‘Darkness Brutal’ by Rachel A. Marks (A Review)


Review by Curtis Cole

                Do you have a hankering for Young Adult (YA) Urban Fantasy novels? If so then good news! Rachel A. Marks has you covered with her first installment in the “Dark Cycle” trilogy. Featuring all of the hallmarks of YA literature (hormones, passion, intimacy, emotions, etc.) with a healthy dose of inspiration taken from the television show “Supernatural”, readers of such works will be delighted to partake in the latest addition to the ‘up and coming’ sub-genre of urban fantasy; with the author having previously won an award for her novella “Winter Rose”, one should consider it an added bonus that the name behind the pen is talented as she is dedicated.

So what is the plot of this YA release, you ask? One of very expected content: Meet Aiden, a seventeen year old boy. He has special powers, including, but not limited to: the ability to read (and speak) in numerous ancient languages, see and communicate with demons, fighting said demons, and see peoples’ emotions waft from their bodies as colorful hues. Aiden must protect his little sister (Ava) whose (mysterious) importance is so vital to demon-kind that they have hunted her ever since she was a little girl; they congregate every three (or so) years—on her birthday—to make an attempt on her soul. People tend to die when this transpires and so Aiden, diligent to prevent any more innocent people from being torn to shreds, becomes desperate to protect her from the darkness, to find a lasting cure for her “demon problem”. In a bid to stave off the monsters he brings Ava to the home of Sid, a magically inclined gentleman who deals in the supernatural for a living, alongside his crew of “uniquely talented” youngsters. Though protected under Sid’s roof by his array of enchantments, things quickly become complicated for Aiden once he meets Kara and Rebecca; from here on out his life becomes a swirl of raging hormones and arcane secrets from his past—his mother’s death at the hand of demons somehow one of the keys to saving the world.

It is all standard fare. It is equal parts Supernatural and Harry Potter mixed with a bit of H.P Lovecraft. To Marks’s credit, much of the writing is handled exquisitely. The characters, for the most part, feel authentic: there is drama and emotions preserved in narrative layers; just when you think things become settled, something new transpires to throw everything out of orbit. Though there are many different sub-plots nothing ever feels too “out of whack”. Although some of the narrative aspects could have been more fully realized (such as a character or two or a plot thread), Marks should be congratulated on managing the largely successful fusion of so many different elements in a whole. Many authors, especially new authors, make the mistake of balancing too many balls in the air and end up crashing to the ground: Marks meanwhile juggles with pride.

So with this being said, I wish my opinion of Darkness Brutal was better, but quite frankly, I cannot lie: I found this book to be trite to the core. Though it may simply be I am not the target audience, I feel this only mitigates a fraction of the damage—I have read other YA novels containing far more substance. To make a list of my complaints: (1) the protagonist was jarring, (2) the plot itself easily recycled material from a wide range of supernatural and fantasy canon, (3) the drama needless and eye-rolling, and (4) some of the preaching, moralizing, and how it combined with the plot twists were laughable. Though there are many positive components to this books, these listed aspects were inexcusable mistakes.

First and foremost, the protagonist: he was thoroughly unlikable. Numerous times while reading, I wish I could shake him and/or punch him—he was a clueless, melodramatic, male chauvinist hiding behind a “nice guy” persona. His ignorance became more glaring with each chapter; his refusal to confide in people, ask for help, divulge information—along with his general arrogance juxtaposed with his stereotypical ‘I can handle anything since it is my responsibility to protect my little sis,’ when he is clearly outmatched—made him a target with legs in my eyes. His attitude was irrational and highly irksome since it was lazy writing on the part of the author; indeed, with Aiden she dropped the ball: truly he is nothing more than a walking amalgamation of tropes and clichés of the worst kind.

Another factor which pushed my literary buttons was Aiden’s disposition towards sexual activities. While this complaint factors into the various drama sub-plots, I found it to be a weakness of the author, and so subsequently attached it to her conservative social position; although the protagonist is on the cusp on adulthood, and openly remarks about his desperation to “get laid” and lose his virginity, he never engages in sexual activities when an able, willing and age-appropriate partner presents a consenting possibility.

To be clear: I am not railing against the fact that there are no sex scenes. No matter the genre, I prefer my literature to be free of pornography, as I feel it distracts from the narrative. What I am frustrated with, rather, is Marks’s moralizing and poor character design. Simply said, this seems of an authorial imposition: though I do not wish to make blanket statements about young people, I feel that many youth in Aiden’s position would have partook in a chance at sexual intimacy instead of passing up the offer. The fact that he refuses encounters extended to him by a willing, similarly aged, consenting partner, which even leads him to the fulfillment of the narrative’s major sub-plot, is indicative of a reactionary theist-oriented stance on human relations; Marks is building a world where youth resist the temptation of “sex before marriage” and are rewarded by divine powers. A position collaborated when seen contrasted to depictions of those who indulge in premarital carnal relations (i.e., deformed, sinful and unwell life forms who bring hardship upon their loved ones). With procreation constituting the major theme of the book (hardly surprising since Mormon extremist Orson Scott Card gave the title a sterling endorsement), and Aiden’s redemption of “The Mother(s)” achieved precisely through such conservative means, the aroma of sex negative thinking pervades the text.

For a teen and young adult novel, Darkness Brutal was a jarring read thanks to the overwhelming emphasis which conservatism occupied. The majority of the book’s inter-character drama played out against sexual desire and its repression. While the author did try and elevate non-sexual activities (like kissing and hand-holding) to a higher level of importance, the net-product was more condescension than reality. I felt that the focus of the plot was being subsumed. In place of an active engagement of Aiden as a uniquely talented individual, the focus of the narrative centered more on carnal delights which were only present due to the gifts given once rejected; in short: Marks does not know how to write youthful heterosexual males, a visibility made even more acute with the frustratingly cardboard “emotional wreck” of a love interest (“Kara”). It was needless and hapless preaching on the part of Marks; a kind whose obsolesce appeared all the more antiquated due to its awkward visibility in a genre usually devoid of such backward positions (teen novels such as Raziel Reid’s When Everything Feels Like the Movies depict how much a teen novel can get away with in terms of sexual philosophy without losing sight of the characters as driven agents).

All of this said, Darkness Brutal is still a fine read. Assuming one does not mind a great deal of cursing (or angst filled characters), I would recommend this as a suitable read to a teen or young adult with a penchant for the supernatural and otherworldly. The writing is evocative and the author knows how to keep the plot going. While she does trip over herself on more than one occasion, I do not feel it severely impedes the narrative to an unreadable degree; though I should be honest and say that I think this book can only be recommended to persons still developing a taste in this kind of thematic material; anyone, after all, who has read and watched more than a handful of similarly constructed texts, will be sure to find this a drab read. So, at the end of the day, while this is bound to be an adequate birthday-party bash for any number of young readers, older lovers of ‘the dark’ should stay away—nothing but ‘kiddy’ parties here!

Darkness Brutal

Rachel A. Marks

422 pages[1]. Published by Skyscape (NewYork). $4.99 (Kindle)[2]. 2015.


[1] Page estimates taken from Amazon.com.

[2] Prices were accurate at the time of writing.

Humanities Spring Reception 2016


The Division of Humanities (which includes the Department of English) each year hosts a spring reception to celebrate the accomplishments of the past year. Faculty members Pat O’Donnell (UMF’s Trustee Professor), Kristen Case (Little Arias), and Jeffrey Thomson (Fragile) read from recently published work or work  in progress. Miriam Cohen and Roshan Luick provided music.


Students (and their faculty sponsors) who received Wilson Scholarships  were recognized: Curtis Cole (sponsored by Lorna Hughes), Nathaniel Duggan (Shana Youngdahl), Jill Gingras (Gretchen Legler), and Timothy Stokes (Daniel Gunn).

Several students were honored for receiving awards and fellowships from organizations outside UMF, including several Fulbright Fellowship winners (which will enable the students to pursue research or creative projects or teach English as a foreign language): Travis Bent (a history major minoring in French and Spanish whose Fulbright will allow him to serve as an English teaching assistant in Spain); Kyle Manning, who graduated in 2015 as an English and Creative Writing double major, and who will be spending a year in Quebec researching bilingual comic blogs; Caroline Murphy, Secondary Education-English (also a 2015 graduate), who will be an English teaching assistant in Bulgaria.  Additionally, Creative Writing and English major Kim Arthurs completed a semester with the Movies from Marlboro program for young filmmakers.

The ceremony also announced several BFA awards: Senior Award (fall): Nathaniel Duggan; Senior Award (spring): Sarah Winchenbach. The Beth Eisen Memorial Scholarship went to Sarah Williams.

Bryce Cundick, librarian at Mantor Library, announced the winners of the Mantor-sponsored On Our Minds writing contest. All three winners were Humanities students: First, Jinni Workman; second, Mariah Haggan; third, Aimee DeGroat.

Humanities students won several other writing prizes over the past year: Aimee DeGroat was a finalist in the Hollins University Fiction Contest for her story “Feel Something.” Tim Bushika took first prize in UMA’s Terry Plunkett Poetry Festival Student Poetry Contest for “Six Days at the Bottom of the Ocean.” Nathaniel Duggan won the COPLAC (Consortium of Public Liberal Arts Colleges) David J. Prior award for outstanding essay on the public liberal arts experience for “Liberal Arts Degrees and Lobster Tanks: A Lesson in Stopping to Smell the Fishy Roses.”

Each year the Division of the Humanities Presents two honors for achievement in the the field of English, the Eleanor Wood Scholarship and the Maude L. Parks Award. In 2016, there were ten students who were finalists for the awards. There were two winners, and eight students who earned honorable mention. Honorable mention went to: Samuel Bennett, Tiffany Bishop, Julia Fletcher, Tyler Gadaire, Carolyn Newhouse, Janelle Noonan, Laura Pulito, and Kristen Simmons.

The Maud L. Parks Award was presented to Holland Corson.

The Eleanor Wood Memorial Scholarship was awarded to Brigid Chapin.



Imagining Counter-recruitment: A Review of Michael Chatfield’s ‘Recruitment’


Review by Curtis Cole

Military science-fiction tends to be a conservative outfit; many authors express a hardy, even jingoistic support for imperialism, often becoming apologists for fascist regimes infamous for the mass murder of critics. So for a voice to go against the grain and promote progressive values is an oddity. After reading The Recruitment: Rise of the Free Fleet I was pleased to see that author Michael Chatfield seems to have added his name among the small stable of semi-lefty authors.

As the book’s namesake implies, Chatfield’s overriding concern is that of militarism. With the opening of the text depicting the abduction of thousands of earthlings by an interstellar power calling itself the Union/Planetary Defense Force, the reader already sees the parallels between this mysterious collection of aliens and contemporary armed forces; the bellowing face projected upon screens announcing that the time has come for Earth’s “call to service.” The abductees, protagonist—and gamer extraordinaire Salchar among them—becoming the latest in conscripted cannon fodder.

Forced to endure a brutal training process by which a group of mostly children and young adults are required to ingest body altering foods and augmentations, the subtext is one of unity. To circumvent the dehumanizing aspects of the training, Salchar—though originally acting for purely personal reasons—creates a fighting code, later referred to throughout the fleet as “Salchar’s Rules”, meant to preserve the dignity and honor of the abducted by enforcing an ethical code of fighting and moral guidelines of non-combat interactions. This speaks to a sense of community which transcends the typical warrior code found in military sci-fi novels: that of the reactionary Bushido code; something fully adopted and allegorized by the story’s femme fatal, and eventual wife to the protagonist, Yasu Ono—a stolid loner who values honor and battle above all else[1].

After training is complete, the humans are assigned to ships and forced to participate in the Union’s military affairs: shortly after their departure from Earth, they raid a “terrorist” vessel and become pawns in a planetary invasion not unlike an operation which deprived them of their own freedom. Of course, Salchar has a plan of his own, one which involves destroying the Union and making them pay for their heinous treatment of the galaxy.  It is at this time he is introduced to an Artificial Intelligence (A.I) named Resilience; an entity on a mission to wage war against the Union. She enlightens Salchar on the hidden history of the Union, revealing that long ago there was an interstellar war between the Union, as it was then known, and an expansionist empire known as the Kalu. Not ending for several hundred years, the victorious Union had achieved a pyrrhic victory; a vast pirate horde, in the meantime, known as the Syndicate had grown in influence within the weakened Union zones of control, eventually staging a successful military campaign against the Union, stealing their name in an effort to legitimate their recruitment of an army of slaves to do their bidding.

From here the novel branches out in several interesting narrative directions. One direction, it needs to be said, is heavily concerned with society and culture. More to the point, it is a thread concerned with violence and how coordination and cooperation are used to penetrate what Marxist theorist Guy Dubord called the “Spectacle”, or, that edifying aspect of advanced capitalist society which prevented people from realizing the truth of their economic reality by virtue of the overwhelming proliferation of signs (mass media, popular culture, revisionist history, etc.). Chatfield’s contribution to this debate is that of historical truth: the victories achieved by the abducted members of humanity only come as a result of the disillusionment with the establishment, the status quo, of the revisionist history regaling all of the necessity of violent means to win peaceful ends, being uncovered as a fraud.

Resulting from this revelation is an insurrection. Salchar emerges as a leader and cajoles the oppressed into joining his audacious plan to seize a major Syndicate base. In classical Marxist theory, it is easy to view the Syndicate as a decadent bourgeoisie (capitalist class) with the slaves composing a working class, or proletariat. Hence why Russian revolutionary Vladimir Lenin’s words echo so strongly during this desperate battle for the space station: “The overthrow of the bourgeoisie can be achieved only by the proletariat becoming the ruling class,” (State and Revolution 25), speaks to the historical truth espoused by the masses of life-forms, human and otherwise, which flock to Salchar’s banner since “the proletariat needs state power, a centralized organization of force” which will enable the disparate slave species to re-take their various home worlds, an undertaking impossible without a violent, organizational apparatus to guide and grow the endeavor.

The other narrative direction is one of interpersonal relations. Although the author is heavily concerned with how the Military Industrial Complex expands and propagates itself, he is also equally concerned with societal ramifications of this expansion, namely, social violence. Early in the book Chatfield speaks of a super-competitive gaming event called Mecha Assault, a game with fans and players so rabid that “For some of them if they lost a battle, then they would have to regain their honor in another battle” (Chatfield 490[2]), which was often undertaken within the real world as often as it was undertaken within the virtual. Such behavior encouraged player militarization. With gamers learning defensive martial arts simply to survive, to stay in one piece, and in some cases, from being killed, many youths found themselves with deadly talents highly sought by armed organizations: whether they be human or otherwise.

Societal concern such as militarization carries over into those recruited: of the abducted, the majority are children, adolescents, and young adults. Rushed through training, while being pumped full of drugs and hormones to encourage development, sexual and social lines are blurred; this becomes even more acute with “the marriage fight” which paired up the abducted with those of the opposite sex into legally binding unions. Something which becomes concerning once one remembers the age of the participants and their expectation to breed slaves which the Syndicate is able to train, from birth, into soldiers.

One could expect developmental problems to arise within youth who are expected to sexually engage with one another when not on the battlefield. And so it is not unexpected that references abound to the youth being unable to distinguish reality from fantasy; in the case of one fifteen-year-old, Wiry, the development of a murderous pathology. Both the narrator and the protagonist chronicle how the soldiers believe their actions to be like a video game. A reoccurring track of social commentary signaling Chatfield’s concern with how militarist social-media texts (such as Call of Duty and America’s Solider) are negatively affecting contemporary youth in a postmodern age.

The ending, both conventional and unconventional at the same time, belies the author’s commitment toward storytelling. On one hand it rejects typical notions of heteronormativity within military science-fiction literature; the marriage battle, through forcing Salchar and Yasu to marry and enforces a reader’s expectation of latent sexual desire between the couple, this desire is never affirmed; the furthest the couple gets is a lukewarm kiss. Sexual intimacy is never consummated and, indeed, throughout the book, Salchar is paranoid of the murderous intents his so-called wife has upon him, while Yasu herself is disgusted with Salchar’s perceived sexual promiscuity and lack of honor. So while heterosexuality is very much the lifeblood of the book, the actual content reveals a disturbed core, from the marriage battles to the relationship between Salchar and Yasu, antithetical to the romanticized views which predominate literary texts.

In the end, Chatfield’s first swipe at being an author is a conflicted bag. Although I admire much of his work, especially when we consider this effort to be among the first of his authorial commitment, one cannot ignore the literary faults inherent within the text. The most glaring of which is punctuation and grammar. While I can overlook the occasional typo, and even stomach some incorrectly or misused words, The Recruitment is littered with mistakes; from missing parentheses, incorrect temporal alignment (for example, “destroying” when “destroyed” is the appropriate tense for a passage), to missing commas, periods, and quotation marks, the overall manuscript is riddled with errors. Although I did not find these mistakes to be terribly distracting, it is a shortcoming which I would advise the author to take steps to overcome, as any work destined to be read should be first put through a rigorous date with an editor before publication.

Some of my smaller complaints are directed toward the uneven pace of the plot. At times, specifically in the second half to final 35% of the book, there is this breakneck speed which the narrative takes up. Prior to this portion of the text the plot felt as though it was reaching a natural conclusion; however, upon reaching this point, it increasingly felt as though the scenarios were not given the necessary time to be wholly coherent, or as if the events were novellas which the author hastily fused into a larger work so as to give it more diversity in content. Considering this ebook is an estimated six hundred pages, this is mildly concerning as it points to a lack of organizational skills. But, as this is an early work by the author, and as such, he is still honing his skill, I can forgive such quirks and state my belief in that the author should continue writing.

The Recruitment: Rise of the Free Fleet

Michael Chatfield

600 pages. Published by Booktango. $14.13 (Paperback), $2.99 (Kindle). 2015.


Works Cited

Chatfield, Michael. The Recruitment: Rise of the Free Fleet. Bloomington: Booktango, 2015. Kindle E-Book.

Lenin, V.I. State and Revolution. Mansfield: Martino, 2009. Print.


[1] This is not to say that the author, Chatfield, is a Leftist. On the contrary, he displays reformist tendencies (liberalism and conservatism). Although the code of “Salchar’s Rules” is a moderate alternative to the Bushido code, it is still one rooted in humanist ideology and reactionary social-Darwinist thinking; after several Union/Syndicate ships are seized, for example, humans are found aboard in a terrible state. They are depicted as violent, dirty, sexually threatening, and lawless. Close to sub-human, in fact. It is discovered that these individuals never trained with “Salchar’s Rules” and so descended into a chaotic cabal where the strong provided over the weak. Such a display contrasts sharply with those trained keeping Salchar’s Rules in mind: they are organized, healthy, and able to cooperate while supporting one another. Salchar, by extension, is set up as a pseudo-Christ figure as the savior of humanity; this connection is later reinforced during his encounter with the Avarians and his subsequent “transition” marking its similarity to the Bible tale of Jesus’s Resurrection.

[2] Citation for this review utilizes Kindle’s “location” based system instead of page numbers.



During the week of May 2, the UMF courses participating in the Adaptations Co-Lab staged a week-long event called Adaptacon. Following the practice of science fiction, cosplay, and anime conventions, Adaptacon offered two tracks, creative and academic. Students presented critical papers on adaptation as well as staging, screening, displaying their own adaptations.

Adaptacon culminated in a party and costume contest, a final celebration of adaptation, where many of the creative adaptations were performed and displayed. The central event of the evening was a costume contest (in which contestants came dressed as their favorite literary or media-related characters). Additionally, there was a tableau vivant of the Seven Deadly Sins (see photos above); scenes from a new translation and adaptation of Sophocles’ play Ajax; Jane Austen and Emily Dickinson set to music; poster displays from Francophone Cultures Through Film; an installation by INS 377 (Border Crossings) students; various adaptation projects from British Texts and Contexts and American Texts and Contexts; and much, much more. Below is a selection of photographs from the evening.


Lauren Crosby sang three songs, each one an adaptation of a different Jane Austen novel (including a bluesy Emma), while the Seven Deadly Sins listened.


Richard Southard adapted four Walt Whitman poems to card magic.


Artwork by Marissa Smith and Lauren Stetson (based on Cheryl Savageau’s poetry collection Mother/Land and Elizabeth Strout’s novel Olive Kitteridge).


There was a lot going on throughout the building during the event, including British Text and Contexts presentations in one of the basement classrooms.

Costume Contest:



From Sophocles’s Ajax, adapted to a contemporary setting:




Adaptacon involved several participating courses:

ART 221 Painting I

ENG 251 British Texts and Contexts I

ENG 272 American Texts and Contexts

ENG 477 Popular Genres

ENG 477 Jane Austen and Popular Culture

INS  377 Border Crossings

FYS 100 Francophone Cultures through Films

As part of the academic track, both Popular Genres and Jane Austen and Popular Culture offered panels where students presented their final research projects from the two classes:

Panel Title: Horror

Kurt Mason, “Scream Queens: A Genre Mash-Up and Modern Revival of the Classic Whodunnit”

Angela Hutchins, “No Flesh Shall Be Spared: The Challenge of Female Conventions of the Horror Genre in Richard Stanley’s Film Hardware

Josiah Adams, “Zombies and the Mediums of their Dismemberment”

Kat Newcombe, “Eat the Children: Zombies in Young Adult Literature as Seen in Charlie Higson’s The Enemy Series

Francis Hartnett, “Perpetuating Hatred in the Face of Extinction: Apocalyptic Bigotry and Telltale’s The Walking Dead

Carolyn Newhouse, “From a Scream to a Snicker: An Exploration of Horror-Comedy as a Genre”

Panel Title: Popular Genres and History

Holland Corson, “The Fall of Non-Fiction: Mockumentary and the Destruction of the Documentary”

Brandi Merry, “The Nostalgia of Mad Men: Adapting the Historical Novel to Television”

Robyn Noe, “Adapting Arthurian Fantasy: From T.H. White to BBC’s Merlin

Victoria Alagna, “From The War Zone To Your TV Screen: An Analysis of Call of Duty As A War-Themed Video Game”

Panel Title: Superhero and Science Fiction

Nikki Hodgins, “’Deceived by their true nature’: An Exploration of Morality in the Superhero Genre Through the Lens of Marvel’s Daredevil

Avalon Almador, “Dexter Morgan: The Complexities of a Tragic Hero”

Justin Fisette, “’Genre is irrelevant. Your genres will adapt to service us’: The Borg as both zombie and science fiction”

Janelle Noonan, “’Put these References Waaay up Inside your *ahem,* Morty’: Intertextuality and Fan Genre in Rick and Morty

Jane Austen and Contemporary Culture

Kimberly Biddlecom,”‘None of us want to be in calm waters all our lives:’ Overcoming Gender Limitations in Persuasion” (9:50-10:15)

Madeline Boyes, “Exploring Motherhood in the Works of Jane Austen” (10:15-10:40)

Astra Pierson, “Freedom and Limitation in Clueless” (10:40-11:05)

Nathaniel Duggan, “Adaptation as Conversation: Rediscovering Relevance in Mansfield Park through Film” (11:05-11:30)

Lauren Crosby, “The Defense of Fanny Price through a Feminist Lens” (10:10-10:30)

Josh Cardella,  “A Conversation: Adaptations of the Second Proposal Scene in Pride and Prejudice” (10:30-10:50)

Elizabeth Ferry, “Re-vision of Pleasure v. Virtue in Sense and Sensibility–Austen’s Classic, Film Adaptation, and Young Adult Literature”  (10:50-11:10)

Dot White, “The Box Hill Picnic: Prelude and Postlude” (11:10-11:30)

Jane Austen and Popular Genres (students from both classes on one panel)

Gia Pilgrim, “Contemporary Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Jane Austen: In Bollywood and Hispanic America”

Audrey Blaufuss, “Adaptation Takes the Next Step: Cinematic Techniques Evolve New Meaning in Persuasion

Jasmine Heckler, “The Conversation of Morality in Jane Austen’s Mansfield Park and Present-Day Fan Fiction”

Curtis Cole, “Plateau, 2016 A.D- ∞: Understanding the Zombic-machine’s Semiological Features”



Fulbright Winners

Some good news about recent and new graduates from English, Secondary Education, and the Humanities:

FARMINGTON, ME (May 5, 2016)—The University of Maine at Farmington is proud to announce that the Fulbright U.S. Student Program—among the most prestigious national awards for postgraduate study—has awarded a UMF graduating senior and two UMF alumni with 2016 Fulbright Fellowships.

This highly competitive national program, sponsored by the U.S. State Department to promote good will internationally, enables college graduates, young professionals and artists to conduct research, teach English as a foreign language or pursue a creative project in more than 150 countries.

“Receiving a Fulbright award is such an honor and a significant personal achievement,” said Kathryn A. Foster, UMF president. “We are so proud of this year’s recipients and the course they’ve charted as ambassadors to the world. UMF has strategically invested in growing our Fulbright program to support this type of academic excellence and this year’s strong showing underlines its success.”

At UMF, a faculty committee, under Fulbright adviser Anne Marie Wolf, associate professor of history, was very involved with the Fulbright candidates, commenting on student statement drafts, conducting on-campus interviews and providing observations for applications.

Recipients for the very competitive award are selected by the Fulbright Program based on their academic and professional record, language preparation, feasibility of their project or course of study and personal qualifications. The Fulbright Program awards roughly 1,900 U.S. student awards annually, nationwide.

Current senior Travis Bent from Norridgewock is majoring in history with minors in international and global studies, French and Spanish. His fellowship will have him traveling to Spain to be an English teaching assistant in social science. “My professors at Farmington and my adviser Dr. Wolf have really transformed my college experience,” said Bent. “They gave me the tools to make the impossible, possible. This is an unbelievable opportunity for me.”

Kyle Manning, a 2014 UMF graduate in creative writing and English, is currently at l’Université du Maine in Le Mans, France, giving English conversation lessons. He will be headed to Montreal to work on his Fulbright research project on comic blogs as an emerging genre. He will also work with the organizers of a blogging festival and network with these writers.

Caroline Murphy, a secondary education major and 2015 UMF graduate, has been traveling and working at the Kennebunk Beach Improvement Association since graduation. Her Fulbright award will have her working as an English teaching assistant in a high school in Pernik, about 12 miles from Sofia, Bulgaria’s capital. She will also be teaching about American culture and possibly coaching the school’s speech and debate team.

In addition to UMF’s strong showing in this year’s Fulbright U.S. Student Program, UMF has had ongoing significant success in the Fulbright Scholar Award Program, a program for college faculty and professionals. Since UMF’s recognition as a “Top Fulbright Producer” by the U.S. State Department in 2012, the University has added an additional five members to its ranks of Fulbright Scholars.

“Sweet Mother of Stalin!”A Review of Nick Web’s ‘Constitution’


Review by Curtis Cole

                Sweet mother of Stalin. Those are the words which appear in the opening pages of Nick Weber’s “Constitution”, the first book in the Legacy Fleet trilogy. Spoken by Captain Disraeli out on border patrol, he less than enjoys the laugh of his first officer, since he muses on whether it would save him some suffering to “just end it all” (70[1]) with his .45 blaster. You know what they say about tight spaces and monotony…

More to the point, however, it is more likely that the charming Captain is fed-up with patrolling a seemingly empty border: after all, the so-called Swarm, those dastardly alien life-forms with a hive-mind mentality which came out of nowhere and slaughtered hundreds of millions of people, have not been seen for nearly a century. Not since the first “Swarm War.” Seems like a waste of time cruising along, acting as an early alert system should the evocatively named “Cumrats[2]” return and eject themselves into the body politic.

Such a thought would appear like a safe bet… but you would be wrong! Because boy oh boy, do the swarm return, and in style: Captain Disraeli’s morbid rants are cut short in the same manner of his body—vaporization. Taken by surprise, pants well beneath their ankles, the leaders of Earth’s Integrated Defense Force are thrown into chaos; the return of the Swarm also, incidentally, foretells the return of the good old days of militarist preparedness, when ships were constructed ‘right’ and Earth’s Western Aligned militaries had unlimited budgets, before the dark days when bureaucratic red-tape took over and those insidious liberal machinations from the “Eagleton Commission” stripped the war machine of its fighting capacity, filling it instead with– *gasp*– a peace dividend.

The horror!

But thank God for the communistic Swarm! Because of them the flow of cash, the precious lifeblood of the military machine, resumes, and those pesky politicians see how wrong they were to think about peace and poor people. Enter Captain Tim Granger, a rough barrel-chested veteran of the first Swarm War who is mighty upset that his prize warship, the Constitution, was scheduled for her decommission. Or at least he was upset before the second Swarm invasion reversed those pesky anti-militarist itches in a hurry. Now with a ship to prove what the old and experienced are able to do, despite being held down by a society of “vacant, immature materialists” (1125), people who see those like Tim, individuals that “have been around a hell of a long time” have now “outlived their usefulness”, are still able to contribute to society.

And so the spiel goes, on and on.

That is the gist of Nick Weber’s plot: aliens return to wreak havoc on an unsuspecting humanity; the counter-productive anti-war elements are forced to acknowledge their stupidity, while a grumpy senior citizen discontent with military command throws a tantrum every time he doesn’t get his way, all while expecting all those he works with to obey his every word. Just throw in some cliché ridden political intrigue (Russians as the ‘bad guys.’ Original!), a couple moments of Dues Ex Machina, as well as a twist or two bundled up with a burgeoning teaser for book two, and you have yourself a summary of Web’s book.

But this is just another way of saying that military science-fiction is no stranger to counterrevolution. David Weber, with his brand of ultra-conservative nationalistic-jingoism, paved the way in the early nineties for our current onslaught of reactionary sci-fi opuses, with his bourgeois feminist track the “Honor Harrington” series. From there on out the general flood of right-wing texts seen today have only proliferated; with a hefty focus on union bashing, anti-communism, ultra-individualism, and militarism, contemporary military sci-fi is a far cry from Joe Haldeman’s progressive anti-militarist, military sci-fi text “The Forever War.”

So needless to say, Nick Web will feel right at home. As with Weber, Nick plays into the Republican and Democratic Party’s speaking notes on maintaining a large military in the face of a “looming” “enemy” (simply replace “Political Islam” with “Aliens”). Page after page is filled with the urgency of maintaining a large military budget, how it is naïve and dangerous to consider Humanity’s No.1 enemy as anything but extinct, and that ultimately, the wise advice of the elders, those hardened soldiers defending humanity from an inexplicit threat, should be hailed as prophets of the true (re stable and commonsensical (re conservative)) social order, over the heads of the politically correct pencil-pushers.

By proxy, every reactionary trope is legitimated: homophobia (86, “Pixies”, another slur for the Swarm), militarism (910, 3276), conspiracy theories (2588, 3867), and capitalist dictatorship (3301), and nationalist pride, seen in the form of inter-imperialist struggle with Russia (271, 350) and, of course, the low shot against Unionized workers (4029). Many of these examples bleed into one another while many others still exist throughout the textual body. All form a web of interrelations telling a story of a society gone wrong.

I will not say that Web’s book is the most reactionary military sci-fi text I have read; that honor can go to another author (likely David Weber), but it is, and I cannot stress this enough, a backward text. Although in our postmodern age the glorification and mythologization of militarism is nothing new, either in literature or popular culture, it is a virus nonetheless. There is nothing honorable or heroic about armed combat fought in the name of maintaining exploitative regimes. Even more so in an age where Western European and American war drums beat heavily in the contemporary real-world—the one inhabited by you and I— in order to draw support for the surrounding of the Russian Federation. Web’s overt hostility to Russia, which one may suspect borders on racism, is symptomatic of a wider reactionary plague during the decay of capitalism; that of ideologues churning-out ultra-nationalistic sentiments in an increasingly neoconservative world.

If one is a fan of reactionary texts seeing the peaceful minded as fat-cats, then one can’t go wrong here, not with the enthusiasm Web has infused into his creation: for all the issues I have with Web’s book, after all, the writing is solid. Seeing as how I screeched through Constitution in but only a couple of days, I can testify that the author, if he has nothing else going for him, has an impressive grasp of language: descriptors and narration are as entertaining as the chapters are quick, and instill in the reader a “one more chapter” drive. It is merely all the more the shame that he squanders his talent beating the dead-horse of conservative anxieties.

Constitution (Book One of the Legacy Fleet trilogy)

Nick Web

323 pages[3]. Published by Nick Web. $3.99 (Kindle). 2015.


[1] The Ebook used for this review utilized a “location” based system of citation.

[2] Slur for the Swarm.

[3] Estimation of page numbers given by Amazon.com’s product description (Kindle edition).

One Too Many Eves: A Review of “Seveneves” by Neal Stephenson


Review by Curtis Cole

A planet: culture, religion, philosophy, race and ethnicity, sexuality and gender, technology, and nature. These are some of the defining aspects of this planet and of humanity, that biological organism crawling on the husk of the planetary body known as Earth. Such a differential plethora, that vast multitude constituting the near-infinite intertwining of purposes with agents is the focus of Neal Stephenson’s latest epic: Seveneves.

Set against a backdrop of Earth in crisis and a future spawned from that terrible chaos, Stephenson’s thread weaves together narratives of the highest order—the reason for events, human mission in a seemingly mission-less world, etc.—to depict something of a postmodern flare: a story about the production of myth and how metanarratives lead to societal parody, the semiotic becoming satirical in—and for—itself.

Earth of the not too distant future is the setting of the story. In this timeline, however, not all is well. One day, out of nowhere, an unknown force—evocatively called ‘The Agent’—destroys the moon, shattering it into seven gigantic pieces. Unfortunately for humanity though the disaster doesn’t end there for the pieces soon begin to collide with one another. The proliferation of new pieces continues unabated and soon a new disaster is predicted: in but a few years’ time the pieces will reproduce to such an extent that as soon as the moon’s mass falls into the atmosphere (“The White Sky”), and onto the planet’s surface (“The Hard Rain”), the resulting destruction will wipe out all of humanity during a five-thousand year extinction.

With this prediction, the die is cast!

All the nations of the world scramble to save the human species. Humanity endeavors to build a space arc, a massively refitted and expanded international space station, to house the best and brightest minds of the human race; the idea being that humanity will save themselves by roughing out the storm in such habitable environments, to which after the Hard Rain ends, they will remake the Earth and live there once more. Fast-forward five centuries to witness the reclamation of the Earth, along with the social discord which follows: first contact, Cold War-esque stand-offs, and the meaning of duty all make their mark during this epoch, the ‘era of the seven races’.

Divided into three parts, the novel’s first two parts focus on the trial and tribulations of 21st-century humanity in saving their skins while the third part concerns itself with the journey of their ancestors to reclaim the planet. With a whole new set of characters from the first two parts, the third installment, although radically different from the first storyline, offers some startling observations of social customs, revealing the, what in semiotic terms is called “the referent”, or the original sign, of present day society. Though not expecting a treatise on semiotics and grand narratives when I opened Stephenson’s novel, the third installment screams for the semiotic treatment (something which, unfortunately, will only be touched upon in this review).

If the pieces of the moon represent anything, it is what poststructuralist semiotician Jean Beaudrillard called (and I’m paraphrasing here), “the evasion of the dialectic of meaning”, of how the “infinite proliferation of things” managed to dissociate themselves from the original signification. As the catalyst for the whole plot the moon’s fragmentation represents the culmination of the decay of the chain of signification: from the moment the moon dies to the final chapter five thousand years later, the (semiotic) sign, riding on the coattails of culturally constructed ‘metanarratives’ of struggle and survival, degenerates until nothing but parody remains, the base of the sign which had originally, before the Agent battered the moon, existed as a hidden regulatory function; the sign which informed cultural and social reproduction.

The post-“Hard Rain” society bears the wounds of this decay extravagantly. From the two great powers dubbing one another merely as “Blue” and their foe as “Red”, to the casting of television producers as military generals (in order to literally direct, as in film directing, the armed engagements so as to garner societal support for any armed confrontations; manipulation of the fighting, accordingly, of how the battle is handled, who is killed and who is shown mercy, becomes all mere factors in engagements. Truly, wars in this society are truly televised as neo-Roman spectacles), the realities of contemporary (21st century) society reflect their future parallels as the pale and sickly phantoms of their formerly full-blooded selves: no grand labels or names are superimposed on conflicts—a war which happened in the woods is merely known as “The War in the Woods”, media is spotlighted as just as important to the war effort as the soldiers themselves. The masking of the pre-Hard Rain epoch, as framing conflicts as grand tapestries of emancipation or of mass-media outlets acting as supposedly impartial observers, in actuality acting as impromptu public relations firms for the military, has been thoroughly effaced. The function of society, its bare bones, and how it truly functions, becomes perceptible in Seveneves through its semiotic deforestation.

Of Neal Stephenson’s previous works Seveneves stands out. Said another way it is either greatly enjoyed or hotly despised. I tend to side with the critics of the unfavorable disposition. Across the board, the writing is inferior to Stephenson’s previous novels; while a reader could devour a work such as “Reamde” and enjoy every second of the narrative’s pacing, stellar character development, and universe, without becoming fatigued, the same cannot be said for Seveneves. Each and every character is one-dimensional, often offering little—if any—in originality, save but for a quip here or there; the pages are filled with monotonous tech-jabber that becomes unintelligible unless one has an engineer’s degree or a sophisticated understanding of the sciences, and slows the reading down to a barely managed crawl every time the author starts a track concerning the logistics of how the space station is expanded or how a certain machine functions; and the story, while ultimately one about cultural parody, is still nevertheless, a silly idea—the “Agent” is never identified (the moon was simply destroyed and nothing more is said on the cause), the actions of the characters swings between wildly perceptive, the sort of which is only possible in Hollywood-style movies where the protagonist has a one-in-a-billion hunch which turns out to be correct, and those characters which are dizzyingly irrational (infighting on humanity’s only hope for survival over trivial political matters? You bet!); and then, the worst offender, being that of Stephenson’s reactionary depiction of race which borders on the legitimation of racialism: aside from the genetic alteration of each of the so-called seven “eves”, or the most prominent woman capable of procreation, being a laughably absurd happening, even after one takes into account the satirical angle offered through the decay of (semiotic) signification attached to (pre-Hard Rain) conceptions of race, the discourse of each of the Eve’s races possessing genetically defining traits determinative of how they cooperate, or lack of, therefore, with the other races, becomes at once both a kindergarten-level understanding of racial dynamics, as well as a deeply insulting characterization of race through the erection of contemporary racial stereo-and-arch-types. The novel ends with an unsatisfying conclusion which, though meant to draw readers out on the question of metanarratives, fails to make its point suitably perceptible to the average reader.

As it stands Seveneves is a mixed bag. While the world-building is fairly well-done, if not a bit opaque and ponderous at times. For better or worse, Part Three stands out as a defining point in the novel; still, for everything which has been said, one cannot ignore that there are qualities to this novel worth mentioning, the best of which is Stephenson’s ability to keep the story moving forward with the big picture in mind. Some readers this will find this to be an (inter-)stellar time: something that combines some hard-nosed geeky research with a fantastical social-sciences adventure through the cultural stars. For others, however, it will be the opposite: the literary equivalent of a leaky spacesuit. Whether this is a suit you want to wear, I will leave for you to decide.


Neal Stephenson

861 pages. Published by HarperCollins. $16.99 (Kindle), $35.00 (Print). 2015.

Emily Dickinson Symposium Schedule

Thursday 4/21
1:00-2:30 Student panel: Papers by Sun Weiheng, Julie Guerra, Nathanial Duggan – Emery Arts Center

2:45-4:15 Round table discussion: Jeffrey Thomson, Kristen Case, Joseph Massey, Ben Friedlander, Shana Youngdahl -Emery Arts Center

7:30 Poetry reading: Joseph Massey, Ben Friedlander, Shana Youngdahl: The Landing, Student Center


Friday 4/22
10:00 Presentation of student adaptations/creative work – Emery Arts Center

11:45 Keynote Lecture, Ben Friedlander: Emery Arts Center




Olive Kitteridge Adaptation

As part of our participation in the Adaptation CoLab (a CoLab is a UMF experiment that connects several different classes through a shared topic), American Texts and Contexts students read Elizabeth Strout’s  novel Olive Kitteridge (2008) and then watched several episodes of the 2014 HBO mini-series based on the book. The award-winning mini-series starred Frances McDormand, Richard Jenkins, John Gallagher Jr, Zoe Kazan, and Bill Murray. As a contribution to our discussion of this adaptation, student Cameron Gelder interviewed his cousin Riley Fearon, who had worked as a production assistant on the film, about his experience during the production of Oliver Kitteridge:

This is an interview of Riley Fearon, about his first major filming production, Olive Kitteridge. Riley worked as a production assistant, doing errands for the filmmakers to help move things along. He had inside experience regarding the production of the miniseries, detailed in the interview itself. Riley is currently an Editor and Motion Graphics artist at Maverick Productions, LLC, where he helps create promotional films, advertisements, and assists with films and television. He also has his own company, Riley Fearon Productions, where he works on digital production and completes freelance work. Both are based in the Boston area, so the productions Riley works on are usually done in or near Boston.

Cameron Gelder is a Secondary Education-English major, currently in his sophomore year. He’s also Riley’s cousin, which helped facilitate the interview. He wrote the questions himself, and Riley answered accordingly.

 Olive Kitteridge Q & A

What was your job during the production? What did your job entail?

Olive Kitteridge was my first big break in the film industry. It was my first time working with a big name production company (HBO). I was hired as an Office Production Assistant, which meant I spent most of my time working in the production office and less on set. Job requirements ranged from printing scripts, creating shooting schedules, and buying office materials for the office and set. It was the perfect first job because I got to meet and network with the crew and actors in every department when I delivered the scripts and shooting schedules.

Did you read Olive Kitteridge before beginning production? If so, how did you think the miniseries and the book compared? If not, when, if ever, did you read it?

I hadn’t read Olive Kitteridge before beginning production. I was hired just a week before shooting and I had to familiarize myself with the script first. It was a backwards way of doing things, but I actually enjoyed that reverse process. I was able to read the script without any prior opinions. After reading the book though, I do wish they integrated more characters and made it a 13 part mini series instead of 4; or at least added a few more episodes.

Did you work directly with the director? If so, what was your experience with her? Were you confident in her direction?

I had a few interactions with the director, Lisa Cholodenko, during the production. Mostly it was delivering her a new script if there was a change or an update. I believe she was a great choice to helm the project. She is excellent at capturing strong women and depicting emotions such as depression; a disease most directors avoid or struggle depicting. Frances McDormand was actually the one who approached Lisa and asked her to direct the film because of her work on The Kids Are Alright.

Did you work directly with any of the actors? If so, what was your experience with them? How do you think they did in their performances? What did they do to achieve these performances?

I was lucky enough to meet most of the actors in the film. All the actors were kind and no one created any drama on set. The casting was, in my opinion, spot on, but I suppose that’s because I read the script first and automatically pictured the actors as the characters. It’s all about chemistry on screen and I think Frances and Richard Jenkins melted perfectly together.

What issues/challenges did the production face? How did you overcome them?

One of the most challenging parts of the production was finding areas in Massachusetts that look like Maine. Though I wasn’t working on the film yet, I heard that the scouting process took months. I think in the end they did a pretty convincing job depicting the Maine coastline. Most of the film was shot in the North Shore of Massachusetts. The towns included, Gloucester, Salem, Beverly, Ipswich, and Rockport.

Many people consider this to be a faithful adaptation of the book. Do you agree? Do you think this was the intent of the production?

Being faithful to the book was definitely a main priority for the filmmakers. When Frances decided to produce this she wanted to be sure it was faithful. She made sure it wasn’t a two-hour movie and convinced HBO to do a 4 part (4 hour) miniseries.

Were there any funny or interesting behind-the scenes stories?

I think the most memorable experience I had with an actor was with Bill Murray, of course. I had to deliver him his new rental car one day and he invited me into his trailer where we tried on different hats that the wardrobe department wanted him to try on. We eventually decided on a purple beanie, which you see him wearing in the film when Olive finds him in the park. According to Bill, it looks better on him.

You’ve since went on to work on such films as Joy, Black Mass, and the new Ghostbusters. How did your work on Olive Kitteridge compare to these experiences?

Olive Kitteridge was my first real experience working on a movie, so I was lower on the totem pole and didn’t have much of an input. As each movie comes along, I’ve been able to slowly work my way up and have more of a creative input into each movie. For instance, on Ghostbusters, I was able to research and purchase props and decoration for different scenes within the film.

Is filming an adaption of a book different than filming an original movie? How so?

Working on a film that is an adaption of a novel is extremely different from working on an original film. When working on a movie that is adapted from a novel, you have to make sure details such as clothes, locations, and even the actors lines match up with the characters and setting in the book. Working on an original script, however, the filmmakers have complete creativity on creating the characters and the world around them.

Is working on a miniseries different from working on a film? How so?

Feature films and mini series are very similarly structured when in comes to production. The only difference I noticed while working on Olive Kitteridge is that we had the same amount of scheduled shooting days as that of a feature film. So in our case, we had to film 4 hours of usable footage compared to a regular 2 hours for a feature film. The result is longer days and less sleep, but it’s always worth it in the end!

Batman or Superman?

Batman always wins!

Los Angeles AWP Conference: Adaptation and Bringing the Novel to the Big Screen


There has been an ongoing discussion in the English Department at UMF about the process of adapting literature; and once created, what these adaptations mean to the original text and how are they related. I recently took a trip to Los Angeles to the annual Association of Writers and Writing Programs Convention and attended two panels which dealt with this notion.

Since Hollywood, California is such a film-oriented city, you can imagine the different types of scenarios and conversations that circulated in these panels. Some writers have had wonderful experiences watching their novels come alive onto the big screen. Other writers have seen their memoir twisted into a strange story without their permission.

The first panel I attended is described below:

“If the integrity of a film adaptation is measured by the degree to which the novelist’s intent is preserved, Mr. Foote’s screenplay should be studied as a classic.” —Harper Lee on the movie To Kill A Mockingbird. What makes a novel worthy of adaptation? How should we measure the success of an adaptation? How faithful should a screenwriter remain to a novel? Is the author’s intent relevant? In this panel we explore these questions from the perspective of prominent screenwriters.
The four screenwriters who were present at the panel included:
  • Graham Moore, who is a New York Times bestselling novelist and Academy Award winning screenwriter. His screenplay for the film The Imitation Game won an Oscar and a WGA award.
  • Also, Nicholas Kazan who is a playwright (Blood Moon, The Good Soldier, Mlle God), screenwriter (MatildaAt Close Range, Reversal of Fortune, Fallen, Bicentennial Man, etc.), and a writer/director (Dream Lover).
  • Amber Tamblyn was present; and has been nominated for an Emmy and a Golden Globe for her work in TV and film. She published three poetry books, including the critically acclaimed Dark Sparkler. Most recently, she adapted and directed the feature film Paint It Black, based on the novel by Janet Fitch.
  • And lastly, Robert Nelson Jacobs who has had seven of his screenplays have been produced as films. His script for Chocolat was nominated for an Academy Award for best adapted screenplay.
This particular panel was interesting to me because I learned about the process in which a piece of writing is transcribed to film. It is a massive evolution where the screenwriter will have to take the piece of writing and interpret that writing into what would fit best in a screenplay, but then a director will buy that screenplay and interpret his own tone and direction – and try to hire actors and actresses to convey it. So it’s a long and complicated process to try and keep the spirit of the novel alive.
Nicholas Kazan wanted to discuss the meaning of the word “adaptation” and wanted to argue that a more accurate term is a “transformation” since he believes the change of media to be something completely unique, and it should be something unique. “The way it goes, is that you go ahead and devour the book, right? And there’s a spirit in it that you love. Close the book, lock it away, and then create your own.” He went on to say, “When I tackle onto writing a screenplay from a successful book, I ask myself, ‘What are the new challenges I have in front of me? How can I embrace them?” The task of adding and eliminating elements from the original text can be both scary and liberating but what is important, as Kazan expressed, is keeping the spirit.
Amber Tamblyn had the opportunity of working with the author of Paint it Black and they wrote the screenplay together. They emphasized that this particular situation doesn’t always work perfectly, but it did in this case since Fitch and Tamblyn had a certain relationship and . Tamblyn said, “You want to feel the same emotions as when you read the book, but sometimes you can’t always transfer it onto the screen. You have to be creative.” She went on to explain that the book was very internal, and was mainly about the process of grief. Tamblyn changed it in a way where the movie instead made you feel grief. She even removed one of the main characters in the book. “You have to kill your darlings,” she explained. “What to leave in and what to leave out is the most difficult decision in this business. You’re blind to your own work for a while, you’ll cut out a certain scene but then another scene can become richer.” She then elaborated on the process, calling it “music” and “detective work” trying to find a new, but similar, story and how she decided to remove the character and why.
I’m currently researching contemporary adaptations of Jane Austen’s novels Pride and Prejudice, Emma, and Sense and Sensibility, and by going to this panel, it was interesting to hear about WHY we adapt. The panelists talked about Sherlock Holmes and Romeo and Juliet and why there are hundreds of adaptations of them and they said, “There’s so much room to play. There are boundaries, and there is structure, but within those lines, you’re able to get really creative.” They also explained that from an economic standpoint, it’s a lucrative business to adapt since there is a market for familiar stories. Whether it’s a classic, or “based on the best-selling book” it will bring audiences to the theatre to see how they’ve translated the story to the screen.
Overall, the adaptation of novel to screenplay is difficult since screenplays tend to be “the spine of the movie,” with dialogue and notes, and the director and actors needs to fill in the rest. The writing has to be very simple and novels tend to be complex. The interiority of feeling and emotion has to be expressed in a different way and sometimes visuals can and cannot convey them. Afterwards, the film is an entire different beast and those who work on completing it have ownership of their creation – it’s a cousin of the original text.
I’ll be covering the second AWP adaptation panel next week, “Adapting to Adaptation: Making the Most of Going Hollywood,” which included panelists from the opposite standpoint: authors whose novels have been adapted into Hollywood films and the pros and cons associated with the process.

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.