Happy Halloween Week: Tarry Town

 

The dominant spirit, however, that haunts this enchanted region, and seems to be commander-in-chief of all the powers of the air, is the apparition of a figure on horseback without a head. It is said by some to be the ghost of a Hessian trooper, whose head had been carried away a cannon-ball, in some nameless battle during the Revolutionary War, and who is ever and anon seen by the country folk, hurrying along in the gloom of night, as if on the wings of the wind.

 

If you’ve ever read Washington Irving’s much-beloved short story “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow,” I think my writing style becomes self-evident. It has always been, and will doubtless always be, my favorite work of fiction. As a very little girl, I fell in love with the story itself, thanks in large part to Bing Crosby and the animated Disney featurette, which is not only adorable, but lovingly faithful, and, of course, exquisitely narrated. Save the musical numbers, almost all the audio is a straight-up recitation of the text.

As for the text itself, I quickly fell in love with it as well, when I was old enough to read it. Irving liked words. Scratch that: he loved them. His joy for language leaps off the page, and it’s clear, upon reading any of his work, that the telling was as much if not more fun than the plot of a story. All of his stories are, in fact, rather simple; it’s the execution of them, their onion layers, their asides, their backstories, that make them most interesting.

Given it’s baked into my imagination, I’ve found myself wondering, this Halloween season more than those previous, if I was always destined to be a verbose and elaborative writer, that it was some latent instinct with regard to storytelling, even in my earliest, kindergarten attempts, and if that’s why I’ve always loved Irving. Or if my obsession with this story from an early age shaped the way I would eventually write as an adult. Bit of a chicken and egg situation, honestly, and I may never know the answer.

In any event, this is my annual “I love Sleepy Hollow” post. And speaking of: though I generally dislike film adaptations of books, and I especially don’t like creative license being taken too far, Tim Burton’s 1999 film Sleepy Hollow is absolutely perfect, and also the perfect Halloween watch. I’m not even a Burton fan, but the way he managed to capture the vibe, and even a few frame-for-frame shots from the animated short, and spin them into something darker, truer, and more sinister, in which Christopher Walken plays the Horseman, and it’s absurd, but it’s awesome…it’s a feat, let me tell you. The musical score, the sets, the coloring, and, most especially, the grisly practical effects, outshine most modern movies. And the riding! The horse is gorgeous, and whoever’s riding him did a beautiful job.

Happy Halloween, fellow pedagogues.

In one part of the road leading to the church was found the saddle trampled in the dirt; the tracks of horses’ hoofs deeply dented in the road, and evidently at furious speed, were traced to the bridge, beyond which, on the bank of a broad part of the brook, where the water ran deep and black, was found the hat of the unfortunate Ichabod, and close beside it a shattered pumpkin.

~*~

The old country wives, however, who are the best judges of these matters, maintain to this day that Ichabod was spirited away by supernatural means.

Spooky Reads: Vampires

 

I posted a Reel on Insta earlier in which I declared "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow" my favorite piece of fiction, and the Headless Horseman my favorite monster of all time. That's why it, and he, will get a separate post to celebrate Halloween next week. 

When it comes to creature features as a genre, however, I'm a vampire girl all the way. The crumbling Gothic mansions, old-fashioned wardrobes, and ethereal beauty as a means to draw prey are all excellent. The angst inherent with immortality is chef's kiss. And, of course, the erotic overtones (sometimes subtle hints, other times delightfully explicit) that come with the blood-sucking territory. 

I've always loved vampire-focused fiction, but I didn't try my hand at writing it until 2017, when I started the Sons of Rome series. It took me until then to feel ready for it: to feel like my writing skills finally matched my ideas, and that I could flesh them out in the way I felt they deserved. 

Every author has his or her own unique vampire lore, and mine strays pretty far from the classic image of the vampire. Val and co. can walk in the sunlight, can reproduce genetically in addition to turning the willing and unwilling; vampires can be born, in my books, and age until they reach their physical peak. They must drink blood in order to stay vital, but they eat human food as well. I made most of my decisions because a good many of my vampires are real-life figures from history, and I couldn't have Vlad the Impaler or Richard the Lionheart sleeping in a coffin all day. My books won't suit anyone looking for a classic vampire experience: my vamps are strong, immortal, psychically powerful blood-drinkers who can slumber for long periods of time...but they also drink liquor, and smoke cigarettes, and feel pain. 

Writing that has made me miss them again 😢

Dracula is a classic for a reason, but the title of Favorite Vampires goes to the legendary Anne Rice's creations. If you want to write vampire fiction, I think Interview With the Vampire is necessary reading...though I challenge you to stop there. The Vampire Lestat is where you properly meet the Brat Prince, and Rice's Vampire Chronicles are his, more than anyone else's. He's certainly been an inspiration for me - not just with Sons of Rome, but across all my series. Every gremlin character I've written has a little sprinkling of Lestat dust along the top for flavor. 

30 Years of Jurassic Park

 

"Welcome to Jurassic Park."

Yesterday marked the 30th anniversary - what??? - of the theatrical release of Jurassic Park. A tremendous, iconic, deeply original, and seemingly plausible story (thank you, Michael Crichton) transformed into a film (thank you, Steven Spielberg) that captured, and has held, the imaginations of millions. I think you would have been hard-pressed to find a kid in 1993 who wasn't obsessing over the movie. *raises hand* I was six and my brother was five, and we begged our parents to take us. My cousin, 7, went to see it with his family shortly after its release, and my aunt said that he covered his eyes and ears and she had to take him out of the theater. (Sorry, cuz, not trying to drag you.) So my parents went to see it first without us, and decided that, given I'd been eating Tales From the Crypt for breakfast since I was four, a few dino-related deaths were nothing we couldn't handle. They were right, as was proved by the T-Rex named Elvis I toted around for months afterward. 

Genuinely, I was shocked to hear that it's been thirty years. I know it's been a while, that I was under ten when it came out, but I think of it as an "older film" in a nebulous sort of way: Oh, yeah, Jurassic Park came out a few years ago. In 2023, it doesn't oversaturate pop culture in the way the Marvel movies do, but it's still very much a part of the arts culture; is still referenced, is still played on network TV, and still feels current. Some of that's down to the Jurassic World films - which I'll touch on in a bit - but mostly it's because the original has true staying power. 

I find it interesting that Spielberg wound up directing JP after Jaws, because both are classic man vs. nature conflicts. Technology was further along when it came time to bring the dinos to life, versus the mechanical problems that plagued showing the shark in Jaws, but you can still feel the director's touch in not showing us a "living" dino until the very meme-able scene where Alan and Ellie first lay eyes on a Brachiosaurus. In the opening scene, and in my view the most horror-driven and therefore one of the most effective scenes, where the raptor pulls a workman into her cage to his doom, we don't actually see her. We don't see any of them until a good 10-15 minutes into the film, and that suspense is hugely effective in building up audience expectation - an expectation that isn't disappointed because, even 30 years later, the dinos in the film - puppets, animatronics, and CGI - look freaking real. Far, far more realistic than most of today's green screen creations. Puppets, man; never dismiss the importance of puppets in a creature feature. 

Like all man vs. nature stories, man loses. All of man's machinations fall laughably short when up against the galling power of nature. I love that the dinosaurs are not painted as malevolent monsters, because they aren't. They're animals doing what animals do. Every year, dumbasses at Yellowstone get out of their cars to approach bison, elk, or bears; JP is that on a much larger scale, but the same principle applies. Given that they are dinosaurs, and therefore a novelty, it's completely logical that a character like Nedry would be trying to cash in, and thus sets in motion the disaster that follows. 

Crichton's novel goes much deeper into the cellular science of the cloning process, to the point that, as a layman reading it, you walk away from the book feeling like the whole thing's possible. Though it can certainly read as dry in passages for anyone wanting to breeze through a summer blockbuster, his writing is scientific in a way that grounds the story in a very necessary way; because it feels real, we embark on the adventure more readily than if he'd handwaved the impossibilities away. Plot-wise, the novel is bleaker than the film, with Hammond less of a charming grandpa with grand ideas and more of an outright villain. Alan takes an active role in destroying raptor eggs, and Muldoon, the GWH, is less of a buffoon, more of a believable big game hunter, who not only survives, but does so with a compound fracture in his leg and while weilding a rocket-launcher at a T-Rex. I find I prefer the film to the book, vibe-wise, though I do wish Muldoon had been savvier in the movie. Likewise, it wouldn't be a Spielberg movie if the gun didn't jam. *eye roll at that lingering shot on the abandoned, jammed rifle in the face of raptor pursuit* 

30 years later, we're all still quoting this line:

And though technology has advanced in countless ways since its release, the film, to me at least, doesn't feel dated. Its themes, its cautions against playing God, its outcome, all still feel relevant. Because I'm a character girl at heart, I think, ultimately, it's the characters that sell the story, more than anything. No one is an Action Hero cardboard cutout. The kids are likeable. Impeccable casting, each actor making each character distinct and loveable. There are plenty of contemporary action films that have lots of flashy explosions but never succeed in making the characters known to the audience, but that isn't the case here. For instance, we never see Ian outside the park, but just a few lines and we know him. 

This is the part where I want to say that Jurassic Park is one of those "changed my life" stories that influences my work today. And it is...but I couldn't say how. I couldn't draw a direct line from it to anything I've written. So I think I have to say that it's an enduringly beloved story upon which I imprinted in childhood, it's part of my personal canon, and has doubtless been influencing my writing in dozens of little unconscious ways my entire life. 

Thanks for thirty, years, Jurassic Park. Long may you reign. 

I know I said I'd talk about Jurassic World, and I want to, because I love those films, too! But I think I'll bump it until tomorrow - it'll give me something to blog about - so I can shift into writing for the rest of my day's "quiet time." Be on the lookout for that post hopefully tomorrow. 

Wisdom

“Love is something more stern and splendid than mere kindness.”
― C.S. Lewis

There are innumerable books about sex; palaces of tomes on people; countless tales of events. Love is the defining delineator of books. If you want to write love, then read love. C.S. Lewis is a brilliant study in the finer emotions, and their unrefined manifestations.

The Way to my Heart is not Through Diamonds

 

Look at my beautiful new 75th Anniversary Edition of The Hobbit.

 

I had to order a book for book club from Amazon, but how does a person order just one book? Not possible. I added to the order to get free shipping, badly in need of a copy of The Hobbit since my old copy was lost in the move years ago. I didn't know it would be so pretty; the cover is embossed and textured.

 

 

 

It's got Thror's map.

 

And little cute Smaug on the first title page.

 

And this gorgeous second title page with the dwarf runes.

 

I'll have to be sure and reread it before December, so I can remind myself just how heart wrenching the end of the third movie is going to be.

Happy Tolkien Reading Day

It's Tolkien Reading Day. My all time favorite - everything. Author. Stories. Movies. My muse. I wanted to share some of my favorite quotes.

“There is some good in this world, and it's worth fighting for.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Two Towers

“Some who have read the book, or at any rate have reviewed it, have found it boring, absurd, or contemptible, and I have no cause to complain, since I have similar opinions of their works, or of the kinds of writing that they evidently prefer.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings

“Fairy tale does not deny the existence of sorrow and failure: the possibility of these is necessary to the joy of deliverance. It denies (in the face of much evidence, if you will) universal final defeat...giving a fleeting glimpse of Joy; Joy beyond the walls of the world, poignant as grief.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien

“If this is to be our end, then I would have them make such an end, as to be worthy of remembrance.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Two Towers


"A day may come when the courage of Men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship, but it is not this day. An hour of wolves and shattered shields when the Age of Men comes crashing down, but it is not this day! This day we fight!"

-  J.R.R. Tolkien, Aragorn, The Return of the King

The Game is On

*Pics by me.*

I'm pretty much trend-proof. If it's must-see, chances are I haven't seen it. If everyone's buying it, I don't feel compelled to slap down money. I'm a skeptic; I reserve judgment. And when internet photos of Benedict Cumberbatch's dyed-dark, scarf-wearing, collar-flipping Sherlock Holmes started making the rounds on the web, I was, as always skeptical. A new Holmes? I didn't know about that...

If you've read Whatever Remains, you know the title was taken from a Sir Arthur Conan Doyle quote. Sherlock Holmes - that's where it's at.  I grew up on the PBS reruns of The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes starring the man who is, in my opinion, the definitive Holmes, Jeremy Brett. Anything Sherlock, I loved. It's so smart, so civil, so atmospheric, so British. And then the buzz started up about BBC's new series, their modern retelling of Conan Doyle's classics, simply titled Sherlock.

Could it be as good? I wondered

As it turns out, it's better.

Not because it's newer; not because it's trendier. It's just really great TV, and if you're looking for something new to watch, run yourself out and get the DVDs; they're well worth the cost, because they're the sort of thing you want to watch more than once.

Reasons to love it:

John. In every other incarnation of the series, Sherlock's sidekick was the mustachioed, dignified Dr. Watson. I'm not sure I ever knew what his first name was. But in BBC's version, Watson - played by Martin Freeman - is, while still a doctor back from military duty in Afghanistan, known simply as "John," both to Sherlock, and to the fandom. This is a more complex, more independent Watson, one who very obviously loves Sherlock and is, throughout the series, Sherlock's salvation in a world of humans he would otherwise care nothing about. John is the heart of the show. For viewers, he isn't just the sidekick, but one of two primary characters, one the audience loves and identifies with. Martin Freeman brings him to life like no one has before.

Sherlock. Benedict Cumberbatch plays a detached, at times emotionless Holmes: brilliant, quirky (to put it mildly), rude, unapologetic, and graceless in every social context. Rather than affected, Sherlock's misunderstanding of social niceties and rituals is a true comprehension gap. He can read everyone like binary computer code, can use human behavior to crack every case, but openly admits to being bored by what he sees as trivial human motivators. He isn't normal, doesn't pretend to be, doesn't want to be. The result is kind of adorable. And it makes his affection and devotion to John all the more special because, in his own words, "[He] doesn't have friends. Only one."

Mrs. Hudson. (Una Stubbs) She loves her boys. This show takes a background character and fleshes her out: Mrs. Hudson has a sketchy past, a strong maternal streak when it comes to Sherlock and John, and this wonderful way of saying "Oh, dear" and insulting you all at once. She's indispensable.

Mycroft. Co-creator and writer Mark Gatiss steps in front of the camera to fill the role of Sherlock's fussy, refined older brother. "He is the British government."

Lestrade. (Rupert Graves) He's not a bumbling idiot in this version, but a competent detective. He's not too proud to admit he needs Sherlock's help - character improvement? Yes.

Molly. (Louise Brealey) The geeky Every Girl who'd do anything for Sherlock. A fandom favorite, she's got a thing for high-functioning sociopaths.











While Moriarty is a splendid villain, I love having a show that you don't want to watch solely for the villain. This isn't an anti-hero show, and that's a pleasant change to what's currently on TV.

The only drawback is the length of each season - only three episodes. But each episode has a runtime of nearly two hours, and is packed with cases, and enough straight-from-the-text Conan Doyle references to keep any Holmes fan happy. It isn't a show that gets talked about at dinner parties in the US, but it should be. It's absolutely worth getting addicted to.

Perfect Rainy Day for Reading

Sometimes I wish I wrote less so I had more time for reading. I'm a book worm in the true sense. But one can't hope to make a career of reading, so oh well. Duty calls.

Today is a perfect, drenching rainy day, and this just arrived in the mail yesterday. All one thousand pages of it. Impeccable timing.

I finished Patrick Rothfuss's The Name of the Wind a couple weeks ago and immediately ordered the sequel, The Wise Man's Fear. So far, this series is proving to be my favorite kind of read: the kind I enjoy so much that I refuse to step back from it and look at it critically. I just want to be a fan, to read and enjoy and soak it in and not worry about analyzing it for a second. Sure, I could talk metaphors and language and themes, but suffice to say Rothfuss is a beautiful writer who handles first and third person deftly, creates complex characters, and tells a story in true epic fantasy tradition. I'm so glad I took a chance on these books; they were such a good recommendation.

Favorite Things: LOTR

Whenever I've been a little down and been a little stressed - whenever external factors begin to take their toll - I like to think about my favorite things. No...not raindrops on roses: things that pull me out of the daily lurch and remind me...

"That there's some good in this world, Mr. Frodo... and it's worth fighting for.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Two Towers

 

 

 

So, this week, I'm talking favorite things. And I couldn't start that list without the entire Lord of the Rings trilogy.

 

 

The Lord of the Rings

 

The LOTR seems to be fairly polarizing: there are those who have no real opinion, but for the most part, there are those who can't stand it, and those who love it almost obsessively. I fall into the latter category. For a lot of reasons.

 

I was a sci-fi/fantasy child; I read The Hobbit at ten, the trilogy at twelve, and was smitten with Middle Earth and its heroic citizens. And then, my freshman year of high school, Peter Jackson turned the books I'd loved into the truest book-to-film interpretation I've ever seen, and he brought Middle Earth to vivid, tangible life.

 

The trilogy is artistically important for the fantasy genre, but for me as well. I think childhood inspiration has a way of shaping our adult sense of creativity, and in my case, I'm a sucker for good vs. evil; for true heroes; for the sort of wisdom that transcends elves and orcs and speaks to us as humans.

Plus, I always had a bit of a thing for Orlando in that blonde wig. I'm an adult. I can admit that.

And I named the farm in honor of the fields of Rohan.

“Where now are the horse and the rider? Where is the horn that was blowing?
Where is the helm and the hauberk, and the bright hair flowing?
Where is the harp on the harpstring, and the red fire glowing?
Where is the spring and the harvest and the tall corn growing?
They have passed like rain on the mountain, like a wind in the meadow;
The days have gone down in the West behind the hills into shadow.
Who shall gather the smoke of the deadwood burning,
Or behold the flowing years from the Sea returning?”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Two Towers

 

Stirring stuff, no?
 

 

 



 

 

Winter Reading

Did you ever start reading a book and realized you couldn't stop? I mean, really couldn't stop. You stayed up half the night and went cross-eyed at anyone who dared interrupt you. I confess, that doesn't happen to me very often anymore. I read quite a lot, but it's rare to find a book, or books, that I just want to fall into. Books whose characters I want to know and befriend. Books that, even after hundreds of pages, I don't want to end.

The past couple of weeks, I've been reading a romance series and while the first was a rather fun read, the further I progressed through the other books, the more I started to realize that the author wrote the exact same character every time - just with a different name and hair color. And she relies too heavily on strange contrasts - ex: the woman is six feet tall but referred to as "delicate" and in possession of "tiny hands". Even worse, I realized that I didn't like her characters. They had no life, no sense of humor, no sparkle. The men were predatory, women mannish, and just...

Anyway, I'm not writing about those books today. Today, I have some book recs.

With all fiction my main criteria is this: The characters must be multi-dimensional and interesting. Most of what passes for romance these days is sorely lacking in interesting characters or even character development. I was writing romance, but wasn't too enthused about the genre until I came across Judith McNaught's historicals.

     

I'm re-reading Whitney, My Love, which is her first novel, and have the sequels lined up when I'm finished: Once and Always, Something Wonderful, and Almost Heaven. I adore these books. Her characters are alive. They are funny. The dialogue is smart and sharp and emotional. The men and women of these stories are real and fallible - they fight and make up and the end of every book leaves me all sappy and glad these two fictional people have found each other. I love Whitney from Whitney, My Love - she's the kind of girl you'd want to be friends with. And Almost Heaven is so, so good.

I'm really not a fan of McNaught's contemporary novels, but the historical ones are fabulous. They're perfect for cold winter evenings indoors.

Lizzy

"Lizzy has something more of quickness than her sisters," Mr. Bennet said of his favorite daughter, and she's always been one of my favorites too.

An unquestionable classic, Pride and Prejudice introduces readers to the kind of female protagonist sorely lacking in much of today's fiction. Jane Austen challenged convention and thus earned a place in the hearts of readers for generations.

Elizabeth Bennet is saucy, principled, cynical, and yes, prejudiced, all while maintaining a certain sort of charm and sweetness. Unimpressed by wealth, protective of her family, Elizabeth is as refreshing now as she was in 1813. She entertained us - and Darcy too, the whole bunch of them really - and we went on a journey with her that rarely left drawing rooms, but was nothing less than adventurous. And that's the whole point, isn't it? If a character is a beautiful specimen of human traits and shortcomings, then she is the source of entertainment in a novel, and however mundane her daily life, I'll lap it up and ask for more.

Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy earn one another, you could say. And their love story is one of my very favorites.

Katie Scarlett

Everyone knows Scarlett O'Hara. Most people would say she's a bitch...and they wouldn't be wrong. She's also a brilliantly crafted character.

Scarlett's driving force in life is pride - a pride that makes her cutthroat, and, on occasion, manifests itself in more human ways. Proud of her beauty, proud of her ability to make men grovel, she craves validation rather than affection, and she's the sort of girl who puts her teeth into a challenge. Ashley won't love her, and she doesn't love him so much as she needs to achieve the unachievable. Rhett does love her, but he can't be manipulated - loving him would do nothing to prove her craftiness, and thus we are left with my favorite pairing of all time.

One of my favorite things about Scarlett is that her great character flaw is the one thing that gives her the mettle to survive when so many others would have wept into their skirts. She's too proud to go hungry, too proud to leave Mellie to fend for herself, too proud to admit that Tara can't be refurbished to its original splendor, too proud to beg Rhett for money, even if it means tearing down her mother's drapes and turning them into one of film's most iconic dresses.

I could go on for pages and pages, but this is the abridged version. Scarlett is a bitch, and she's one helluva strong woman. But never mistake bitchiness for strength. Scarlett is a complicated combination of traits that make her human, and make her difficult to label.

My mom made me - MADE me - her green drapery dress for Halloween one year when I was little. I had the hoop skirt, the tassels, the little hat and everything. And no one knew who I was supposed to be. A sad, sad day for literature it was.

Broken Harbor

I can not wait to dive into this. I've set it up on my bookshelf like a showpiece for the past two weeks and have let the anticipation build, but I think I'll have to start it tonight. I stumbled across Tana French's first novel In the Woods two Halloweens ago, struck by its cover art after I fished it out of a back shelf at Borders. I don't like trendy fiction, so I was excited to find someone I'd never heard of. She's become my very favorite author and I almost hate to read her latest because I know I'll hate when it's over.

I've really never been a fan of first person perspective - mainly because it fails to deepen my understanding of characters and usually makes the protagonist sound shallow as hell. "I'm pretty, I'm scared, I'm so hot for this guy...see Spot run....", etc. But Tana French is masterful with first person. She uses it to highlight all the layers and prejudices of her characters: through their eyes, we come to learn just how damaged they are, and just how desperate their circumstances become as the novels unfold.

Her last novel Faithful Place was wonderful. Without an ounce of smut, she paints a picture of a love affair that continues to haunt the protagonist, and as a reader I was catapulted back to Frank Mackey's past - a place that was alive with sensory details and dominated by how much he loved his girl. It's a book that stays with you, that had me very near actual tears, which I can tell you, doesn't happen to me while reading.

Love This

I feel like such a doofus because when I included this author's name in a list of favorites as part of a query letter I sent yesterday, I left the A off her first name. Such a doofus. But her name is Marisa (don't forget the A) de los Santos and her books Love Walked In and Belong to Me became instant favorites.

The prose reads like a friend's sometimes rambling, always entertaining personal stories, and because of this, the main character, Cornelia, feels like someone I've known for years.

Favorites

The prose reads like poetry. The detail is astounding. Love this one.

Favorites

A Song of Ice and Fire series
by George R.R. Martin

I wish I could say I was a fan of this amazing series from the get-go, but instead I have to thank my brother - fellow geek - for pushing the books on me. Because with the exception of The Lord of the Rings trilogy, I don't think I've ever enjoyed any book or group of books more than I have these. I'm more cynical than I used to be and I tend to read as a critic, more for self-education on what I like/don't like and should/should not do with my own writing. But with these books, I'm only a fan, and a rabid fan at that.

The HBO TV adaption - titled after the first book in the series: Game of Thrones - is phenomenal. Season 2 premieres this Sunday, April 1, and I can't recommend it enough...though I think the books are pretty essential!

Thank you, Brother, for letting me borrow your books. For describing The Wall and Winterfell, an honorable family, a bastard boy, and this crazy-complicated web of political intrigue in a way that piqued my imagination. Sometimes, it's really fun being a geek.

Oh, and Winter is Coming...

Favorites

Tami Hoag

I love all of her stuff. She went from romance to mystery without missing a beat. Her mix of rich details, intense action, violence and spookiness is so much more gritty and realistic than CSI ever thought about being. Still Waters, Ashes to Ashes, Dark Horse...I haven't read a title by her that wasn't entertaining. Absolutely love her stuff.

And then....

I found out she's a dressage rider.

I was grooming for someone at Regionals one year - a show where all the winners from a particular region compete together for top honors - and was enjoying doing the grunt work and getting to be behind the scenes without the stress of showing myself. I was double checking my rider's ride times when I came across the name d'Artagnan in the show program. Tami's horse! He was no longer Tami's horse, but I knew she rode down in Florida and had obviously sold the gelding to someone else in the region, someone who was at regionals!!

I didn't have time to track down d'Art while I was there, but it's just as well. I was rapidly turning into a fangirl.

Favorites

The Legend of Sleepy Hollow

by Washington Irving

“The dominant spirit, however, that haunts this enchanted region and seems to be commander in chief of all the powers of the air, is the apparition of a figure on horseback without a head. It is said by some to be the ghost of a Hessian trooper, whose head had been carried away by a cannon ball, in some nameless battle during the revolutionary war, and who is ever and anon seen by the country folk, hurrying along in the gloom of night, as if on the wings of the wind.”

“Sleepy Hollow” was originally published as one of the serial installments of Irving’s work The Sketchbook of Geoffrey Crayon in 1819 and 1820. It is perhaps his best known work, save for “Rip Van Winkle”. It is my absolute favorite work of fiction without question.

I love his language: there is something magical about the way he weaves words together in such a richly descriptive, folksy way. How could you not smile reading about Ichabod Crane who might have been mistaken for, “the genius of famine descending upon the earth, or some scarecrow eloped from a cornfield”? (Favorite line!)

I love the legend: Brom Bones and Katrina Van Tassel, the poor superstitious pedagogue who falls victim to the local rumors of the Horseman. It’s simple: a tiny, rural town afflicted by dark fireside tales, populated by locals who fear a vengeful spirit.

I love the tone: this is a story in which modern day gore has no place. It’s colloquial and quiet, mysterious, and just spooky enough to give you a happy little chill. I love the sense of tradition and love the ambiguity at the end: we never know if Ichabod was chased away by the Horseman, or Brom Bones in costume.

My hokey love for ghost stories can be blamed on “Sleepy Hollow”. For me, it’s the consummate folk tale. The Tim Burton film version is fun, the Disney cartoon is extremely accurate (and cute and narrated by Bing Crosby). But nothing can touch the original, written word.

“[On] the bank of a broad part of the brook, where the water ran deep and black, was found the hat of the unfortunate Ichabod, and close beside it, a shattered pumpkin.”