve screwed up other major franchises. What do I mean you ask? Let’s go over it.

Lesson One: Don’t Reboot the Story when Nothing was Wrong with the Original and it wasn’t that Long Ago. Disney should have learned this one by now after redoing the entire Disney Renaissance in live action. Or in the case of the Lion King, “live action.” No one asked for a new Aladdin. No one asked for a new Beauty and the Best. No one asked for a new Little Mermaid. Disney gave them to us anyway, and though they made money, I can’t think of anyone who said “Wow, that was what was missing from my life.” Cinderella and Jungle Book kind of worked, because the originals were released in the middle part of the twentieth century, though it should be noted that neither of those reboots were as iconic as the original.

The original Harry Potter series was not that long ago. The first film in that series appeared in 2001. The last film in that series appeared in 2011. That was twelve years ago. I know. I saw both films in theaters. I can’t say that for the Little Mermaid. The films did extremely well. Pretty much everyone I know owns all the films. So, even if this show is well written, it will live in the shadow of the original. The temptation to constantly compare the show to the movies will be irresistable.

Lesson Two: Certain Characters are Impossible to Recast. After making forgettable reboots of its own movies, Disney decided to make a forgettable Star Wars movie when it made Solo, recasting Alden Ehrenreich the lead. The problem was evident from the beginning: Harrison Ford does not play Han Solo. Harrison Ford is Han Solo. Certain characters like superheroes can be recast over and over again. We get a new Batman and Spiderman every five years it seems. But those characters were built up by comic books for years before they were introduced in film, so the character and the actor playing the character had independent identities. As I said, the first Harry Potter Movie was released in 2001, a mere three years after the first book came out, and lasted for ten years, and throughout that time Daniel Radcliff, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson were the main characters. Not exactly Han Solo-Harrison Ford level identification, but close. Whoever they cast as the golden trio, those child actors are being set up to fail.

Lesson Three: Don’t Stretch Out the Story by Adding a Bunch of Extra Stuff. When the Lord of the Rings came out, a bunch of superfans got mad that they cut out Tom Bombadil. Then, they decided to stretch the Hobbit, which was the shortest of J.R.R. Tolkien’s books, out to three movies, and we all learned that as bad as cutting stuff out can be, adding stuff that wasn’t there in the first place is worse. You need more material to fill up a season of television than a movie, and what we’re being told is that there will be additional storylines which are going to be added in order to fill up space.

I don’t oppose additional stories within the Wizarding World. It’s like additional Star Wars movies. It’s kind of hard to oppose something that is inevitable. Going back and changing the original stories, however, never ends well. This is less like releasing additional Star Wars movies and more like changing the first Star Wars movie to have Greedo shoot first.

And yet, inevitably, it will make money. Once again, whatever you think of J.K. Rowling, the wizarding world makes money wherever it is. Some people were down on the latest Fantastic Beast movie. It still made over $400 million. And that’s with COVID keeping people away from theaters, one group of people who hate J. K. Rowling, another group of people who hate Johnny Depp, and the fact that this is now the eleventh Harry Potter movie. It still makes money, and that’s why we keep getting more of it.

The real problem here is that we need to be pushed to embrace new stories. Remember when America produced new stories? Yeah, I know Hollywood has been doing reboots forever, including like 25 versions of the Wizard of Oz in the 1920s and 1930s, but they knew to stop after they finally got it right. There’s a lot of 80s nostalgia going on right now, but I think that what was great about that era is the fact that the stuff Hollywood keeps regurgitating at us was new. Yeah, remember back when Ghostbusters was a smash hit that came out of nowhere and not a franchise that just pumps out one movie after another in hopes of getting a few guaranteed hundred million? Our culture used to come up with new ideas.

Well, here’s a new idea: a man trying to run a microbrewery on the moon. You can order that book here:

Okay, so I don’t have any other idea to write about, so I am spleening about every inconsistency in the Harry Potter series. Now, I am a Millennial, but before you start saying “Read Another Book,” I must tell you that the last few weeks have been great for my Twitter follower count, so there’s that.

I don’t have a plot hole this week. I have a complaint about the HP world building. Namely, why does Slytherin House exist? Okay, I know that technically Slytherin is the house for people with “great ambition,” but originally the entire point of the house was a place to put all of the evil wizards. Hagrid even says every wizard who ever went bad was in Slytherin. (I guess Peter Pettigrew is an exception) Every character we are supposed to hate is in Slytherin and while there may be some decent people from the house, like Snape and Slughorn, it’s basically the asshole house.

Being sorted into Slytherin is like being told to your face that you are going to Hell. No, really, think about it. The Sorting Hat has perfect knowledge of the mind and soul of every person who is sorted, and it tells some people they belong in the same house as Voldemort whose mascot is a classic symbol of evil from the Bible. Almost like some kind of infinitely just and wise being telling you that you should share a zip code with Hitler in the afterlife or something.

I don’t mean to say that the existence of Slytherin is bad writing. Yes, it’s a pretty black and white world J.K. Rowling made, but it’s a children’s book. Furthermore, when she tried to introduce shades of grey in the later books, the stories got worse, particularly the last one. That isn’t to say the last books were bad, they just weren’t as good as the early ones. Rowling does shades of grey better than George Lucas does, but not as well as either of them do good vs. evil. The dropoff from books 1-3 of Harry Potter to the rest of the series is not nearly as bad as the dropoff from the Original Star Wars Trilogy to the “morally complex” sequels.

No, I mean looking at it from the perspective of people in universe, why do they educate people they know have a high likelihood of turning into bad wizards. Why don’t they just use the Sorting Hat to identify who bad wizards are (which it practically already does), snap their wands in half, and send them packing?

Well, there’s an answer to this question. You have to think of the Wizarding World as having a social contract, just like ours does. Order comes from making compromises between the various parts of society so that everyone feels like they have a place at the table. Imagine if the ministry did just expel all the Slytherins and snap their wands in half? What would happen then?

The Slytherins aren’t going to just take that lying down. After all, they include some of the oldest and wealthiest wizarding families in the United Kingdom. They can buy new wands, and if Ollivander won’t sell to them, they’ll go abroad or more likely start their own wand shop. And then they will start their own magic school. What do you think that place will be like?

We get a pretty good idea in the fourth book. Draco mentions that Durmstrang teaches the Dark Arts, not just defense against the Dark Arts. The headmaster is a former Death Eater. A Durmstrang equivalent in the UK would likely lead to multiple wars.

That’s why Slytherin house exists. It’s better to have the Slytherins at Hogwarts taking OWLS than it is to have the Malfoy, the Lestranges, and the Blacks of the world founding their own school and teaching their children the Unforgiveable Curses at the age of eleven. Hogwarts is a unifying institution in that everyone in British Wizarding World goes there. If the Slytherins had their own school, they’d probably form their own society in their own section of Britain, and how difficult would maintaining the Statute of Secrecy be when the Slytherins are holed up in Scotland killing muggles for fun?

Now, there is a problem with all of this. Namely, this already happened. In both wizarding wars. Voldemort comes on the scene, and despite the effort by everyone else to integrate Slytherins into the rest of society, even giving them cushy government jobs, they go crazy and start trying to take over. Social contract broken.

This happens. In the U.S., we have a social contract called the Constitution, and that worked pretty well until we had a Civil War and it didn’t. So, after the Civil War was over, we amended the Constitution three times. Europe had an informal balance of powers in the nineteenth century, which fell apart in World War I. They tried, and failed, to reform their contract in the interwar years, but after World War II a new set of international institutions, NATO, the EU, the UN, gradually took shape.

The problem with the Wizarding World is that after being threatened by Voldemort and the Death Eaters, their social contract remains completely unchanged. When the first book begins, we are ten years away from a Slytherin led revolt against the system, and the Soring Hat is still doing what it always did. We’re even told that the people directly responsible made up stories about how they were hypnotized into being Death Eaters. No changes to the system have been made to prevent this from happening again. And hey, what do you know, it does! Voldemort returns, the same people who led the attack the last time rally around him due to either fear or enthusiasm, and this time they even overthrow the government for a full year.

A lot of people don’t like the Epilogue, and I didn’t mind it from a story standpoint, but what bothers me in hindsight is that it shows once again that the Wizarding World has done nothing to modify their social contract to prevent another Wizarding War. Harry’s child worries openly about being sorted into Slytherin, which indicates that it still exists. Draco is there despite having played an active role in assassinating Dumbledore, apparently a free man. It’s like if we had a Civil War and decided to just let the South keep its slaves. At least Europe tried to change during the interwar period. Wizarding Britain just keeps going with the same system that failed twice without anyone asking “Why did this happen?” or “How can we keep it from happening again?” Inevitably, some other dark wizard will rise, and another war will start.

Now, I don’t know how I would change this. Yes, yes, I do. Abolish Slytherin house. Tell the Sorting Hat to put the Slytherins in other houses. If the parents complain, tell them that if you start a war, you better win it. The public will support you given the last two wars they had to live through. Half of these people should be in Azkaban anyway. Have tolerance training seminars at Hogwarts. Do something.

If you would like to do something, buy my book: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BLSVRZN5 

Let’s call this “Jack Willems and the Bad Case of Writers Block.” After last week’s post, I’m still thinking about Harry Potter. Yes, just like a stereotypical millennial, I can’t get my mind off those books. At least for now. During my last theory, I mentioned Sirius’s death and my belief that Harry was responsible for it, despite Dumbledore sugar coating it. Now, a week later, I have reconsidered. Harry still acted stupidly, but he wasn’t the most responsible person for Sirius’s death. No, that would be Sirius himself.

This doesn’t have to do with his getting into a fight at the ministry. There’s no reason he shouldn’t have been in that fight. No, this has to do with the mirror. Yes, the two-way mirror. Sirius gave Harry a two-way mirror before he went back to school on Christmas, so Harry could contact Sirius any time he wanted to. Harry only finds this out after Sirius is dead because he never opens the package. Then, presumably he forgets about it, because Harry goes to the ministry because Voldemort made him imagine that Sirius was being tortured there. Harry never feels guilty about this (which I find to be odd), but if Harry had known about the mirror, he would have contacted Sirius using the mirror and not used the fireplace in Umbridge’s office, he never would have gone to the ministry, which was an obvious trap, and Sirius never would have died. All of this was utterly dumb, but not as dumb as what Sirius did.

What did he do? He didn’t tell Harry what the gift was. No, not at Grimmauld Place. Molly Weasley would have sniffed that out. Nope, I’m talking about the first time Harry used the fireplace. Earlier in the book, before Harry fell for the world’s most obvious trap, he experienced Snape’s memory of Harry’s father and the rest of the marauders bullying him. Harry is seized with the need to speak with Sirius, which would be fine if he bothered to look inside the package Sirius gave him saying use this if you ever need to speak to me. However, Harry didn’t do this and decides he needs to use the only unmonitored fireplace in the castle, the one in Umbridge’s office, leading the Weasley twins to turn the Great Hall into a swamp as a distraction. Harry sneaks into the office and uses the fireplace to speak with Sirius, and if Sirius was a logical human being, here is how that conversation would go.

Sirius: Harry, you’re using the floo network to speak with me. Why?

Harry: I saw one of Snape’s memories I need to talk to you about.

Sirius: No, I mean I gave you a two-way mirror to speak to me whenever you want. It’s that package I gave you at Christmas. Why are you using the floo network?

Harry: Really? This is embarrassing, but I never opened it. I guess I kind of forgot about it.

Sirius: Harry, whatever you need to talk to me about, this can’t be a safe way to communicate.

Harry: Actually, no, it’s not. I guess I should cut this short.

Why didn’t Sirius do this? Yes, other people have found this plot hole, but it just irritates me more now that I’m a writer. When people don’t behave rationally in books, it bothers me now. That’s how writing changes you.

Indeed, there are a lot of things about Harry Potter that don’t make sense in retrospect. Things like, why didn’t they examine Sirius’s memories before he was sent to Azkaban. Dumbledore may have testified against him, but why bother with testimony at all in a world where Pensieves exist? How did Sirius stay in Azkaban when all the other Death Eaters know that the traitor is Peter. You expect me to believe no one would try to cut a deal when they had that kind of dirt to spill?

If Hogwarts is connected to the Floo Network, why does Molly Weasley have to send Ron a howler to chew him out? Why not do it in person? Hell, why are parents not visiting all the time? Why have dorms? Wouldn’t it be easier for students to just take the floor network every day? Does the Hogwarts Express serve any non-plot purpose? Why not just use a Portkey? If the Hogwarts Express serves no purpose, why did Ron think taking the flying car was the best way to get to Hogwarts after being shut out of the barrier in the second book? There are a thousand better ways to get to Hogwarts. Arthur Weasley could just hold Ron and Harry’s hands, apparate in Hogsmeade, and they could walk there. Shouldn’t Ron know this?

You could keep going. I guess the answer is that nothing and nobody in this world is perfect, so it’s pointless to complain. Consider in the Wizard of Oz how Dorothy is able to go home the whole time by just clicking her heels, but Glenda makes her go through the entire rigamarole of walking to Oz and killing the witch “to learn a lesson.” I can’t be the only person who threw my bottle at the screen when I first heard that.

Oh, and by the way, buy Beer Run: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BLSVRZN5  

Okay, so I know I should be using this blog to promote Beer Run, which is available here: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BLSVRZN5, but I’ve need to talk about something that has been bugging me for a while. I think I found a flaw in the Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. I don’t mean things like “Harry is a Gary Stu” or “there are too many adverbs.” I mean a plot hole. Spoiler alert for Harry Potter and the Sorcerer Stone, though if you need a spoiler alert for this book, I’m going to ask you if would like to meet President Biden because apparently you’re a martian.

Okay, by comparison, let’s look at Indiana Jones and the Raiders of Lost Ark. It has been pointed out that Indy objectively accomplished nothing in that movie. He sets out to keep the Nazis from the Ark, and he fails. In the end, the Nazis get the Ark, and it kills all of them. Best case scenario, they take it all the way to Berlin and open it in front of Hitler and the rest of the Nazi leadership. I think Cracked pointed this out, and then the Big Bang Theory did, though inevitably there have been Reddit posts about this. Indy should have just stayed at home.

Now, let’s look at Harry’s decision in the Sorcerer’s Stone (or the Philosopher’s Stone if your British), to go down into the maze and protect the stone. Hell, let’s say he and Ron and Hermione never bother getting interested in the stone in the first place and just spend their time doing normal 11-year-old wizard stuff. What happens? Well, the last protection the stone has is the Mirror of the Erised, and Quirrell can’t crack it. The Mirror of the Erised shows those who gaze upon it whatever their deepest heart’s desire is. The catch is that it will only surrender the stone to someone who wants to have the stone, but not someone who wants to use it. Quirrell just sees himself resurrecting Voldemort. It’s not until Harry steps in front of the mirror that the stone materializes in his pocket.

So, what if Harry just decides to go to bed early that night? Simple, Quirrell and Voldemort don’t get the stone. Indeed, Voldemort only gets close to the stone precisely because Harry shows up right when Voldemort needs him to. Looking at it objectively, it would have been better if he just listened to Prof. McGonagall and did nothing. Then he could have at least played quidditch and won the cup.

Now, this is a children’s book, which is often forgotten, but it still bothers me. Certainly, Dumbledore must understand this. He’s an intelligent man. Why didn’t he tell Harry that he acted like an idiot, other than, you know, the fact that this is a book? Why reward Harry for thinking that he was able to protect the stone better than Dumbledore and every other teacher at the school combined? Above all, why give Gryffindor the house cup and thus ensure that Lucius Malfory’s attorney sends him a rather angry letter?

Now, the argument may be made that this looks at Harry’s actions purely from a utilitarian standpoint, when Dumbledore might be looking at this from a virtue ethics perspective. Sure, the consequences of Harry’s actions might have been bad, though ultimately, they weren’t, but his actions improve his moral character, which is what’s really important.

Except, no, it wasn’t improving his moral character. Instead, it exacerbated his greatest flaw: his need to be a hero. Sometimes, like in the Chamber of Secrets or in the last book, this flaw becomes a virtue, but other times it gets people killed. No, really, in the fifth book, Harry decides only he can save Sirius, and ends up walking into a trap that gets Sirius killed. And he does this while his friends, who know him pretty well, tell him to his face that this is a trap set up for him because his enemies know he needs to be a hero. Dumbledore sugar coats it for him, but in the end, Harry’s at fault. Though, Dumbledore is a little easy on Harry, likely because he encouraged Harry to be this way. Whenever Harry risked his life, and others, Dumbledore responded by giving Harry points for Gryffindor up and till the point someone died. After all, most of the time when Harry does this sort of thing, it works out.

Now, I did search for people who have noticed this same problem on the wide world of the internet, and yes, a few people on Quora and Reddit have pointed out that without Harry, Quirrell couldn’t do shit. Still, I can’t remember any major cultural heavyweight to bring this up. Why? It’s sitting right there in plain view! If someone can point to some place where this has been extensively discussed, I’d appreciate it. Am I off base and missing something in this situation? Tell me, I’d love to hear it. And buy Beer Run. Here’s the link again: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BLSVRZN5.

I will be talking about Beer Run with other authors on the Book Slam this Wednesday at 3 pm Eastern Time. Here is a link to their YouTube page. Looking forward to talking up my book. The Book Slam – YouTube

I have started on a sequel to Beer Run. This may seem odd as I’ve only sold a few copies of the first book, but I need to keep writing, as it is a habit. Furthermore, I have ideas for Beer Run, and I was able to publish the first book, so I may as well work on a second.

Right now, the working title is “The Great Reckoning” and it starts right where the last one ended, with Bill and Cassandra landing on earth. Just as Bill gets back to the brewery, he finds it under attack by the Lunatics, the local Xenophobes, who believe, based on an online video titled “The Great Awakening”, that Bill is the head of an intergalactic conspiracy to destroy their livelihood, lure them to his bar, and then eat them.

After one of the leaders, Jethro Duff from the first book, tries to burn down Bill’s bar (which is made of metal siding, making arson impossible), Bill decides to sue the man behind the online video, Cody Duncan. Bill’s attorney, an oversized beetle hires an investigator to look into Duncan’s operation. This investigator just happens to be Jimmy, Bill’s intern, who works as a private investigator as one of his several side gigs. As Jimmy gets infiltrate’s Duncan’s organization, Bill starts to worry if Duncan will bring out some of Jimmy’s bad habits. Not sure how it will end, but that’s why it’s a work in progress. Tell me what you think of the idea.

Alright, so now that I have laid out my ideal fantasy world of Pandemonium. Let me tell you what I’ve done to sell it: I’ve had it beta read and revised to oblivion and I’ve queried every agent that could plausibly be interested in it I can find over the last two and a half years. I’ve gotten two full requests, but no takers. I have a six-book series planned, but I’ve only written the first novel and am desperately trying to sell it.

The book involves the Stranger Church being sold to a prosperity gospel preacher who resurrects a theocratic vampire to force people to give him money using hypnotism. As you might expect, this doesn’t go as planned and then locals have to take him down.

I have to have applied to over one hundred agents at this point. I’m wondering if maybe I need to start applying directly to indie publishers at this point. Beer Run was a book I wrote to get a writing credit to promote this Pandemonium. Getting published in the indie sphere took a lot less time than getting published through an agent. I’m wondering if I need to switch tracts and stop querying agents and start querying publishers.

On the other hand, maybe there is something still wrong with how I am writing it. Now, I’ve only given you all an introduction to the story (which I promise is a real story and not just exposition), but if you see something that might be keeping the story from getting published. Tell me that too. Be completely honest.

So, just throwing myself out there to the internet world: what do you think I should do? Switch to Indies? Cut out this or that part of the concept? Just give up? Tell me. I can take it.

Here is the last part of the history Pandemonium. It’s been great reliving the beginning of my writing life. Now, let’s finish up.

***

The 1970s and 1980s were periods of change for the city of Pandemonium.  Grimsley began a reform within the Satanic Temple to dispatch with the need of a literal Satan.  Satan was now a metaphor for worldly success, and worship was merely a means to an end in this.  In modern capitalist society, there are better ways to achieve worldly power than sacrificing a goat at 3 am on a Sunday.  Witch society would concentrate raising children to pursue ambitious careers with the same reckless abandon that Cramner and his followers pursued Earthly power on their own terms.  Most Witches were happy with this change, as few of them really believed in the existence of Satan.  However, as time went on, fewer and fewer of the Witches actually attended the Satanic ceremonies.  If Satan was not real, why was it necessary?  Those that did attend increasingly gave reasons such as “tradition” or “I grew up in this temple.”

            Following Whitfield’s death, the Strangers took a different tact.  The Witches’ faith was about Earthly power, which could be accomplished without any resort to worship at all.  The Strangers claimed to be a Christian church, however, and the rejection of their community by the wide Christian world left them deeply shaken.  In addition to this, a new study by Cramner University disturbed the Stranger community greatly.  In the hey days of the turbulent 1970s, the youth of the community started to engage in certain activities disapproved of by their elders: drugs, pre-marital sex, and loud music.  Researchers at Cramner did a survey of teenagers in the 1970s and found that drug use, sexual activity, and crime rates were higher among the Stranger youth than among the Witch youth.  Add to this the fact that the Stranger part of town became notorious in the same decade for hosting the town’s only pornographic theater, and the Strangers were forced to confront the question of what they really believed for the first time in 300 years.

In light of these developments, finding a replacement turned out to be more difficult than expected.  The elders of the church interviewed one churchman after another, but many expressed doubts about their faith similar to the Witches about whether God existed, whether God favored this church, or even if the Stranger Church deserved to exist.  After the negative reception that Pandemonium received in the 1950s upon the Witches’ coming out, recruiting an outsider for a pastor was virtually impossible. 

Just when it appeared that all hope was lost, a young man all the way from County Antrim in Ulster called the Stranger Church specifically to say he wanted the job.[1]  Surprised to receive aid from so far away but delighted to have an interested candidate, the trustees of the church invited Atticus MacDonald for an interview, paying for his flight.  MacDonald did not disappoint, as he aced the interview, indicating both a real grasp of theology and presence on the pulpit.  MacDonald began his life as a Presbyterian, but later in life entertained doubts about the doctrine of double predestination and soon had to leave the Reformed church tradition.  He had been educated at Trinity College in Dublin and had already served five years as a Presbyterian minister in Belfast.  This made him a perfect fit for the Strangers, as MacDonald was educated, experienced, and, in a stroke of providence, theologically in line with Robert Winthrop’s practical theology.  MacDonald had only one condition, namely that a male friend of his be allowed to come with him.  This made the elders somewhat nervous, as other religious communities had dealt with the issue of underground homosexuality among their clergy.  When they explained their reservations to MacDonald, he laughed and told them this was not the case between himself and his friend at all.  His friend, you see, had an unusual condition that meant he could not live just anywhere, but could only live on the grounds of a desecrated church.

            “A desecrated church?  What are you implying?” asked one scandalized elder.

            “Excuse me, sir, but as I understand your history, you built your church right on top of the ground where you burned that poor woman to death using the wood of the ship where you decided to commit that heinous act, did you not?” asked MacDonald.

            “Well, yes, I mean, our ancestors did that, but does that make our church desecrated?”

            “I mean no offense,” MacDonald said. “I only hope to do a favor for a friend.”

            MacDonald called in a disheveled, dark-haired young man wearing a black coat and grey scarf, beckoning him to introduce himself to the elders.  The young man called himself Theophilus, or Theo for short, though this was an assumed name, and he spoke with a noticeable but not thick Irish accent, unaffected by any Scottish influence, unlike his Orangeman companion.  He thanked the trustees for having him here and said that he and MacDonald were not “buggerers” as he called them, but rather very good friends who had been through a few scraps together.  Theo promised he would be out of the way, as he was content to sleep in the crypt.  His only requirement being the importation of a few crates of peat bog from “back home,” which he said would help him sleep. The Stranger elders discussed it amongst themselves, and agreed that while this was highly unusual, MacDonald was the best candidate, so as long as this Theo character kept to himself (and perhaps bathed).  MacDonald thanked the elders, and began as pastor in December of 1982.

            Of course, we must briefly consider the tragedy that occurred in Fieldhand church in 1979.  However, once again, this book is written for the purpose of strengthening civic pride.  Having been alive during those times and remembering the great anguish Pastor William Walker’s actions brought to this community, I would argue some things are best left unsaid.  I am sure Pastor Overstreet would agree about this.

            The Ze’ev had their own brief flirtation with fame when a camera crew from a local news station captured a Ze’ev transforming on camera, leading to a Ken Burns documentary about the now famous Ashkenazi sect.  Scientists flocked to Pandemonium to try to find some scientific basis for these famous transformations.  None has ever been forthcoming.  The Rabbi Maharam has speculated that none will ever be found as not everything is within the limits of human reason.

            Finally, this brief history must come to an end, so it may well come to an end with the Author, who succeeded Fr. Grimsley to the position of Satanic High Priest in March of 1997, a position he holds to this very day.  Much like Grimsley before him, the Author sees himself as less a servant of dark powers and more a caretaker of history, which is why he has decided to write this brief history.  Our ancestors’ practices may be offensive to us today, but we stand on their shoulders.

            If the reader fears for the Author’s immortal soul, he or she is entitled to such beliefs, but for what it is worth, the Author does not share the same fears.  He has attended Satanic ceremonies since his birth, either as a congregant or as a celebrant, and nothing has ever occurred. No possessions, no floating objects, no disembodied voices. Nothing happens.  There is nothing to fear, which is why if the reader is in town the Author invites him to our services every Sunday at 10 am.  Few believe in this sort of thing anymore, but the reader can witness a unique historical ceremony with deep roots in America.[2]  The Author, conscious of the fact that he has monopolized this brief history, will now allow the other religious leaders of the community have the final words.

Pastor Atticus MacDonald of the Stranger’s Church

            I thank my adversary[3] for giving me this space.  His decision to mention my friend Theophilus must sound strange to you, but Fr. Ravenwood has always held a small grudge against me for bringing Theo here.  Theo rubs some people the wrong way.  Fr. Ravenwood commonly refers to my friend as “he who lowers property values.” We at the Strangers’ church have taken it upon ourselves to try to convert Theo and convince him to wear a nice shirt every once in a while.  Alas, neither lesson has stuck, but hope springs eternal.

            I find no serious historical inaccuracies with Fr. Ravenwood’s brief history,[4] only a serious inaccuracy in his description of my theological opinions.  Fr. Ravenwood claims that I was selected for this position because my theology was similar to that of Robert Winthrop.  Nothing could be further from the truth for the very simple reason that I actually hold my beliefs.  Fr. Ravenwood’s brief history makes it clear the Winthrop did not actually believe what he preached.  This is what Fr. Ravenwood means when he says that Winthrop was not seeking to obtain some “metaphysical truth.”  Based on my conversations with him, Fr. Ravenwood appears to be a closer disciple of Winthrop than I am, though I do believe in a creed remarkably similar to the one Winthrop promulgated.  He may have taught better than he knew, which may also be said of the Drunkard. I have been the Pastor of the Stranger Church for 38 years and one thing I have tried to emphasize is that ideas matter.  The way we think the world is shapes the way we behave in it, or at least it ought to.  For this reason, I hope you do not attend Fr. Ravenwood’s service at 10 am this Sunday, or any Sunday.  Come to my church.  Come to Pastor Overstreet’s church.  Have coffee with Rabbi Maharam that Sunday morning.  Sleep in.  Whatever you do, don’t attend a faux worship service for the Devil.  I doubt he will appear, but what will disappear is an hour of your time, and for all you know you don’t have many of them left. Remember death.

Pastor Darrell Overstreet of the Church of the Tobacco Fields

            Throughout the South, people claim they are defending history.  History is important.  Fr. Ravenwood thinks history is important, and I agree with him.  What causes me dismay is Fr. Ravenwood’s insistence on retelling that history with vast holes in it.  Fr. Ravenwood tells the story of my congregation using the word “slave” only once.  The ship that brought us was involved in “Migration and Importation of Such Persons.”  The unconscionable cruelties of Beauregard Davis are given two footnotes.  Fr. Ravenwood says the Witches offered no resistance to military occupation, but skips over the March Massacre of 1888 where a Witch militia destroyed a thriving African-American business sector out of jealousy and hate.  Jim Crow is barely given word.  Fr. Ravenwood glosses over the long history of segregation and racial violence in this city, the legacy of which remains with us today. 

            Should we move on?  Our faith does not teach us to move on, it teaches us to forgive. Forgiveness, however, must be accepted by the guilty party, and the guilty party will often refuse forgiveness by failing to acknowledge they need it.  I actually know the Davis family quite well.  They are a good family.  I would say a friend of the church, though I have yet to get one of them to join.[5]  Their cooperation was invaluable in allowing Mr. Coleridge to write his book, giving him full access to the old plantation house.  I encourage any visitor to buy his book as a necessary counterbalance to this rosy, whitewashed history produced by Fr. Ravenwood.

Rabbi Maharam of Temple Ze’ev

            I thank Fr. Ravenwood for giving me this opportunity to welcome potential visitors to our town.  I invite all visitors to Pandemonium to come to the old Ze’ev marketplace and learn the history of a unique immigrant community whose descendants are living the American dream.  We are not the only Jews in the South, but there are few people who can say this unironically: Shalom y’all.  A great deal of this history is dedicated to our monthly transformation, which we received many questions about in the 1990s due to the Ken Burns documentary.  By now, I assumed it was old news.  Yes, if you come during a certain time of the month,[6] you can see quite a show, but that is only one part of our community. 

            One thing to note about Fr. Ravenwood’s brief history, namely the initial plan in 1970 to build the courthouse with only three doors: yes, we objected to three doors being too few while the Fieldhands objected to three doors being too many.  Somehow four doors was just right.  I remember that time, and I remember being insulted at the insinuation that we weren’t real Pandemonians.  Of course, Pastor Whitfield and Fr. Grimsley never meant to insinuate such a thing, they were just forgetful that’s all.  But it was important to correct, because identity is important.  Every man must ask himself, who am I? And because no man is an island,[7] most of the time this means asking, who are we?  The Ze’ev are both citizens of Pandemonium and people separate, set apart.  Thank you for your time, and if you do find yourself on our side of the island, I suggest David’s Chophouse, if you’ve never tried Jewish barbecue.

Statement by the Diocese of Charleston

            The Diocese of Charleston objects to the publication of this brief history at a time when no priest has currently been selected for St. Michael the Archangel parish.  We mourn Fr. Timothy’s death.  May eternal light shine upon him.  Any invocation of Satan risks summoning the demonic presence.  We condemn Fr. Ravenwood’s actions and any ceremony performed at the Second Satanic Temple to invoke Satan.  A new priest for St. Michael’s will be forthcoming.

---

[1] He had heard about the job through an article in the New York Times centered on the now famous church’s troubles in finding a new minister.

[2] Subject to certain revisions over time such as the replacement of human sacrifice with the crushing of a bug.

[3] The term Satan means adversary, which is why it is so appropriate our communities have been at loggerhead for so long.  While the Red Devils may have won the last game, Winthrop leads the Blood Bowl series overall 68-60-3.

[4] There are no inaccuracies, but as Pastor Overstreet makes clear, there may be certain important omissions.  Many of the more elderly members of my church would no doubt blanche at Fr. Ravenwood’s rosy description of Col. Davis’s massacre of surrendering Stranger soldiers, but personally having found Col. Davis to be a more complex historical character than that action would demonstrate, better to leave certain things in the past.  

[5] As Pastor MacDonald says, “Hope springs eternal.”

[6] Get your mind out of the gutter.

[7] Did you like that?  I came up with it myself.