Nawp.
This post isn't so much about zombies (psh, who am I kidding, it's a LOT about zombies, but there's other stuff too) as it is about the way our perception of a writer/novelist/book-maker-upper changes the way we read and enjoy books.
I just finished the first two of the saucy threesome that is
Day by Day Armageddon by J.L. Bourne. I got the first one for my birfday and finished it within a matter of 7 hours. I. Could. Not. Put. It. Down. Not only was it comparable to zombie fiction gold like
World War Z by Max Brooks, it was a whole new level because of the in-depth tactical explanations and mind blowing suggestion of what may have caused the zombie apocalypse (the final explanation will hopefully be fleshed out in the third and final book because sweet baby jebus let me tell you, my brain hurts from looking on forums and then having to google things like "nanobots," the "Compton Scattering Effect," "crumple drive," and "physics" BLECK...science? Is important? To understand things??? Not a fan.) <---Wow, if you were expecting me to use parenthesis correctly at any point and time in this blog or in my life for that matter, you are in for a world of pain ma friend.
So...science. It's real, and despite as gross and impossible it is to understand it serves it's purpose allowing the author to walk a very fine line between reality and fiction. It also does a world of good for the credibility of the author to be clearly immersed in the facts of the supposed reality he or she is asking you to believe in. I find this to be especially true in Orson Scott Card novels. That dude has studied his military history and space gooblety gock fa sho.
Ender's Game is hands down the book I have most reread in my entire life. About thirty times. The others in the series are more than worth a returning read, but I keep going back to that one like literary meth. Or...cough syrup (that's addicting right? It's delicious I know that much).
I don't know if I'm just a weirdo banana goo goo, but I really like researching the background of the authors of books I connect to, and get epically immersed in. I feel like I'm getting an even more intimate look at something I've dissected with love. Once I got to know some more things about Orson Scott Card, my brain stamped a resounding approval on a man I have never met before. Through interviews and Forewords I decided "decent human being, someone who is bettering the world with his words." At that point I became even more involved with a genre I had never touched before (Sci-Fi). It became a semi-obsession. I had to have every book by this writer because I felt I was bettering myself through osmosing (you know what I mean) off a person I admired.
I did the same thing with John Green, but the process was backwards-sauce. First I was a fan of his personality through his charming nerd video blog that he created with his brother Hank Green. Through this venue I discovered he was a writer and thus my next collection of interest-in-author-based book purchases began. And I wasn't disappointed, oh no, somehow the reading experience was heightened by having a log of John's vocal signatures and inflections in my mind grapes from watching so many Vlogbrothers videos, like he was reading the book to me. Same with David Sedaris. I listened to one of his audiobooks on a long trip and after that I gained so much happy good times from reading his books with his voice in the narration seat. I watched hilarious clips of his appearances on talk shows and took even more joy in the knowledge that the author I chose to admire was legit, funny for realz, and someone I would high five in life (although David Sedaris wouldn't be in this equation as he has a phobia of people touching him).
So what happens when you find out you don't really care for the personality of an author whose book you really like, eh? Some would say, who gives a shit, it's not like you're ever going to hang out with this person, and just because YOU don't like what they have to say in real life doesn't mean other people don't. Well you have a valid point but for the sake of my argument I'm going to ask you to, for the time being, shut your dirty cock holster. As I mentioned before, I was visiting a certain discussion forum after having read the second book in the
Day by Day Armageddon series. This forum was special because the author himself would post some responses to the posits of his fans and what their expectations and theories for the third and final book were. And that's when shit went downhill for me as a reader who likes to like the author as a person. One of the fan posts was as follows:
"
I do not think sub-nanotechnology is a million years beyond our grasp right now. I do however believe that detecting sub-nanotechnology is beyond out current technological limitations. .5 angstrom is .005 nanometres. For there to be sub-nano circuitry you would have to have a resolution greater than that. .5 angstrom resolution allows you to see the spaces and edges of an atom. What you are talking about you would have to be able to actually see the atom with a resolution to see the electrons, protons, and neutrons of the atom. I am not calling bullshit on what your saying just that I dont think we are a million years from the point of that kind of observation."
I told you science sucks to read about. But anyways, this was a fan's opinion and in an open forum he had every right to share it. This was the response of the author to the above post:
"I don't need you to agree with me. I'm the one writing the novels, not you. Feel free to write your own novel, get it published somehow and have people that think they know something about nano-tech/sub-nano tech TRY and pick it apart, unsuccessfully. Good luck."
Ugh. What's that sour taste in my mouth? Oh yeah, it's your ATTITUDE Mr. Writer Man! Dude was just trying to get his nerd on and debate physics like bros do (nope...no they don't) and you've got to shut him down like that? Un-savory, good sir. That's what I say. Now I said I had already read the first two books before reading this forum and the third one has yet to be released but I had put it on pre-order when I ordered the second book. But when I read that statement I felt myself cringe at the thought of reading it, of being one of the many readers paying for this guy's fame and fortune when he didn't seem to even appreciate his fans. I began to think of the things I didn't really care for in the second book. All because I assessed someone's attitude as "not the hero I wanted him to be." You know what that makes me? A dookie head.
How dare I make a snap judgment on someone's personality that I have never and statistically will never meet face to face? Maybe Bourne was having a bad day, maybe he was sick of his work that he's put so much time and effort into getting pulled apart by the physics bullies. Seriously, what's has two thumbs and is total dookie head? This beezy (points to self, jabs self in eye on accident). Maybe give someone the benefit of the doubt today like I should have done instead of rage stroking at the failure of an icon that didn't live up to the role he didn't choose for himself, but that I placed upon him.
Because in the end, aren't we all just one big world of dookie heads?
