Three things in books I can do without

a) Love triangles.

They are everywhere now and for no good reason; thrillers, mysteries, adventures, fiction, non-fiction, you name it. A writer is stuck and has run out of ideas on how to move his story forward and boom! A love triangle surfaces which ends up being half the book. Love triangles are a powerful plot mechanism when the plot is in fact the love life of the main characters. Anna Karenina is a good example here. Pride and Prejudice is also a good example of when a love triangle works. But in The Hunger Games series for example, the story began as a very sophisticated and thought-provoking examination of our society and especially the corruption in the media and our obsession with entertainment. All this through the eyes of a very smart, strong-willed, and extremely likable female lead. How did this very interesting plot end up being a "who will she end up with?" story and who do I have to kill to make this shit go away?! (I don't like criticizing other authors and I usually avoid it. I have made an exception this time because I believe an example was needed to make my point clear.)

b) Front covers in which the author's name is ten times larger than the title.

This is basically the publisher telling you that the author of the book is more important than the book. This only makes sense if you're reading a biography or general non-fiction. Otherwise, it's just another marketing scheme, a way to make the author's name stick in your subconscious. Personally, the cover of a book is very important to me. I am in love with the visual arts and I do judge a book by its cover. When a cover is overwhelmed by the presence of the author's name written in giant, bold letters that take over half the surface of the cover, I feel a giant "ego" floating around in the room... and it's not mine.

c) Stuff and people coming out of nowhere to solve everything.

"Deus ex machina" in Latin, or "ἀπὸ μηχανῆς θεός" in Greek (they invented this plot technique) or "who the fuck is this person and what is he doing here" in English. You know what I'm talking about... "experts" and "specialists" who appear mid-way through the story in order to give you all the information you need and then exit the story as suddenly as they appeared, never to be seen again, or simply die in the following chapter because there is no more use for them in the story. Or the dead victim who miraculously isn't dead after all and crawls towards the killer and stabs him in the foot so your character can escape, and then the killer kills this victim again... for good this time. This technique was cute for about an hour, two and a half thousand years ago. Now it's just exhausting to read.

Fun trivia about The Unwords

1) The Unwords is the only book in the modern market that has neither an author’s name nor a publisher’s name on its front and back cover. Only the title is present.

2) The author was listening to the album “10,000 Days” by Tool during the entire creative process of The Unwords. The album was on repeat mode on his work computer for over five years.

3) The first chapter of The Unwords was the last one written and the closing sentence of The Unwords was the first sentence the author wrote when he began the project in 2005.

4) In 2012, The Unwords became a Goodreads Choice Award Finalist, the first ever book to be nominated in the history of Goodreads that didn't have an identifiable author.

5) The official release day of the second edition of The Unwords was September 1st, 2013. It was a Sunday... bookstores are shut on Sundays.

6) Due to his anonymity, the author created five different ways he could prove his real identity from within the contents of the book as a way to protect his work from copyright infringement during the book’s pre-publication period. Even though these methods of identification were no longer necessary after the official publication of the book, both author and publisher decided to preserve them in the official release anyway. So if something appears to be random; it’s not. And if something appears to be misplaced... it isn't.

Control overdose

People who are addicted to cocaine are called cocaine addicts. Heroin users are called heroin addicts. People who are addicted to an illegal and unspecified drug, in a general conversation they are labeled with the term drug addicts. On the other hand, people who are addicted to alcohol are not called alcohol addicts... they are called alcoholics, boozers and drinkers. While people who are addicted to cigarettes are called smokers instead of what they really are... nicotine addicts. 

When a cocaine addict uses more cocaine than his body can handle, we say that this person has overdosed. When an alcohol addict uses more alcohol than his body can handle, we say that this person got drunk, wasted, smashed or pissed.

Soft language; common, boring and over-used verbs that can be referring to any number of activities that doesn't involve the use of any addictive substances. Overdose is a strong word. A powerful, beautiful word. It conveys the concept of "using too much of something" flawlessly. When you hear the word overdose, you know immediately that someone took something in quantities that his body couldn't handle. 

But we don't use that word for alcohol, do we? Even though alcohol overdose is the most frequent and most common form of overdose there is. A smoker is not doing nicotine like a heroin addict does heroin, he is smoking, puffing and having a cigarette. That's right, he has a cigarette... not doing a cigarette.

Truth is that you had no choice over the matter. Your alcohol and nicotine dealers took the words overdose and addict on your behalf and replaced them with cute, common, low-impact words in order to make you think that every time you use their drugs you're engaging in a cute, common and low-impact activity. Well, you're not. You're an addict getting a fix.

If you want to control people you need to control thought. 

In order to control thought... you need to control language.

Entertain we must!

I have seen many social activists out on the streets in protest for the recent developments in Syria. They will change nothing. The US is not only an imperialistic state, it's also an imperialistic economy. It depends heavily on its weapons industry to keep its economy going and for that reason, every now and then they have to free up some space in their warehouses so the weapons manufacturers can justify their multi-billion dollar contracts.

What I find really disturbing nowadays is that social activists, instead of holding signs, banners and Molotov bombs in their hands during these protests like the good old days... they are now holding iPads.

Entertainment... such a strong word, isn't it?

An activist protesting against the system with an iPad in his hand is like slicing your own wrists and expecting your neighbor to die. You have bought an iPhone, an iPad and an iPod and you have already signed a gazillion agreements with iTunes...

...if you want to change the world, instead of investing on the iStore try investing on iDeals and iDeas.

Please! Love me!

I went through a period of complete creative inactivity these past few months because I had to dedicate all my time and energy in the production of the second edition of The Unwords which will be officially released on September 1st. Now that I have more spare time in my hands I will pick up where I left off concerning my next project and of course, this blog.

The Unwords is divided into three thematic chapters, each with its own purpose. But what these three chapters have in common (besides the obvious) is that I express my dislike about advertising and marketing one way or another in all three chapters, even though this subject is not the central theme of any of them. My anonymity is vital for my work for many reasons, and one of those reasons is because I know the truth about what is really going on inside a publisher's head.

Publishers don't want you -the reader- to fall in love with a book they publish... they want you to fall in love with its author. If you fall in love with any given book, you will probably search to find other works by the same author. But it doesn't mean you will love them too; there's a good chance you might hate them. But (and this is where the publisher's mind falls into the wrenching abyss of advertising and monetary interest) if you promote the author enough... not the book; the author.  If you really choke him down deep into the public's throat through advertising campaigns and constant media exposure, just enough to make readers fall in love with him as a persona, as a presence and as an idol, then the quality of his work doesn't really matter anymore. Readers will buy his work, not because they are interested in what he has to say... but because it's him that says it. When a famous author is being interviewed about his latest book, haven't you ever wondered why they spend 80% of the interview talking about the author himself and not the actual book? They mention the title of the book, it's release date, a small synopsis about the plot and... that's it! The rest of the time, they talk about the author. Well, now you know why...

Publishers are not trying to sell books, this is the harsh, honest truth. They're trying to sell authors to you. This is the main reason why if you are an unknown, you will most likely not be getting signed by a traditional publisher any time soon. Unknowns are hard to sell and cost a lot of money to promote and If they don't succeed into making the author lovable, they know that every time a new book is out, they will have to start their marketing all over again from scratch... and in the marketing world, everything that starts from scratch costs a shit load of money!

I have always distanced myself from this mentality. I consider it a scam and I have no desire to be a part of it. At the end of the day, it's just another highly inventive way the "business man" has come up with in order to manipulate people. I don't want this shit in between my work and my reader, I consider it offensive. I don't even want myself to be in between my work and my reader. Many have enjoyed reading The Unwords but that doesn't mean the same people will enjoy The Torn Apart. I know I have to start from scratch and honestly, I find that really exciting and emotionally accelerating. There are no guarantees, no pretenses, no nonsense to distract my reader....

...with every word I start from zero and I wouldn't have it any other way. 

"Never mightier than the sword"

A nameless character. A faceless  figure. A disturbing, thought-provoking journey through the facts of the world we live in that we often refuse to acknowledge. 

The Unwords take full advantage of their author's lack of identity and extreme levels of introspection as they unleash a full scale attack on all fronts of cultural and social decay. 

Education, religion, politics, language, relationships and common every day social activities are stripped down to their bare foundations and deconstructed through the eyes of a man who considers every act of deceit as an act of war against the people he loves. 

Poetic verse blends seamlessly with the arts in the form of full page illustrations to create a new, refreshing form of writing the author describes as “Graphic-verse.”

Words are meant to be spoken. In a dishonest world, what remains unspoken can only be the truth. In a dishonest world...

...the pen is never mightier than the sword.

The expanded second edition of The Unwords will be released this summer

The second edition of The Unwords will be entitled "The Unwords: Exposing the dishonest language of a culture in decline" and will be published through Fearache Publishings and distributed worldwide through Ingram Distributions. September 1st, 2013 is the official release day. The first edition of The Unwords is now permanently out of stock, therefore discontinued.

Democratic leaders are neither "demo-" nor "-cratic"

Stop referring to politicians as "leaders." The concept of a leader contradicts the concept of a democracy... they have nothing to do with each other. The whole essence of the democratic system is the absence of leaders. The entire system was invented by the Greeks so they could finally get rid of their "leaders." In the words "monarchy" and "oligarchy", the second element arche (ἀρχή) means "rule", or "to lead." Hey, you wouldn't happen to know who was the leader of Athens around 500 b.c, would you? Of course not, because there was none! Because they were a democracy! That's right, they didn't have presidents, nor prime ministers. True democracy is direct, not representative. 

There are only three activities in which you can have leaders, in sports, religion and in battle. So unless your democratic "leader" is holding a rugby ball, a lightning bolt or an AK47 then stop wasting my time with this bullshit and try to pay attention to the language we've all agreed on.

The Unguests - Media in decline

We have become accustomed in learning to think, or learning to create a way of thinking, in accordance to the media and the content we see every day in news or soap operas or stuff we read in trashy magazines. We have programmed and modified our brains to think in a way that is acceptable by media and those few who are considered to be the “intellectual elite” which dictate acceptable social behavior. One could wonder what “acceptable” and "behavior" really mean today. It means limiting your beliefs and principles to what TV tells you. TV is creating today’s society. 

Certain people are not acceptable. Certain cultural streams are not acceptable. Certain fashion styles are not acceptable. 

I saw a man standing in a bus the other day. He was unshaved, unwashed, worried and alone. He had an old yellow suitcase where he probably packed his whole life inside. Some kids entered the same bus and as one of them sniffed through the air, the other laughed and said: “He’s behind you, man”. He… True, his clothes smelled bad because the poor guy had no house, no bathroom. This is all happening in the 21st. century, the high tech age with phones and clothes people call “smart”. I looked at his face and realized that he did not care about people, the sky, the birds or the river. That man was drowning in his own troubles. What would a group of teenagers know about troubles and one’s demons? Their brains are based on very simple processes and as such, they fitted the pattern. The man with the yellow suitcase is not a part of that pattern, because he smells bad. 

You’re homeless? OK, it’s not a big deal, you weren't lucky enough, but be good in this life and in your next life God will reward you with a castle. Meanwhile we need to put you on the margins of our beautiful society. The same rule applies to the unemployed, smokers and single mothers. Our society will reject you if you are different in any possible way. 

Those kids mentioned above are the new nationalists of Serbia. Born in the 1990’s during the war, dictatorship, turbo folk expansion and rise of new capitalists. They are the future builders of this land, controlled by sick media – TV or gossip magazines, which tell them how to think and what to do, creating retarded young people – nationalists. Just as I thought that we were leaving hate and prejudices behind, new stream of old conservatism came into life once again. This “new” conservatism is recruiting kids and sending them the message that our neighbors hate us and that only some specific nations love us. The guy who wrote the true history of my country is hidden somewhere in the United States. Americans hate us, of course. What they don’t think about is that a nation is not its government... a nation is not the voice of their local TV stations, but the people themselves, and they have a voice of their own.

People are brought into life in order to be creative and broad-minded and free. No one needs to remind me what I am and what I’m supposed to do, especially not the modern media. 

The Unguests - Tipped For The Win

by Tzellofouska of Lucubration Blog
Psychologist, heavy metal enthusiast, keen whiskey drinker and the founder of Lucubration. 

There is this old tradition which has been developed through time into some sort of social contract, which I am not very comfortable with. “Tipping” or “service charge” or “service fee” or “gratuity” or whatever you want to call it;

It seems to originate from the 17^th century England where people (usually of higher classes) used to tip or, better yet, bribe someone for the latter’s services. This trend was introduced into the United States during the civil war by American aristocrats, who wanted to show off their cultured nature, allegedly enhanced by travelling to Europe.

Considering the circumstances in which this unusual trend was developed, isn't it logical to abandon such customs in the 21^st century? Why do we still contribute to this paradigm of social inequality? ...Someone would argue. But I’ll pose another argument. The Oxford dictionary defines service as “ the action of helping or doing work for someone”. I will not get into the tiring definitions of what occupations are included in this term but aren't we all service providers, one way or the other?

I am a researcher. My action is doing work for someone. That someone is my boss. Despite the fact that I provide my services to my boss, aren't my published papers also a service towards knowledge dissemination or even a service to organisations that fund my research? Sadly, my funders do not think so, or do not even think about it this way, thus no tips for me! A musician is providing a service in that the music she produces with her instrument entertains people and provides them with a good night out on an otherwise boring evening. Do we throw coins at her? Why is it that waiting tables as opposed to writing a book is considered a privilege for the costumer? Aren't they both paid for the work they produce? I would say that tips would be more helpful for the writer rather than the waiter!

With every occupation comes a job specification document. Within that document there is a description of what the requirements are for the person to be employed. That person is receiving money for their service be it their skill of engineering a robot or their skill of mixing a drink. The two set skills are distinct yet both lay the foundations for a service to be produced for which money will be exchanged in return. As a customer, I am expected to pay the price the employer sets for my receipt of their employees services. So egotistically speaking why am I expected to pay more for someone to do what they are paid to do in the first place? Are we meant to be feeling bad for the waiter, the barman, or whoever desires our tips because they are stuck in a shitty job? I am sorry but last time I checked, no job is shit, right? And by labeling jobs like this aren't we contributing to social inequality ourselves? Don’t we stigmatize occupations for their inherent disadvantages?

I don’t even want to discuss the “discretionary service charge” restaurants put on the final bill, which is most of the times outrageous. This is technically illegal and one is legally right if they request this charge to be taken off the bill. Recent reports indicated that most of this money goes to the employers’ pockets, who use it to expand their businesses. See, we all fall victims to this old tradition and we may even feel bad if we don’ tip where we consider it “appropriate”.  I admit it, abandoning this kind of tradition may not change the world that much, thus it is up to each person whether they want to follow it or not. Well, the good news is that old traditions are not rules and some of them are nowadays obsolete; be it tipping, wearing a white wedding dress, throwing sick newborn babies into bottomless pits, or believing that morality derives from religion.