Appropriated Novels -- What an Idea

Invention, creation, inspiration -- the fear of the blank page.

The writer -- especially the novelist and to some extent the playwright -- is tasked with the daunting job of creating something from nothing. But what if a writer simply starts with what's already been imagined and written, and then puts a unique spin on the original material? And what if the writer starts with widely known, even famous, literature that is now in the public domain? Well, that might just be the recipe for huge success. For example, I just purchased two fun re-tellings for the high school library where I work:  Pride & Prejudice & Zombies by Seth Graham-Smith and a lesser known but equally entertaining Jane Slayre from Sherri Browning.

The contemporary retelling or "classical adaptation" is a time-honored -- and occasionally quite lucrative -- tradition in literature, film, television, and theater. And the works of Jane Austen have become produced a full cottage industry of derivatives, extensions, and adaptations in the contemporary era. Whether it's the Jane Austen Mystery Series which extend the lives of Elizabeth and Darcy following the end of Pride & Prejudice or the more contemporary retelling of Austen's novel Emma in Amy Heckerling's incredibly successful film Clueless, it seems the work of Austen will literally never go out of style.

Two Bands Saved Punk in the 1980s

Almost from its inception, Punk was declared dead and over. 

The basic idea behind that early mortality and the surprising staying power post-mortem seems to mostly to do with the belief within the early scenes -- New York's Lower East Side and London -- that once punk was on the radar of the mainstream, it was no longer punk. Pivotal music writer Lester Bang felt this way, as did the pioneering punk band Crass which delivered the song "Punk is Dead" in 1978. Mark Perry, founder of the zine Sniffin Glue, argued punk died the minute the Clash signed to a major record deal.

While it all started for me with the Ramones, Clash and Sex Pistols in the early 1980s, past the date punk was declared dead, punk actually gained steam and became the counterculture that exists to this day with the second wave punk bands and scenes sprouting up across the United States and the world. From New York to Washington, DC to Los Angeles to the Bay Area, the spirit of punk -- grounded in the DIY attitude that "I can do that, too ... even better," -- invigorated the culture of punk, and it moved beyond anything the small crew of independent musicians and writers may have imagined in the mid-70s.  

Punk is an interesting phenomenon -- for something seemingly grounded in simplicity, it's actually quite a complex history discussion. And stories of punk history and scenes and culture and artists and the "punk ethos" are endlessly fascinating to me. With that in mind, I truly enjoyed this recent piece in Ultimate Guitar magazine that points to the pivotal role "two bands, two songwriters, and two labels" played in maintaining punk for what it was, is, and will become. Punk Survived Growing Pains in The '80s: But These Two Bands Are (Likely) Responsible for Saving the Genre | Ultimate Guitar

The rise and relatively quick near fall of punk is well documented in the genre's history. While early punk scenes in the UK, NYC, and LA flourished, they just as soon began to flicker, for a variety of reasons. In the UK, early leaders of the movement who had mainstream success, like The Clash and Sex Pistols, eventually fell apart, while across the Atlantic in NYC, a good chunk of the scene embraced the post-punk movement. Things went a little differently in LA, however, as I would argue the punk scene took a bigger hit, or had a higher fall from grace, than it did in either London or New York.

This is well documented, especially if you read my favorite band memoir, "Do What You Want," written by the whole Bad Religion crew. In Southern California, the scene had dried up, so to speak. Bands were shelved, broken up, and the general enthusiasm and energy from the early scene was replaced by rage, agitators, and anarchy. And then, Bad Religion released "Suffer."

"Suffer" was widely seen as the rebirth of SoCal punk and made waves across the national scene here in the US. But I'm not really here to talk about how good the music on that album is. I'm more interested in the infrastructure that would soon be built up by members of Bad Religion, namely guitarist/songwriter Brett Gurewitz. A big part of the Bad Religion story is Epitaph Records, founded by Gurewitz, but closely intertwined with the band's story. And you know what else is highly intertwined with Epitaph Records? Basically, all the punk rock that came after "Suffer."

As the band grew more successful, so too did the record label. Several bands were signed who emerged not only as commercial successes for the indie label, but as huge factors in the rise and continued development of punk in the late '80s, all the way through the 21st century. Bands who were signed included NOFX (more on them later), L7, Less Than Jake, The Offspring, The Vandals, Circle Jerks, Rancid, and Pennywise. Need I say more? The idea of a punk band and punk artist putting out other punk bands wasn't necessarily Gurewitz's original idea, but I'd argue he did it a whole lot better than Greg Ginn did with SST Records.

Jay Kelly is a Beautiful Movie

George Clooney is just sixty-four years old, but he has the old school Hollywood charm that has been the essence of the movie star myth since the days of Jimmy Stewart, Carey Grant, and others. And that "myth" has always been the fundamental romanticization of the lives of the glitterati. Clooney's most recent film - Jay Kelly, streaming now on Netflix - is a deceptively simple yet touchingly poignant look into that world.

The movie will, no doubt, garner numerous accolades and award nominations for Clooney, whose title character is an aging movie star just like himself facing the end of a career and a self-accounting for what sacrifices got him to where he is, and for Adam Sandler in a thoughtful and vulnerable role of the "manager" to a Hollywood star. Writer and director Noah Baumbach will almost certainly collect nominations and award for Best Original Screenplay.

The Unlikely Super Bowl Matchup You Want to See

I just want it noted for the record that on September 23, 2023, when Deion Sander's -- or "Coach Prime's" new CU Buffs football team was rolling to a great start, and then Bo Nix and the Oregon Duck's came to town and absolutely pasted the Colorado team 42-6 with Nix on the Duck's first drive drilling a 40+-yard touchdown pass to the corner of the end zone, I said, "The Denver Broncos should draft Bo Nix next year. I want Bo!"

And now, in one of the wonkiest years in recent NFL history, the Denver Broncos with their sophomore year QB are sitting atop the AFC West Conference with a tie-breaker lead over the New England Patriots for the number one seed while the dynastic Kansas City Chiefs are idling in third place with a sub-500 record at 6-7. And my bold prediction is the Broncos are going to the Super Bowl. And the ideal NFC opponent is another team dear to my heart, a team that has been waiting quite a while to get back on top -- The Chicago Bears.

I know, I know. Two teams with second-year quarterbacks and winning records but a a lot of close games, along with several holes in their offense and defense, amidst a league with a lot of teams like the Patriots and the Packers and the Lions and the Chargers ready to step up and take the crown. But a Denver-Chicago Super Bowl would be a heckuva game. 

Everyone is Using AI to "Create"

A recent op-ed in the Wall Street Journal suggests "When anyone can produce passable work, real talent becomes more readily apparent than ever." Thus, AI, rather than destroying or replacing human creativity, is actually a gift to the real creative people and innovators in society.

As Oscar contenders like “The Brutalist” deploy artificial intelligence to perfect foreign accents and AI-generated country tracks top the charts, anxiety is roiling the creative community. Fear mongers warn that AI will hollow out artistic expression, de-skill entire professions, and damage our capacity for original thought. It won’t. AI is ultimately a boon for creativity.

True, AI can finish work by itself without an artist, but that affects the volume of output more than the nature of human creativity. AI relieves humans not of creativity but of drudgery—the rote, time-consuming tasks that have always consumed more human energy than inspiration ever did. Artists have never defined themselves by their use of certain tools, but by what they do with them.

2025 was truly the year of AI, almost reminiscent of the date August 4, 1997 in The Terminator when Skynet, the artificial intelligence system that ultimately takes over the world, officially went online, kicking off the rapid march to machines' dominance over man. And, honestly, no one knows better the seeming instantaneous omnipresence of "everyone using AI" than teachers at nearly all levels, from elementary school to graduate programs. A quick scan of social media -- or "Teacher Twitter" -- will reveal all manner of requests, rants, and ramblings about how to address the use of AI. For writing teachers especially, it seems like a return to handwritten in-class assignments is one key response.

And, in terms of creativity, I would tend to agree with the Wall Street Journal article that when everyone is using AI to create, the landscape will take on such an obvious tech-induced/influenced style that the truly innovative and creative people will be able to stand out. As I noted in a piece on AI yesterday, I maintain that while humans were able to conceive of, envision, and create artificial intelligence, AI would never have been able to conceive of humans.

Time's "Person of the Year" is not AI, but almost

No matter how "intelligent" AI ever becomes, there is one key difference that will never change: Humans conceived of artificial intelligence, but AI could never conceive of humans.

That distinction is at the heart of this year's award for Time Magazine's "Person of the Year." The honor for 2025 -- the "person most significantly impact the news" -- has to be related to AI, which seems to have become instantly omnipresent this year. And so, Time has named the people behind AI for the award. The "person of the year" is a few key people -- The Architects of AI. 

 

It's honestly not that difficult to imagine why these innovators are the obvious choice:

Since 1801, American leaders have gathered in Washington, D.C., to attend the Inauguration of a new President. It is a day of great tradition, one that often brings together the most powerful people in the country. Prominent at Donald Trump’s return to office in January were the chiefs of U.S. technology companies, which long have led the world. But something unexpected was happening offstage: that same day, a little-known Chinese firm called DeepSeek released a new artificial-intelligence model that spooked markets and led to a rallying cry from Silicon Valley.

The next day, tech titans Sam Altman, Larry Ellison, and Masayoshi Son appeared at the White House with an announcement of their own. They pledged to invest up to $500 billion to build AI data centers around the U.S., calling the project Stargate. Those two days foretold the year to come: global competition, astounding innovation, massive sums of money, and the alchemizing forces of public and private interests.

This was the year when artificial intelligence’s full potential roared into view, and when it became clear that there will be no turning back or opting out. Whatever the question was, AI was the answer. We saw it accelerate medical research and productivity, and seem to make the impossible possible. It was hard to read or watch anything without being confronted with news about the rapid advancement of a technology and the people driving it. Those stories unleashed a million debates about how disruptive AI would be for our lives. No business leader could talk about the future without invoking the impact of this technological revolution. No parent or teacher could ignore how their teenager or student was using it.

Daily Pages & the Artist's Way

About a year and a half ago, I wrapped up a thirty-plus year career in public education with a plan to pursue writing and art and creativity full time. And following my heartfelt get-together with friends and colleagues from the school and English department where I worked, a colleague came into my office and gave me a wonderful parting gift. She is one of the creative writing teachers at the school, as well as being a writer herself, and she said it was time for her to pass on to me a gift given to her on her writing journey: The Artist's Way: a Spiritual Path to Higher Creativity by Julia Cameron. 

For a writer and writing teacher, I was pleasantly surprised, both with the gift that has been a meaningful part of my journey, as well as the fact that I had never read nor really heard of this book before. The book is more than thirty years old now, and it has been a valuable contribution to the craft for so many people. I've been intrigued by the results of simply Googling the book, as so many writers have personal stories to share about their experience. Like this piece from Lauren Gonzales:

Eight summers ago, I found myself in a D.C. yoga studio sitting in a circle with several other women. No one was in a downward dog position, and hardly any of us were wearing stretchy pants. Any curious passerby might have assumed we were part of a support group of some kind, and in some ways, we were. We were a motley group of struggling creatives practicing The Artist's Way.

The Artist's Way is a 12-week course that helps people unlock their capacity for creativity — whether in art, at work, or in life. At its core, it's a great practice to access more delight, curiosity, and creative inquiry within your daily life. But for me, The Artist's Way grew to mean more than just a fun summer project or a tool to overcome writer's block. It helped me face my fears around trying new things, and gave me a better framework to live with the vulnerability and uncertainty that comes with life. I will gab about it to anyone who lets me in on their secret desires to pursue their artistic dream — be it tiny or grand.

One of the foundational aspects of the book, and one which people mention most frequently, is the simple practice that Cameron calls "the Morning Pages." The basic premise is grounded in two important aspects of the creative process -- clearing the mind and making a daily habit of production. Cameron's advice is to sit each morning before doing anything else and fill three full pages of handwritten reflection. I've appreciated this smooth explanation from Leah Lavelle of the Urban Wild Studio:

What are morning pages?

Imagine it is the early hours of the morning, you’ve just arisen and the world outside is still relatively calm and quiet. You pour a cup of coffee, and with a pen in hand and a blank page before you, you begin to write. Three pages of unfiltered thoughts, flowing freely from your mind onto the paper (or laptop). This is the essence of morning pages – a stream of consciousness daily ritual that holds the promise of self-awareness, and the potential for transformation and renewal.

In short, morning pages are (in the words of author Julia Cameron herself):

• Three pages of longhand, stream of consciousness writing, done first thing in the morning
• *There is no wrong way to do Morning Pages* They are not high art. They are not even “writing”
• They are about anything and everything that crosses your mind– and they are for your eyes only
• Capture your cloud thoughts; can be whining, grumpy, petty. Can be cheerful, pleasant, enlightening
• Morning Pages provoke, clarify, comfort, cajole, prioritize and synchronize the day at hand
• Do not overthink Morning Pages: just put three pages of anything on the page...and then do three more pages tomorrow

What are the benefits of morning pages? Why is this practice so powerful? Again, in Julia Cameron’s words, morning pages help:

• Clear your mind
• Become acquainted with all the corners of your psyche
• Put your negative thoughts on the page so they aren’t floating around your consciousness during the day
• Meet your shadow and take it out for a cup of coffee
• Farewell to life as you knew it, and an intro to life as it’s going to be

Now, I will be honest in that I have tailed off the artist's way a bit since I began in the summer of 2024, and I don't even do the morning pages in the full expectation of the practice. However, I have continued the practice of daily writing reflection in the early morning, and it remains a meaningful part of my day and my creative practice.

Riot Grrrl Resurgence -- Cheap Perfume's new LP & Tour

If you're near Milwaukee, Chicago, or St. Louis, there is a Riot Grrrl wave heading your way this week. Cheap Perfume, the premier Colorado Fem-core band has a new album and are taking their unapologetically political music and their fierce live show on the road. 

Since Donald Trump took office and, among other things, bolstered the ICE budget, slashed funding for important social and cultural programs, and attempted to censure trans and nonbinary folks into erasure, many people have taken to the streets in dissent. Punk music remains an important, historic form of protest, so it’s fitting that Denver femme punk outfit Cheap Perfume is set to drop a timely new album later this year.

The band has already released singles “Woke Mind Virus” and “Down to Riot” to tease the forthcoming album, Didn’t Ask. Don’t Care, which drops on October 3 via Snappy Little Numbers. Vocalist Stephanie Byrne, vocalist-guitarist Jane No, bassist Geoff Brent and drummer David Grimm have always worn their anti-capitalist, anti-fascist and pro-women political stances on their sleeves, following in the abrasive tradition of riot grrrl punk bands like Bikini Kill and Bratmobile.

On the new songs, Cheap Perfume, which formed in 2015, has yet again sharpened its fast-paced, shout-heavy and guitar-forward brand of feminist punk, holding nothing back in its calls for change. “A lot of the content on our new album has to do with anti-capitalism,” No explains. “So we were just writing about anti-capitalism in general and anti-fascism, and, of course, they go hand in hand with the patriarchy.”

I first encountered this incredible band about three years ago when I caught a show at the 715 Club in Denver, and my mind was blown when lead singer Stephanie Byrd literally charged into the crowd from the opening bars and drum beats with a ferocity I hadn't seen in years. Yet, I was also charmed with the cool conversations I had with Byrd and guitarist Jane No before and after the show. I wrote about the band a couple times, including this piece about their first out-of-state tour. After that short tour which included a slot at the historic Gilman Street, the band also opened up a show for Bikini Kill on the band's 2025 tour, and I felt the logical continuation of the Riot Grrrl revolution BK had begun in the early 90s.

As anyone in Denver’s punk scene knows, a Cheap Perfume show is a sonic blast of guitar chords, big drums, quick and heavy bass, and scathingly sharp yet sardonically poetic messages of social justice and empowerment. It’s also a helluva lot of fun. That’s the appeal of a band that is, as it calls itself, “fun, foul-mouthed and unapologetic.”

Now fans outside of Colorado will get the chance to experience Cheap Perfume’s sound and attitude as the band embarks on its first-ever tour this month. The self-described “fem-core punk” group will join the Atlanta-based rockers of Sarah and the Safe Word (SASW) for a West Coast run starting on April 24 at the Nile Underground in Mesa, Arizona. Then Cheap Perfume will be back to its Denver stamping grounds on Sunday, May 5, for a victory lap at the hi-dive.

The news of a “first-ever tour” may come as a surprise to local music fans who know Cheap Perfume from shows up and down the Front Range, as well as festivals. Though the band has played regularly for years, “the farthest we’ve gone was Salt Lake City last year, for Mind the Gap Fest,” says guitarist/vocalist Jane No. The band has had many tour offers, but the members finally found a time that worked for everyone.

“We’ve been together since 2015,” No says, “and it’s weird, or I guess unusual, that we haven’t toured, but that’s mostly because we all have demanding day jobs.” Just because a band has a ton of streams on Spotify doesn’t mean that pays the bills. “Meanwhile,” No dryly observes, “the CEO is a billionaire.”

This band is making some seriously good music, and CP is not to be missed if you can catch the live show at Milwaukee's X-Ray Arcade, Chicago's Liar's Club, or the Heavy Anchor in StL.

Favorite Christmas Songs -- Beyond the Classics

My favorite Christmas song is a rather unorthodox one in that it's not one of the traditional songs like "White Christmas" or "Carol of the Bells." It is, instead, an alternative song from a favorite indie rock band -- "2000 Miles" from Chrissie Hynde & The Pretenders.

There is just something so poignantly beautiful about this Christmas song in its sense of pathos -- longing and nostalgia and warmth and hope. The story is actually quite beautiful -- it's a bit of an elegy for a lost friend. And, it reminds me of that, old friends. Whenever I hear this song, it takes me back to working in restaurant in my small town in middle America around the holidays. This was one of several alternative Christmas songs on the mix tape, and I have such memories of cleaning up at closing time and listening to these songs. Anyone who has worked in restaurants knows what I mean.

A few other favorites from that time that always move me, sometimes to nostalgic smiles and even a bit of misty eyes included "Colorado Christmas" from the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band, "Do They Know It's Christmas" from Band Aid, "Christmastime" by Smashing Pumpkins, and a beautiful play on an old classic, "Peace on Earth/Little Drummer Boy" by David Bowie & Bing Crosby.

 

Less Than Zero: A Gen X Christmas Movie

Well, it's time for the annual debate about what makes a movie a Christmas movie. The quintessential discussion for the past twenty years or so is whether Die Hard, the classic 1988 Bruce Willis thriller, is a Christmas movie. But I won't bother with that one -- I have another suggestion. Five years ago, I posted my own review about a classic Gen X Christmas movie. Less Than Zero, the 1987 Brat Pack film based on the novel from Bret Easton Ellis, is a perfect example of a non-traditional Christmas movie. Here are my thoughts:

Is Die Hard a Christmas movie? Does anyone really care?

What defines the “Christmas movie”? Does it have to be a feel good story like It’s a Wonderful Life, or can it just take place during the holiday season like Die Hard. Does it have to represent the holiday cheer featured in Hallmark commercials, or can it expose the cold, distant reality of authentic families during less-than-warm Christmas parties?

Thirty years ago, Clay came back to LA for Christmas, and the holiday movie was never the same. For Generation X, a group of people raised on disappointment, the cinematic version of Bret Easton Ellis’ novel Less Than Zero is a true Christmas movie exposing the hollow superficial excess of the holiday season and specifically the 1980s. A visually stunning film from cinematographer Edward Lachman, the movie captures and spotlights all the glitz of the holiday season, especially in Beverly Hills, while not looking away from the vacuous lack of substance behind the style, the holiday, and the state of the American family. Director Marek Kanievska created a haunting music video of a Christmas movie with film noir elements amidst the bright lights of holiday decorations.

Read the rest of the piece on Medium ...

Ideas Gurus

I've always been a nonfiction geek, and the type of research-based commercial nonfiction that took off in the early 2000s with books like Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point: How Little Things can Make a Big Difference has always been like catnip to me. Right at the turn of the century, it seemed like there was a hunger for "ideas" and accessible writing about the latest developments in science, psychology, economics, and other traditionally "dry" reading. Writers like Gladwell, Michael Lewis, Daniel Pink, and more began churning out book length explorations of the kind of stories that used to make great airplane reading in magazines like Wired, Fast Company, Forbes, The Atlantic and countless which took off during the 90s, a true heyday of magazine writing.

I always called the writers of these books the "Ideas Gurus," and their schtick was finding obscure information in research studies and distilling it down into accessible chunks of narrative-based nonfiction writing. And at that time, as the industry grew and publishers where looking for the next big nonfiction bestseller, scholars and academics and researchers who would have never considered themselves best-selling others, much less media personalities, began to crank out some seriously cool books. Stephen Dunbar and Steven Levitt's Freakonomics: a Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything immediately springs to mind.

Op-ed commentary writers like David Books also got into the game, making a nice living with books like Friedman's must-read blockbuster The World is Flat and Brooks' more niche but quirky cool Bobos in Paradise. And the one writer, other than Gladwell, who has ridden the commercial nonfiction wave to its greatest heights is Michael Lewis, the Princeton-educated English major who became a bond trader and then transitioned to a writing career with the Wall Street tell-all Liar's Poker: Rising Through the Wreckage on Wall Street. Several of Lewis' books have gone on to Hollywood stardom as well -- notably, The Blind Side, Moneyball, and The Big Short.

Some More Thoughts on Streaming

So, I shared my blog post about "Bandcamp not Spotify" with some friends who are in high finance and venture capital. And one of them really didn't like it. He is convinced that streaming is much better for all involved parties, especially him as a consumer who gets a nearly endless supply of practically free music on Spotify and AppleMusic. He is basically missing my point that if, as a fan, you really like a singer or band's music, you should support them more authentically by purchasing a digital product or even the physical form, for which the artist receives a much better payout.

Being a finance guy, and also someone under the age of forty, he can't understand why I can't agree that it's much better for the artist to have endless streaming fees for perpetuity, as opposed to the consumer buying the LP one time for $15.99 or the song (via the iTunes/Bandcamp model) for $0.99. He gets into all sort of finance theory terms talking about projection and .... blah, blah, blah. And I am unable to convince him that a band would rather have tens of thousands of fans buy a product and give them a large sum up front than to depend on millions of fans occasionally streaming the song for $0.0028 a listen over several years.

By the way, the artists and musicians I've heard from agree with my take, even as they acknowledge the reality of streaming and concede its benefits -- specifically the extended reach and exposure that wasn't possible before streaming. That said, we all know that while a million streams sounds impressive, that only earns the artist about $3000, and that would be divided among all band members. But, if a million or tens of millions of streams were instead the sale of ten to fifty thousand albums or CDs or digital downloads at $15, the artist would be earning hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The point is that the finance guys are not creators or producers. They don't make anything, so they can't really appreciate the value of the labor. And they like getting stuff cheap. And my original point is that if you really like an artist, you can support them by buying the product for real dollars, rather than just renting it for microscopic portions of a penny at a time.

Tip your servers, and pay your artists.