Music, visual art, dance, film, writing: all of these spring from the same human impulse — to express ideas, emotions, and, sometimes, as talismans against what cannot be expressed through rational, measured discourse…

The Arts trim away the fat of existence: allowing direct ingress into the depths of mind and the unconscious which are normally the province of daydreams and nightmares alone. 

Writing is explicit in its intention — the author has a point or plot to steer the reader through…

Dance and film, being performance-based, are less open to explicit interpretation: these are  languages of subtlety and nuance… the actor's face; the camera's movement across an edit; the pirouette of a dancer behind a scrim… And yet, the product is nearly always a rehearsed interplay held together by a script, or choreography, or both.

Music and visual art are more emotional in their respective aims; more sensuous, less cerebral (though all great works in any media should engender reflection and possibly inspire thought or action, or — ideally — all of these). For many, the most accessible and ubiquitous of these modes of connection is probably music… Music differs from sheer noise in that it is the deliberate arrangement of silence and sound done in such a manner as to evoke a response in the listener. Static visual art (painting, architecture and non-kinetic sculpture, for example) is the same idea executed with space, color, texture.

Images and sound: two primal methods of expression. These means of communication cut across genre, time, generation: just as the young simultaneously wish to discard and understand their elders — and by extension all that came before – the experienced yearn to grow and transcend their fixed points of view, therefore remaining in the now, and a part of what is to come…

Themed art books can be a tough sell: where do they fit on the bookshelf? When more than one artist is represented, it gets hard to determine the best way to market such an animal: exploit the better known names? play up the variety? promise a new and unexpected treatment of a certain aspect of art? provide a unique insight into the ’post-romodern’ life that we all inhabit?

’Carnivora: The Dark Art of Automobiles’ on the new imprint Barany Books (more on that in a moment), does a very fine job of covering all the bases. The layout and design are flawless, and decidedly clever; it will appeal to the aesthetics of the visually inclined, as well as to the gearheads out there (which, apparently, has a great deal of cross-pollination). The look of the book is impressive: the cover is eye-catching and has a list of all contributors printed on the back. The sheer scope of the book - stated purpose of which is to explore our societal obsessive love and loathing with the modern chariot on a variety of fronts - is incredible, featuring not just masters of the recent past, such as H.R. Giger and Robert Williams, but also an amazing list of other established - as well as up and coming - artists between pieces of prose ruminating on the way cars have impacted everyday life.

Some of those ways, as the title implies, are not for the faint of heart…

The book is a companion piece to the C-Pop Gallery exhibit in Detroit.. of the same name, now moving on to Los Angeles. Les Barany (the editor, and Giger’s agent for some time now) has done a fine job in bringing together over 100 different artists and writers (and their perspectives) and creating a coherent, cohesive whole. A wide swath of different styles and techniques are represented: a cursory flip through the tome reveals cartoon, literature, photo-montage, sculpture, mixed-media, acrylic and oil painting and digital imaging, to name just a few. While some pieces work better than others, there is more than enough material to satisfy even the most discerning palette, be it a preference for modern, edgy, surreal imagery, dark landscapes or bizarre machine/human juxtapositions. There is a smattering of eroticism, but only a few true nudes; the sexual elements (perhaps wisely) are left more to the imagination - in the guise of some very good written memoirs - rather than presented in purely graphic terms.

Exceptional written works abound, and will ultimately change from person to person (or, for some folk, moment to moment), but a few are worth pointing out. Notable remembrances are on display from William Levy (intense and poignant),William F. Nolan (historical and wide-ranging), Steven Cerio  (concise and quirky; he also contributed an interesting illustration),Rick Manore  (thought-provoking), Carlo McCormick (pensive and introspective) and Daphne Graham (grueling and sad). Harlan Ellison® is also accounted for, with his excellent short classic Along the Scenic Route.

The imagery, though, is where this volume shines, and there is no disappointing; it delivers on the questions postulated in the first paragraph of this review, and then some. Standouts include, in random order: Gregory Brotherton, Marshall Arisman, Zdzislaw Beksinski, D. Hwang, H.R. Giger, Jason D’Aquino, Coop, Andre Lassen, Tanino Liberatore, Stanley Mouse, Robert Williams, J.K.Potter, Winston Smith, J.U. Abrahamson, Tomi Ungerer, Vincent Castiglia, Demetrios Vakras, Hugo Schuhmacher and Chet Zar. Remember, this is just the tip of a very large iceberg, but a helpful mini-biography section in the back places the contributors in good context, as well as offering the casual reader insight into their personalities, via the inclusion of their personal vehicles (or lack thereof!).

This is wild: check it out!

1. engage all of the senses (touch, smell, sight, sound, hearing)
   
2. involve the reader with the protagonist, mentally
3. leave room for the reader to inject some details into the narrative (not so much superfluous/cluttered/banal info that it "strangles" the reader)
4. illuminate some aspect of human nature, whether good or bad
5. have realistically believable characters (especially their reactions), even if their situation is bizarre, mundane or high-tension
6. have characters with at least some suggestion of a backstory, even if it is not developed fully
7. have fully dimensional characters, even the villains
   
8. adhere to these principles: Who? What? When? Where? Why? How?
9. make the reader care about the circumstance/character(s)
10. grab the reader and pique their curiosity
11. follow principles laid out in Aristotle’s Poetics
12. have triumph and tragedy in relatively equal measure, though one should predominate in the end
13. avoid neat resolutions
14. be different from one to the next
15. force the author to "murder darlings"
16. surprise and satisfy (emotionally) the reader
17. invite criticism (albeit about the impact/mechanics - how did it affect the reader? how was the plot/characterization/pacing/style and so on - only, not the author personally)
18. have an overall arc and sub-arcs for the characters
19. have exterior and interior plot threads
20. have an internal logic which is never violated

1. be "donut" stories - all the trappings, but no "heart"
2. be too genre-bound (such as the trite aspects of genre pertaining to the evocation of institutional association - Stoker-esque vampires, Universal Studios Frankenstein laboratories, et cetera - unless that’s the purpose, or it’s a period piece)
3. be too time-bound (via pop-culture references, slang and so on)
4. call attention to the writer’s writing
5. be "cutesy" or pedantic
6. get too "geeky": preoccupied with minutia that only shows off the writer’s knowledge or research
7. condescend to the reader
8. have what I call "mind shoes" (long story): intractable or rote ways of conveying plot (there is more than one way to tell a story: keep it fresh)
9. favor plot/action over characterization/substance (there should be a balance, ideally)
10. divulge or communicate the outcome (unless this is on purpose, or cryptic) in advance: this is not the same as foreshadowing (in which the key elements are realized only in retrospect)
    
11. allow the author to avoid tough questions, even if they express no ready answer
12. preach to the reader
13. cater to well-worn cliches
14. cater to the author’s personal cliches: this is not the same as "style"; this is an affectation that the author cannot seem to shake (a "darling") that does not add to the story
15. be monotonous, even in the guise of "story type" or "genre": in other words, tell the same story over and over without any insight or interesting POV
16. trick the reader, or resort to gimcrackery
17. rely too much on first person
18. waste the readers time
19. fail to engage in the first paragraph (even novels)
20. take too long to get to the point; exposition can come after the reader is interested
    

1. Do at least six TOTAL re-writes (more than a line here or there). (Preferably more.)
   
2. WRITING IS RE-WRITING.
   
3. Put the first draft down quickly, then leave it be; come back after an interval (at least a week, preferably more) and be scathing in your critique (others will, trust me).
   
4. Do not read out loud as a primary form of revision: only do this with VERY late drafts to catch run-ons and inconsistencies.
5. Don’t try to do something: DO IT, or don’t bother.
6. Get out of your own way. (Think about it.)
7. Avoid being too literal.
8. Open the story up; make it universal. Too limited a scope is worthless.
   
9. Think unconventionally: is this the correct POV? Is the character’s gender correct? Is the story mired in obscure, distracting detail? Is the plot easy to follow, even if the construction is unorthodox? Are there in-jokes that are weighing the story down?
10.  All considerations should serve the story.
11. The best never rest. (Think about it.)
12. Avoid slavish imitation. Be the best you, not a second-rate (or worse) bestseller-type. Write for yourself, not the "market".
    
13. There are no original ideas/premises for the most part, but there are unique slants and perspectives. Combine multiple things to get fresh(er) ideas.
14. If one has an impulse to do something, question it; if it is obviously an overused personal trope, do the opposite.
    
15. Read a lot, and read widely (non-fiction, magazines, classics, poetry, textbooks, manuals, criticism, et cetera).
16. Talk to people, and listen.
17. Stop reacting.  Observe the world and how things interact to it. Be open-minded.
18. Make up characters, make up stories: CAREFULLY RESEARCH supporting details from a variety of perspectives.
    
19. Realize that writers such as King, Koontz and Barker need good editors that are not afraid of their wrath, just like the rest of us do: when this source of blunt feedback (though it should be gentle) is lost, writers suffer (as in the names above).
20. Editors are looking for reasons to hate your work and put their friends or a well-known author’s work into their mag/anthology/fill-in-the-blank. Don’t hand them reasons to do so: have the manuscript and formatting perfect, use good grammar/punctuation and have something to say, or do everyone a favor AND QUIT BORING US ALL WITH YOU WORK (applies to the "Old Pros" equally).
    

Look at this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18924743/

Pretty sad that women feel empowered by this type of behavior.

That should embrace their own world, and stop trying to occupy the "man's world".