Deliberate Typos in Atlas Shrugged, Kindle Version?

Here is a letter I sent to Plume, the publisher of Atlas Shrugged (Centennial Edition):

Dear Plume Publishing,

I have purchased Atlas Shrugged (Centennial Edition) for my Kindle and there are a lot of suspicious typos.

Every time it should say Wayne-Falkland, the kindle version says "WAy ne-Falkland" (loc 1804, 2283, 2286, 2590, etc). Also, whenever one word ending in "ay" is in front of another word staring with "n," the "a" is incorrectly capitalized, such as "sAy nothing" (loc 2051, 2799, 3855, etc). Both of these mistakes involve the letters of the author's first name and appear to be deliberate. These errors make the publisher, Plume and Penguin, appear to be sabotaging the author while making money off of her work.

Please fix these typos as soon as possible.

Sincerely,
Sean Murphy

I also forwarded my letter to the Ayn Rand Institute and Peikoff.com.

A Catskill Eagle, by Robert B. Parker

This book is classic Parker with his hero Spenser joining Hawk to save Susan Silverman from the bad guy.  Parker keeps things moving, always putting obstacles in the way and having the heroes use both smarts and strength to overcome them.

I don't think Parker uses the normal four-part structure in his books.  The goal was set early one--rescue Susan--and after that the plot was a steady progression of events to achieve that goal--rescue Hawk, look for Susan, flee from the authorities, infiltrate training base, rescue Susan, kill boss.

Perhaps one reason I don't put Parker in the category of great literature is that he doesn't use a mid-point plot event which changes things dramatically and forces the main character to make a choice.  The result is that the suspense isn't escalated during the book.

This book was no different than Parker's other books--an enjoyable read, good but not great.

The Fall of Hyperion, by Dan Simmons

(Notes while reading, 30%)

This book got off to a slow start.  It's really just the continuation of Hyperion which essentially was just a giant set-up for this book.  However, since they are separate books published a year apart the second one needs to review a lot of material from the first, and this takes up most of the first quarter of the book.

It's not until after about the 25% mark that we learn that CEO Gladstone has engineered the war with the Ousters which she hopes will both destroy most of the human race and lead to its eventual survival.  Now I'm finally interested!  But in a normal book, this hook should come early on around five or ten percent.  There's a reason most stories aren't told over the course of two books--it really messes with structure.

(Book finished)

I can sum up this book in one word:  tedious.  Stuff happens, but most of the time the reader doesn't know why so it's tough to care.  And then when a key part of the plot is revealed--the rationale for all the stuff that happened earlier--the point is introduced but then quickly dismissed and more random stuff happens.

Simmons had some good plot events in this book and some cool ideas, but his decision to split the book into two long novels killed any suspense and made it a chore to finish.

11/22/63, by Stephen King

Stephen King's novel about time travel, 11/22/63, has brought me back as a fan.  After reading Under the Dome, I wasn't sure I'd ever read a new King novel.  That one rambled in the middle and had a terrible ending.  This one, on the other hand, was much more focused and the ending was easier to pull off.

The book is told first-person from the perspective of a school teacher who goes back in time in an attempt to stop the Kennedy assassination.  Fortunately, for dramatic purposes, the past doesn't want to be changed--the past is obdurate becomes a recurring theme--so the main character has many struggles along the way.  He also gets involved in the past and falls in love, further complicating the story.

King's writing ability is in top form in this novel and he does a wonderful job of describing the late 50's and early 60's, both the good and the bad.  And we really get to know the main character and what drives his actions.  I think this is the big difference between 11/22/63 and Under the Dome; we care about the main characters in the former, but not in the latter.

The Hunger Games, Suzanne Collins

The Hunger Games is an impressive novel--it has all the elements of a good novel and executes on them well.  In terms of structure, I believe it actually has two complimentary dramatic structures which reach different audiences--one about survival and the other about love.  The two converge at the resolution and lead to a satisfying finish.

The four parts of structure are:  set-up, response, attack & resolution.  Here is my analysis of the two structures:

Survival Story

1. Set-up:  Katniss volunteers for the games in her sister's place.  She thinks she is just fodder for the games and has no chance until she loses her temper in training which earns her the highest score of all the tributes.  After that happens, she now knows she has a chance and changes her outlook on the games.

2. Response:  Now that she believes she has a chance, all of her actions are aimed at improving her odds:  she plays along in the interview, she runs from the cornucopia as instructed, she hides and bides her time.  But during this portion of the book, she is only responding to events.  That changes when she is cornered in a tree seemingly with no escape.  Then a fellow tribute, Rue, gives her the idea of unleashing a nest of killer hornets on the tributes who have her trapped.  She does this and thus begins the attack phase.

3. Attack:  Katniss is literally on the attack in this portion, looking to kill other tributes or hurt their chances of survival by destroying their supplies.  She forms an alliance with Rue.  She also forms an alliance with Peeta when the Games announce that tributes from the same district can both win.  Here the two structures begin to come together because Peeta is hurt and she must help nurse him back to health.  The resolution is set up when the leaders of the Games promise to provide something each of the remaining tributes need desperately at the cornucopia.  Katniss goes to the cornucopia to get medicine for Peeta and for the final showdown with the other tributes.

4. Resolution:  Katniss gets the supplies for Peeta but is then trapped with some of the other tributes at the cornucopia by intelligent wolves.  She battles both the wolves and other tributes and is ultimately victorious.  Now that it is just her and Peeta, they believe they have won.  But then the leaders of the Games change the rules yet again and announce there can be only one winner.  Rather than fight one another, they decide to both commit suicide.  Before they can kill themselves, the leaders of the games relent and allow them both to win.

Love Story

1. Set-up:  The set up on the love story is slow because we don't know up front that this will be an important element.  However, the background provided is necessary for the reveal later on.  Peeta helps Katmiss when she and her family is starving by giving her a loaf of bread even though he is punished by his parents for it.  Peeta is nice to her during the training, but she thinks it is part of a deception to make it easier to kill her during the games.  The set-up ends when Peeta professes his love for Katniss during the interviews.  Now Katniss needs to decide if she believes him, and how she feels about him

2. Response:  For the love story, most of the response is in Katniss thinking back on what she knows about Peeta and wondering if perhaps he really does love her.  The response ends when Peeta deliberately helps her survive after the hornet attack in a moment when he could have easily killed her.  Now Katniss knows he is trying to help her and realizes he really does love her, even though she doesn't want to admit it to herself.


3. Attack:  The love story begins in earnest when Katniss finds Peeta injured and starts to nurse him back to health.  They act romantically, even kissing, but Katniss is still mostly just playing the part to get help from Haymitch, her sponsor.  She does begin to care more deeply about Peeta in this section, although it comes across more nurturing than romantic for most of the time.

4. Resolution:  Katniss goes to the cornucopia to get medicine for Peeta to save his life and the two stories converge.

For me, the survival story was what kept me reading.  But I can see some readers focusing more on the love story, especially if they're rooting for Peeta to get the girl.  However, for me, the love story never took off because Katniss never really fell for Peeta.  Nonetheless, the decision to have two separate story structures which overlap and come together in the end is a great technique and one I hope to use some day in my own stories.

Hyperion, Dan Simmons

After finishing this book, I was very disappointed in the non-ending, in complete agreement with the Grub Street reviewer who wanted to throw it in the lake.

Hyperion is well written with varying styles for each story.  I got the sense that Simmons was showing off, but it didn't bother me because it was so well done.  Simmons also excels at concept, and most of the stories have an intriguing idea at their core.

On the other hand, Hyperion fails at structure--not having an ending is a big problem.  Apparently, this entire book is just a set-up for Fall of Hyperion which I have not yet read.  Perhaps I will have to revise my evaluation of this book after I've finished the second installment.

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, by J. K. Rowling

Notes while reading:

(55%)  The book has a strange structure.  The first 20% or so was Harry's struggles against his non-magic foster family (his aunt and uncle) after his parents died when he was just a baby.  This was getting interesting and seemed to set up this struggle to be part of the first plot point, but then Hagrid came along and took him to Hogwarts at about the 25% mark.  The first plot point should be the first big change or conflict that sets up the rest of the book, but in Harry Potter the conflict in the first 20% was resolved at the first quarter mark!

The book was slow after that, just going through Harry's introduction into the world of magic.  Once arriving at Hogwarts, a new conflict is introduced pitting one house (Harry's Gryffindor) against another (Slytherin, which produced the series Darth Vader character).  Certainly some of the students from Slytherin are against Harry, but some of the professors don't like him as well.  This new conflict is somewhat interesting, but it hasn't been explained enough yet to make it a true first plot point.  The book is more than half-way over, and I still don't know the main conflict in the story.

(Finished)  Well, right after I wrote the above, the book picked up on advancing the plot and at the 65% mark we finally found out that the main conflict is stopping Voldemort from getting the Sorcerer's Stone (you know, that thing mentioned in the title!).  Things moved quickly after that with the author breezing through the second part (the response) and right into the attack and resolution phases of the story.  This part of the book was good and kept my attention.

Overall, the writing was good but not great, as you'd expect from a first-time author.  But I think what has made this series so successful for kids is the world of Hogwarts that Rowling has created and the characters who think for themselves and who do important things.  And Harry is a very likable character.  He doesn't have any super-special skills (except perhaps his ability to ride a broom), but what makes him special is something available to every kid--courage to stand up for himself and his friends.

I think if I read the next book in the series, it won't be for the continuing story but to see how Rowling advances as a writer.  I've seen with Homer Hickam (one of my favorite writers) a huge development between his first and second books.  This gives me hope that even if my first book isn't very good, I'll have learned so much in the process that my second one could be great.

Living Proof, by Kira Peikoff

Notes while reading:

(At 40%)  The theme seems to be the superiority of reason over faith, but the characters representing religion are caricatures.  At one point, a priest tells the main character, "Remember the whole idea of faith, Trent:  Let go of reason and give in to God's higher plan."  And then, "Think of Jesus.  You need to learn how to sacrifice your own desires in order to do something that will help others."  As I grew up in a Catholic family and went to Catholic schools for twelve years, I know that the church is not this crude or transparent.  They are much more subtle and vague, and actually pretend that faith and reason can co-exist.  Perhaps by growing up in a staunchly atheist home (her father is Objectivist Leonard Piekoff), Ms. Piekoff doesn't realize that all of her religious characters don't ring true.  But so far, it is a big stumbling block for me as a reader.

(At 70%)  At almost three-quarters of the way through, I'm seeing that Living Proof borrows quite a bit from Atlas Shrugged.  Since Atlas Shrugged is one of my favorite books, this might seem a good thing.  However, Living Proof doesn't have characters or a plot to match Ayn Rand's classic, so when scenes are borrowed, it detracts from the book.  One example is when Arianna and Sam overcome a major obstacle before government forces can stop them.  Arianna expresses that it seems silly that they feared the government forces and that they never really had to worry about them, which is how Atlas Shrugged ended with Dagney saying the same thing to John Galt.  I still experience a sense of awe in remembering that final scene from Atlas Shrugged, while I don't feel anything when Arianna says the same sentiment in Living Proof.

Another problem I've noticed in Living Proof is that Ms. Piekoff breaks Ayn Rand's first rule of plot:  make things as difficult as possible for the characters.  This was certainly true in Atlas Shrugged, when my heart ached for the characters at times.  In Living Proof, the bad guys could have been more effective adversaries. Instead Ms. Piekoff uses Arianna's progressing multiple sclerosis as a plot devise, which is not as effective as other characters acting against her.

(100%)  Well, I finished it and nothing from the resolution/climax changed my views on the book.  The ending was somewhat melodramatic in my view.  And the unrequited love angle between two people with a father-daughter relationship came out of nowhere and was somewhat weird.

Overall, Living Proof is a good first effort, but I'm surprised it was published.  But it was and has quite a few reviews on amazon.com, so that shows you what I know.  On a personal note, I feel kind of bad giving this book a poor review because any book by an Objectivist has to live up to the incredibly high standard set by Ayn Rand.  On the other hand, any fan of Ayn Rand should hold themselves to a high standard and keep working hard to attain it.

Open Season, by C. J. Box

Open Season is a pretty good first novel, but I didn't enjoy it as much as C. J. Box's later effort, Blue Heaven.  One problem I had with it is that the hero wasn't heroic enough.  He didn't seem to know what he wanted and for most of the book he just reacted to the actions of the other characters.

Another thing I didn't like was the theme, which is that endangered species should be protected regardless of the consequences to humans, including having their land and homes taken away from them.  This last criticism is political, not literary, so it doesn't count against the book for the purposes of this blog.

C. J. Box has a good style and he did a good job of letting the reader into the characters' minds.  He also excels at the conclusion to ramp up the consequences and tie everything together neatly.  Even though the middle was somewhat boring because of the timidness of the hero, the well-planned and executed ending makes the book worth reading.

Steve Jobs, by Walter Isaacson

I took a break from reading fiction to read the Steve Jobs biography which is everywhere!  It was a quick and entertaining read, but I was surprised with what a jerk Steve Jobs was.  I blame it on his parents who always gave into his tantrums and allowed him to form his bad habits.  On the bad side, he treated people like crap.  On the good side, he pushed people to be better and was honest about their work which ultimately made his Apple products better.

I've never bought an Apple product, although I have looked into them.  But I could never pull the trigger on one because I hate the closed system.  I don't want to be forced to use iTunes, or the iPhone app store.  I like freedom, even though it's messy.  I make the same argument for capitalism vs. communism.

Steve Jobs is the closest thing to Plato's Philosopher King that I've seen, and it works for Apple.  But I think it works because Apple products are marketed as hip and sexy, and they're sold to people who aren't technically savvy and who don't care about open vs. closed systems.  But now that the Philosopher King is dead, I predict Apple will fall from grace over the next few years.

The Dark Tower I, by Stephen King

I just don't like the fantasy genre.  I couldn't get through The Hobbit, I  didn't get into Wizard's First Rule, and I didn't like The Dark Tower.  My problem is that I can't put the characters and actions into context when they inhabit a world created by the author.

In The Dark Tower, the gunslinger is following The Man in Black and questing for the Dark Tower.  Why?  It's not explained.  Where did the Man in Black come from?  No answer.  The book does give all sorts of details on the gunslinger's past and how he became what he is, but it's some crazy other-world that doesn't makes sense and just raises more questions than it answers.

Some people just love the Fantasy genre, but I still don't get it.

The Mill River Recluse, by Darcie Chan

The Mill River Recluse was self-published on Kindle and was only 99 cents.  Now there are plenty of good novels out there that aren't accepted by a publisher, but this isn't one of them.  It has one glaring fatal flaw:  it's all set-up!  Most published novels (and virtually every Hollywood movie) has a four-part structure:  set-up, response, attack and resolution.  The set-up introduces us to the characters, shows us what they have at stake, and makes us care about them.  It's all a set up to the first plot point which then upsets their world.  The characters then need to respond to the first plot point, then attack it, and finally resolve the conflict.

The set-up can be one of the most enjoyable parts of a novel--it's often where readers fall in love with a book.  But a better analogy is that readers become infatuated with the book during the set-up.  Only when the book delivers a good response, attack and--most importantly--a satisfying resolution do readers really love a book.  On the other hand, infatuation can quickly lead to disappointment if the novel fails to deliver on any of the expected subsequent developments.  And disappointment is what The Mill River Recluse created in this reader.

The blurb on amazon.com for the book says, "But only Father Michael O'Brien knows Mary and the secret she keeps--one that, once revealed, will change all of their lives forever." This is the first plot point, but it comes at about the 95% mark while it should have come around 25% of the book. The first plot point is the major conflict in the story. Without conflict, you don't have a story, and The Mill River Recluse suffered because of it.

Carrie, by Stephen King

As odd as it may seem, I've never seen Carrie the movie so reading Stephen King's first novel was a new experience.  I think one of the things that makes King so popular is that he takes us deep into the characters' heads and lets us know their most inner thoughts, and Carrie was no different.  On the other hand, one of King's shortcomings is that his books often don't have a strong theme (Misery and Shawshank Redemption are notable exceptions) and Carrie also was no different.  The plot was fairly thin, but probably appropriate for a first novel.

The interspersion of clippings from newspaper articles and books was an interesting way to give exposition.  It also allowed a good deal of foreshadowing, which King is very skilled at.

Overall, Carrie was an entertaining read and a good preview of King's style which he continued to hone over his prolific career.

Skeleton Crew, by Stephen King

Steven King is such a good writer.  I really enjoyed most of the stories in this collection.  In reading these stories, it occurred to me that King excels at three of the six core competencies:  character, concept and writing voice.  He creates characters we care about, he always has an interesting, novel hook, and he strikes just the right balance of writing interesting descriptions without writing purple prose.  These three elements combine to create stories that begin wonderfully, draw the reader in and set up big expectations for the end.  Unfortunately, this is usually where King's stories fall short.  Because the stories aren't planned out with a structure, the endings are hit-or-miss.  Some in this collection, like The Jaunt, The Man Who Would Not Shake Hands and Survivor Type, had great endings.  Others, like The Raft, Uncle Otto's Truck, and The Milkman Stories just peter out without a strong conclusion or theme.  Nonetheless, all these stories are worth reading for their imaginative concepts and characters as well as their wonderful examples of strong writing.

A Cold Day in Paradise, by Steve Hamilton

A Cold Day in Paradise is Steve Hamilton's first novel.  While not as good as The Lock Artist, it was still a good read.

I never cared too deeply about the main character even though he was given a lot of background.  Perhaps it's because he wasn't striving for something.  Rather, he was merely responding to events and trying to solve a mystery.

The ending to the novel also seemed forced.  Perhaps more structure and planning could have helped lead up to the conclusion better.

Crooked Letter, Crooked Letter by Tom Franklin

[Note at 25% read]  So far, the book isn't drawing me in too much.  It's moving slowly because the author spends a lot of time giving details which aren't relevant.  However, I do like how the story switches back and forth between the current day and the past when the two main characters were kids.

The best thing about this book is the theme which is that a lack of courage to do the right thing can greatly affect other people to the point of ruining their lives.  The book was slow until this theme was revealed, but after that point it was enjoyable.

The book also did a nice job of getting into the two main characters which were flawed but likeable.  However, the author continued to give details which weren't relevant to the story line and which slowed down the narrative.

Blue Heaven, by C. J. Box

Notes while reading:

1)  C. J. Box has a style very similar to what I aspire to with lots of sensory description to get the reader into the scene.  Early on, the author overdoes it and it becomes a distraction.  Probably just one or two sensory descriptions are enough at the beginning of a scene.  This is something I'll have to keep in mind while writing.

2) The first five chapters or so introduced all of the characters without going back to continue the story with previous characters.  This was annoying because it was too much to remember.  I think it would be better to introduce new characters slowly throughout the first quarter of the book rather than all at once at the beginning.  You don't want to choke the crow!

Having finished the book, I now rate this book as one of my top three for 2010 (the others are A Simple Plan and The Lock Artist).  The book built nicely after introducing all the characters.  The writing style also limited the descriptions and was no longer a distraction.

The conclusion wrapped together different story lines in a very satisfying way.  The scene construction was also well done and I can see this book being made into a very good movie.